TheRPGSite

Fan Forums => The RPGPundit's Own Forum => Topic started by: Zirunel on May 31, 2020, 04:01:23 PM

Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on May 31, 2020, 04:01:23 PM
Here we go, a thread for discussing covid , lockdowns, health and economic effects, to keep the subject off the main gaming forum, so have at it!
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on May 31, 2020, 09:38:00 PM
Question for HappyDaze, from the main forum

Quote from: Zirunel;1131816
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)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on May 31, 2020, 09:49:03 PM
I'm sure the 18.6% increase in anti-depressant users and 14.8% increase in sleep medication users will have NO negative side effects.
https://nypost.com/2020/05/25/americans-are-gobbling-anti-anxiety-meds-due-to-coronavirus/

That's gonna be some tasty long term profits from totally-not-habit-forming medications.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on May 31, 2020, 11:25:59 PM
I'll give you an answer after I get back from work tomorrow afternoon. I'm already up too late for a work night as is.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on June 01, 2020, 01:02:36 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1131823
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).


By age:
~60% of COVID deaths are 75 or older
~80% of COVID deaths are 65 or older
~93% of COVID deaths are 55 or older
~97% of COVID deaths are 45 or older

https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Death-Counts-by-Sex-Age-and-S/9bhg-hcku


As for comorbidity, yes the list is long, and there is the issue of how they are correlated with each other (e.g., obesity is correlated with many other health issues in the list) and age (i.e., older people are more likely to have chronic health issues). And, yes the list covers a large segment of the population. Regardless, if you have none of the conditions on the list, it is highly unlikely that you will die from COVID.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/
https://whdh.com/news/nearly-every-mass-coronavirus-death-was-patient-with-underlying-medical-condition-data-shows/
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/health/coronavirus-patients-risk.html
https://www.valleypres.org/For-Patients/Covid-19/Facts.aspx
https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/2020/04/15/coronavirus-risk-90-patients-had-underlying-conditions/2962721001/
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-18/99-of-those-who-died-from-virus-had-other-illness-italy-says


One could argue that it is the morbidities that kill, with COVID as the comorbidity (i.e. the straw that breaks the camel's back).
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on June 01, 2020, 06:09:48 PM
Quote from: Zirunel;1131851
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on June 02, 2020, 01:22:25 AM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on June 02, 2020, 01:56:47 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1131915
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.

Thanks for this. Yes wrt primary care, that has been my experience. Faster and more convenient to access than ever, as long as things can be dealt with virtually. I like that a lot, and I hope that is a lasting legacy of this pandemic. In-person visits and gp-ordered tests do still exist, though they have been truncated. Not sure how hard they are to get, it hasn't come up.

And Emergency is way quiet now. And fast, faster than ever. That's one rapid way to get diagnosis for more serious conditions and access to specialist care.

It's not like non-Covid medicine doesn't exist, in some ways it seems more streamlined now, but I still can't help wondering how many chronic, slowly emerging conditions are slipping between the cracks.

EDITED TO ADD: where I am, hospital resources have been carefully marshalled in anticipation of an overwhelming surge. The overwhelming surge never happened, and our curve is flat now. Covid never did overwhelm capacity, so things are already going back to normal. That may or may not mean the marshalling was never necessary or that it was an overreaction. Or that it won't be necessary in the future. We certainly had case clusters and death clusters. I honestly don't know. There's going to be a whole lot of Monday-morning quarterbacking over this.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on June 02, 2020, 02:25:51 PM
Quote from: oggsmash;1131988
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.


Just three weeks ago the media was in horror at the audacity of protestors of the 'lockdown'.  Telling us how irresponsible these protestors were and how thousands would be infected and die because of their selfishness.  Some of these protestors in various States were even armed with rifles,  and yet no windows were broken, no businesses were looted, and no buildings were burned.

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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on June 02, 2020, 02:31:56 PM
Quote from: DocJones;1132214
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?

Yes, I believe that would be a crazy conspiracy theory.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on June 02, 2020, 06:04:25 PM
A truly unexpected barrier to lockdown healthcare is that of closed hairdressers. No, I'm serious. We've had numerous appointments cancelled because grandma won't "go out in public" to her appointment until she's had her hair done. And, until very recently, that just wasn't happening and even now many of them are saying their hairdressers are backed up for weeks. Now our appointments are not life and death (orthopedics, remember), but delayed treatments can lead to worsened outcomes (usually requiring more invasive treatments), more pain, and a decline in quality of life. That last part is important because the loss of mobility can quickly lead to other conditions worsening too. So, perhaps hairdressers need to be considered essential personnel too?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on June 02, 2020, 07:17:19 PM
"Essential" business is a ridiculous category in any case and results in stupid examples of Governors and Mayors who get hair cuts and go to the gym while telling everyone else that they can not.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on June 03, 2020, 03:01:49 PM
It's impacting supply chains in many unexpected ways, because breaking even one link impacts everything downstream. So-called "essential" retailers or services, or non-essential ones that are finally permitted to reopen, are ending up with erratic, delayed, and partial shipments. There's also a lag, so starting up everything at once means the shelves will be empty until new products work themselves through the entire chain. This is just another variation of the same problem that faces socialism: The economy's just too complex for a few central planners to decided what's essential and what's not.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on June 03, 2020, 04:54:59 PM
I wonder when people will get angry at this incredibly damaging fraud committed by numerous governments? There was no cause for the lockdowns, nothing but the knee-jerk panic of numerous governments who preferred the optics of following the herd to taking a stand against the hysterical bollocks in the media.

For the sake of "saving" a few thousand of the sickest people who always die in a bad flu season, many thousands more will die as a result of missed diagnoses and treatments, suicides, domestic violence and many other causes. Not to mention the tens of thousands more who will die when this recession bites. One that promises to be the deepest in centuries.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on June 03, 2020, 09:06:31 PM
Just gonna leave this here without comment. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1232869/ (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1232869/)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on June 04, 2020, 04:59:57 AM
Paul Joseph Watson, in a totally dorkmaster hat, explains how the UK defeated CoronaChan.

Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on June 04, 2020, 05:07:40 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1132518
Paul Joseph Watson, in a totally dorkmaster hat, explains how the UK defeated CoronaChan.


Greetings!

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

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on June 04, 2020, 12:57:05 PM
Love PJW.  Hits the nail on the head with most of his videos.

That being said I totally regret questioning Sweden's approach and getting exasperated at all the usual Swedophiles talking about how wonderful they are.  In this particular case -- they were right!
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on June 04, 2020, 07:02:24 PM
Quote from: KingCheops;1132561
Love PJW.  Hits the nail on the head with most of his videos.

That being said I totally regret questioning Sweden's approach and getting exasperated at all the usual Swedophiles talking about how wonderful they are.  In this particular case -- they were right!
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on June 04, 2020, 07:41:03 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1132591
Even if someone does turn out to be right, that doesn't mean you shouldn't have questioned it!! What I find most exasperating about the covid-19 issue is how many people default to an answer based on their politics without questioning it -- and furthermore, anyone who holds a different view is clearly insane and/or brainwashed.

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

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

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

By contrast, governments have also been far too reckless, when it comes to areas outside their expertise. The economy is the classic example, and if the world was just they'd be trying all the people who were instrumental in shutting down the economy for genocide.
https://wellbeingtrust.org/areas-of-focus/policy-and-advocacy/reports/projected-deaths-of-despair-during-covid-19/
https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/policy_brief_on_covid_impact_on_children_16_april_2020.pdf
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on June 04, 2020, 08:09:57 PM
Quote from: KingCheops;1132561
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"?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on June 05, 2020, 09:39:21 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1132603
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"?


They are way ahead of you.

Quote
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
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on June 05, 2020, 11:35:40 AM
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).
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on June 05, 2020, 01:57:52 PM
Quote from: KingCheops;1132663
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).

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.

So here's recent financial news in Scandinavia:

Quote
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.

Source: https://business.financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/norways-april-gdp-falls-4-7-outlook-seen-less-dire-2

Quote
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.

Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-19/sweden-in-very-deep-economic-crisis-despite-soft-lockdown

This doesn't mean that Sweden's approach was wrong -- quite possibly they'd be worse off if they had implemented a lockdown like Norway. Different economies are different. But it's one data point against the narrative that the economies would have been fine if only we hadn't had lockdowns.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on June 05, 2020, 02:14:31 PM
Target just announced early looting hours for seniors.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on June 05, 2020, 02:32:26 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1132591
Even if someone does turn out to be right, that doesn't mean you shouldn't have questioned it!! What I find most exasperating about the covid-19 issue is how many people default to an answer based on their politics without questioning it -- and furthermore, anyone who holds a different view is clearly insane and/or brainwashed.

The inherent problem is that the "credentialed class" is increasingly untrustworthy--not least because they add to all of their other (typical human) faults that for so many of them, what they say has a political motivation.  So it is only self-defense to direct some of the skepticism towards their motivations.  When the thing "noted expert" wants to happen is suspiciously always exactly in line with their usual politics, no matter how little sense it makes in this case, one starts to doubt their judgment or even honesty.

No doubt the usual media being completely in the tank for their own causes is not helping.  For example, I might or might not lend more or less credence to something Dr. Birx or Dr. Fauci said about all of this--keeping in mind their expertise is not in, for example, the economy--but I lend absolutely zero credence to any media report short of an unfiltered transcript of their remarks.  (And even then, I'm not going to be shocked when it turns out the transcript was edited.)  Nor would it be correct to lay this "selective reporting and editing" problem entirely on the left.  It is fair at the moment to lay it entirely on the "globalist" side, whether left, right, or "neutral venal".  

Everything a globalist says is defacto suspect because their track record sucks so poorly.  If they want more respect, earn it, damn it!
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on June 05, 2020, 03:55:42 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1132676
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.

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. Though also be careful where you source your data -- I've seen a lot of graphs comparing Sweden's overall death toll to the other Scandinavian countries, which is blatantly misleading fake news because Sweden has roughly double the population of any of the other Scandinavian countries.

What's appalling -- and genocidal -- is the complete disregard for the economy shown by those making public policy. We have politicians and medical doctors talking about how we must follow the science and shutdown the economy. Except, what science? Epistemologists are experts on the nature of disease and the spread of infection, not on the economy. In fact, most of them have spent their entire lives in the public sector, so they don't even know what it's like to work in the free market. Yet they've set themselves up as experts on something they quite literally know less about than an average employee in an average company. By contrast, there are no economists up on the stage at any of these briefings. While they do occasionally trot out a few bankers and CEOs, unless you think Phillip Morris determines the science on smoking, or that Exxon should be considered the authoritative voice on the ecological impact of fracking or oil spills, you can't call that science. Not only that, but the economic shutdowns they instituted are completely untested and unprecedented. There's no "science" even on the epistemological side, except some wild speculation and theories.

The word "economy" comes from "economize". We have limited resources, and must decide how to use them, and the economy is how we allocate those resources. It's trivial and disingenuous to say this is about haircuts or McDonald's, because the economy is also how we feed ourselves, how we make medicines, and how we train people in all the specialized tasks needed to support the complex modern world. It's how we fill stores with supplies when they're depleted, how we develop and bring to market new life-saving technologies, and for many people, it's the source of self-esteem and pride. It's our lifeblood. But they shut it down without consulting any experts, looking at the science, or examining the trade offs. Those who destroyed it destroyed livelihoods and lives. They reduced incomes, educational opportunities, health outcomes, and cost lives. They also hurt the ability to respond to the pandemic -- two or three days ago NPR was talking about how the damage to the supply chain was forcing medical labs to source all kinds of alternate supplies, and how that was hurting their ability to respond to the coronavirus. (Though of course, being NPR, they blamed it on the virus, instead of on the economic shutdown.)

Yet people like Andrew Cuomo, who literally forced corona-positive patients on nursing homes and thus is single-handedly responsible for a vast number of deaths in NYC, are celebrated as heroes because they get up on stage and say "we can't put a value on human life" and use that to justify new lockdowns. Which is just compounding a deadly error with even more death, because they're ignoring the lives that will be lost and diminished due to the shutdowns.

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
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on June 05, 2020, 07:03:15 PM
Quote from: Pat;1132687
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.

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.

Quote from: Pat;1132687
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


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
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on June 05, 2020, 07:39:59 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1132709
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.

I don't give a fuck whether you agree with me, this is about you putting words in my mouth. False words, which I never said. In fact, as I pointed out very clearly, it was exactly the opposite of what I said. That's what makes you a miserable piece of shit.

Being a genocide apologist also makes you a piece of shit, but I wasn't talking about that, because you hadn't made it clear that you support the unnecessary death of millions. But I'm sure Andrew Cuomo appreciates your support.

Quote from: jhkim;1132709
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

More things I never said.

For instance, I didn't say anyone disagreeing with the numbers I posted is a crime. In fact, I stated multiple times, in both of my last two posts, that we don't have all the data. That there's a lot of ambiguity. And nowhere did I claim that either of the sources were definitive, or comprehensive. In fact, the only claim I stated with reasonable certainty was the average of 11 or 13 years of life lost, when someone dies of COVID-19. I used qualifying words for everything else, quite deliberately, because I do not consider them the final word. But they're what we have, and give us something we can assess and discuss.

This is the problem I have talking with you. You keep on putting words in my mouth. Words I never said, implied, or believe.

And as I pointed out when you brought up recession mortality rates earlier, almost everybody prefers boom times. If there's a lower mortality rate during economic downturns, what does that mean? It means people are voluntarily choosing to take on a certain degree of risk. Like the public did, when they pressured the federal government to remove the 55 mph speed limit. Like women do, when they decide to bring a child to term. Like we all do, when we cross the street.

Incidentally, a finance director isn't an economist.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on June 06, 2020, 02:05:41 PM
Here's a very interesting article.

https://www.justfacts.com/news_covid-19_anxiety_lockdowns_life_destroyed_saved
Quote
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.

Note the article is more than a month old, so this information has been out there for a while.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on June 06, 2020, 05:50:43 PM
Quote from: Pat;1132811
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.

I wonder if the same people that point out that COVID-related deaths are mainly among those with comorbidities (e.g., hypertension, asthma, etc.) will be as quick to note that the deaths in this study are likewise tied to comorbidities (e.g., depression, anxiety disorders, mood disorders, and psychosis). 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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on June 06, 2020, 09:04:29 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1132845
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?

Good question!

The death data from mental illness would need to be matched vs. economic data. AKA, what's their death rate when employed vs. unemployed? What's their death rate when the national economy is booming vs. suffering recession?

I'm sure these numbers exist somewhere.

Here's a "Systemic Review of Suicide in Economic Recession" from 2015. The conclusion? "Economic recession periods appear to increase overall suicide rates, although further research is warranted in this area, particularly in low income countries."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4473496/

A couple weeks ago, I had been interested in how the social media / MSM fearmongering would affect the overall mental health of the nation.

Our cities got the answer loud and clear regarding the short term effect. Now we must wait for the long term effect.


Quote from: DocJones;1132678
Target just announced early looting hours for seniors.

Reparations on aisle three.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on June 07, 2020, 10:31:32 PM
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)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on June 09, 2020, 02:21:32 PM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: insubordinate polyhedral on June 09, 2020, 03:23:54 PM
Quote from: oggsmash;1133302
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.

The Mayans were right and the world actually ended in 2012, we're just living in the parallel universe hellscape that followed.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on June 19, 2020, 06:47:14 AM
Cases in my area (central Florida) are on the rise again. Many are asymptomatic and are accounted for simply by having much easier access to testing. However, hospitalizations for COVID are rising again too. On the bright side, many of these are being caught early and do not (yet) require ICU. Treatment has also changed with better understanding, so ventilators are used less frequently. Healthcare "workplace" exposures have risen too, mainly r/t lax discipline on following precautions largely associated with fatigue (i.e., "tired" from maintaining precautions continuously for so long...these are not people you would want colonizing Mars).
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on June 19, 2020, 02:39:48 PM
Coronasham is back? We're giving up on the riots already?

Our governor, Emperor Newscum of California, just released his royal edict demanding everyone to wear face diapers inside and outside because of the scary Corona monsters chasing everybody now the protesters got bored and went home. However...the responses to his tweeted command are pretty funny.

https://twitter.com/GavinNewsom/status/1273696999066353664
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on June 19, 2020, 04:17:02 PM
Quote from: DocJones;1133057
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)

"COVID-19 among Black patients is yet another lethal manifestation of white supremacy."

I'm glad they published this letter because that's "1,288 public health professionals, infectious diseases professionals, and community stakeholders" I can avoid at all costs.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on June 19, 2020, 04:27:45 PM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on June 19, 2020, 04:43:32 PM
Quote from: oggsmash;1135151
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.

Adrienne Jones - African American

Literal fucking LOL. Like that is your ONLY fucking credential, that you were born black. My God, the US is doomed...
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on June 20, 2020, 04:14:14 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1132591
Even if someone does turn out to be right, that doesn't mean you shouldn't have questioned it!! What I find most exasperating about the covid-19 issue is how many people default to an answer based on their politics without questioning it -- and furthermore, anyone who holds a different view is clearly insane and/or brainwashed.

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

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

Coronavirus isn't a "new" disease, it's a very familiar one which presents a variety of strains every year. Most of them aren't really all that troubling except to the sick, elderly and young. Since the whole "asymptomatic transmission" thing has turned out to be total bollocks, the only thing that's "novel" about this is that it's particularly deadly to the elderly, while being not that lethal for the young.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on June 20, 2020, 04:20:14 AM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on June 20, 2020, 11:52:27 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1135266
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.

  Speak for yourself.  I always tell my wife if I hit 80 I am going to take up piloting helicopters or hunting bears (grizzy, polar or kodiak) with a hand gun.  I prefer to die wearing my boots and not in bedclothes.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: spon on June 21, 2020, 07:45:34 PM
Quote from: Kiero;1135263
Since the whole "asymptomatic transmission" thing has turned out to be total bollocks

Where are you getting this from? The WHO have already backtracked on their "almost no asymptomatic spread" claim. What I've read implies we still don't know. Some studies say almost 0, others around 20%, and some as high as 40%. Which studies are you going with?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on June 22, 2020, 01:14:10 PM
Don't trust the WHO at all.  That corrupt organization is bought and owned by China.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 01, 2020, 06:36:19 PM
In central Florida cases are rising pretty quickly and the numbers hospitalized are increasing too. There is again some talk of restricting elective procedures (which is murderous on healthcare finances) but beyond that, we are already seeing a lot of patients cancelling surgeries and appointments (pre-op, post-op, follow-up/recheck, and therapy). So we have the back and forth of health issue/economic issue playing at each other. What's really odd to me is that some of the progress that was made on increasing accessibility through telemedicine visits has lost ground when it should be on the rise. For too many people, if they can't do a live visit (currently because they choose not to) they'd rather just cancel than have a telehealth visit.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 01, 2020, 07:23:39 PM
https://www.dailywire.com/news/fatality-rate-plunges-as-cdc-director-says-covid-cases-likely-10x-higher/

Uh huh...
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 01, 2020, 07:38:44 PM
Quote from: Brad;1137466
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on July 02, 2020, 12:14:42 AM
I'm looking forward to the Shutdown 2: Corona Boogaloo because it was a blast racing on the empty LA freeways and having the beaches and parks to ourselves. I wonder how many people are going to submit a second time. Judging from all the people diligently wearing face diapers, I expect its gonna be a Karenfest.

Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 02, 2020, 09:28:14 AM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 02, 2020, 09:48:23 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1137468
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.

People get sick all the time and it impacts them financially; this bullshit is literally causing businesses to cease operations because if one person gets sick, EVERYONE has to stay home. A bunch of restaurants in town have open and closed multiple times because some PT worker tested positive. Some of them are now closed permanently. All for a fucking lie. I have seen videos of city council members saying they will ASSUME that if a person is positive, there must be at least 7 - 15 more cases due to the inevitable contact with others.

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.

I'm so frustrated with this crap...also, no mask ever. Went to the grocery store yesterday, they had signs, walked right in and bought shit, no one said a single word to me. You can do it too.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on July 02, 2020, 11:13:35 AM
Quote from: Brad;1137540
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.

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]

Quote
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.


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/
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 02, 2020, 11:53:11 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1137574
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/

Was waiting for this and it didn't take long...

Quote from: Brad;1137540
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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on July 02, 2020, 05:21:03 PM
Is this a "serious" pandemic?  Isnt the average age of the person that it kills a few years older than the average age of death in the country?  It is not comparable to 1918, because that one killed young healthy people, didnt it?  This one does not.  

  At this point it just about does not matter, because the same motherfuckers screaming about killing grandma then urged people to show their support in protesting.   Sorry you can not have it both ways.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: spon on July 02, 2020, 05:30:57 PM
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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on July 02, 2020, 05:51:55 PM
Quote from: spon;1137647
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?


Makes sense...

asymptomatic carriers...

Oh Wait!  You mean just like the flu?  https://www.nhs.uk/news/medical-practice/three-quarters-of-people-with-flu-have-no-symptoms/
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 02, 2020, 06:14:15 PM
Quote from: spon;1137647
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?

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on July 02, 2020, 07:09:37 PM
Quote from: Brad
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.
Quote from: Brad;1137582
How does it make any sense? Because idiots who claim to be scientists say so?

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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 02, 2020, 08:27:42 PM
Quote from: Brad;1137651
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on July 03, 2020, 01:05:52 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1137671
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?

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: spon on July 03, 2020, 08:08:16 AM
Quote from: moonsweeper;1137708
Are those hospital beds being filled by people who are being hospitalized because of Covid-19?

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: spon on July 03, 2020, 08:12:08 AM
Quote from: Brad;1137651

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 03, 2020, 09:02:30 AM
Quote from: spon;1137720
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.

Not a problem in New York. Governor Cuomo ordered them to all be housed together so they'd die off and not be a burden.

Why, yes, I am accusing Cuomo the Lame-o of deliberately boosting the deaths in his state for stupid political points.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on July 03, 2020, 09:39:01 AM
Quote from: spon;1137719
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'?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 03, 2020, 11:02:24 AM
Quote from: moonsweeper;1137708
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.

I can't provide links--some of the information I have is internal to my organization--but these (200+ in the last two weeks) are patients hospitalized for acute respiratory conditions linked to positive tests for COVID-19. Asymptomatic people don't get hospitalized regardless of whether they test positive or not. Patients being registered for surgery get tested for COVID-19 and, if they test positive, it is at the provider's discretion whether to go ahead with the surgery (guaranteed for emergent, life-saving measures) or to delay it until they retest with negative results (guaranteed for fully elective procedures). Surgeries that improve quality of life but are not emergent have some wiggle room.

Quote from: spon;1137719
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.

A benefit of more widespread testing has been early detection. This means that, while infected numbers are rising very quickly, and hospital admissions for acute symptoms are on the rise too, the proportion of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 needing ventilators is decreasing. This is a good thing.

Quote from: moonsweeper;1137737
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'?

Early detection & treatment is the answer. More are being treated before they might require ICU level treatment and ventilators. This is why there is still a need to flatten the curve so that acute cases (not all infections) stay within the capabilities of healthcare resources.

This is where Brad is technically correct--no matter what, some will die of COVID-19 (and yes, all will eventually die of something)--but it is also where Brad is a dick for suggesting that efforts should not be taken to minimize that number by preventing unnecessary deaths from COVID-19.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on July 03, 2020, 12:43:43 PM
Welp just gonna leave this here. https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/07/hydro-treatment-study (https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/07/hydro-treatment-study)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: spon on July 04, 2020, 05:50:00 AM
Quote from: moonsweeper;1137737
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'?

Assuming the virus is the same in the US as the UK, the reasoning is sound. I believe the death rate going down is because you are detecting a lot more of the mild/asymptomatic cases that were being missed because testing was less widespread. Which might be a glimmer of hope for us - if the virus is actually a lot more widespread than we believe (i.e. almost all cases are asymptomatic), we might be able to get to a situation of herd immunity much quicker and concentrate on helping the vulnerable whilst reopening the economy for everyone else.

Unfortunately, that doesn't look like it's the case, and even if it were we don't have any guarantee that our immunity lasts long enough to help.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 04, 2020, 05:21:15 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1137658
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?

Quote from: spon;1137720
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.

The old "what about grandma" argument. Yeah well, fuck grandma. She needs to stay home and avoid getting sent to a nursing home with old people who tested positive. What's that, you say? We're sending sick people to nursing homes and deaths are spiking?

GTFO with this fear mongering bullshit.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on July 04, 2020, 09:28:53 PM
Quote from: Brad;1137936
GTFO with this fear mongering bullshit.


Fear mongering bullshit is all they have left.

The scamdemic looks dumber everyday. The death rate is a joke, the victims are almost entirely people with one foot in the grave, and less and less people are buying the "oh noes cases be rising" when its obviously from the frantic pace of testing (to max out healthcare dollars).

We're nearly at the tipping point of even the densest people figuring out the scam. 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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: yancy on July 05, 2020, 05:18:14 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1137962
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?

That last bullshit was mandated here a week or two ago, by our dipshit mayor, because this time the governor didn't have the will to fight :(

So far I've grudgingly put a handkerchief on my face when I'm yelled at (which happens in about of half of businesses here), but I'm thinking I'll buy some kinda pro-Trump 'covid mask' so every time someone insists I wear a mask, their happy face over forcing me to express support for Antifa and BLM turns into a frowny face over forcing me to express support for killing the children of unauthorized citizens, or whatever the hell it is Trump is guilty of today.

I've kind of wondered lately, if masks are such a goddamn important and effective public health measure that it's necessary to pass laws mandating wearing them, why it is there aren't obvious signs of them being handed out like sanitary IV drug use kits and meth smoking packages are, not even to low income individuals. Because I've seen little to no (read:no) evidence of any such initiative, and neither has anyone I've spoken to, including friends living in places like, oh, I don't know, Brooklyn.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on July 05, 2020, 10:24:54 AM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 05, 2020, 11:05:58 AM
Quote from: sureshot;1138036
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on July 05, 2020, 06:41:25 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1138042
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 05, 2020, 06:48:00 PM
Quote from: Shasarak;1138097
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.

When wearing masks (not respirators) it really is intended to protect the patient from the HCP (this is the function of surgical/procedural masks). Of course, patients are also required to wear masks within healthcare facilities too, and this is intended to protect the HCPs and other patients too. In cases where there is a known COVID-19 positive patient, HCPs will be wearing respirators and protective eyewear (this is also done with all patients undergoing aerosol-generating procedures).
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on July 05, 2020, 07:14:42 PM
Free abortions are essential but motherfucker you better pony up $1 to buy a fucking face mask!
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on July 05, 2020, 07:57:42 PM
Quote from: Brad
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.
(...)
Quote from: jhkim
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?
Quote from: Brad;1137936
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 06, 2020, 11:14:32 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1138112
(...)


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?

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!
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on July 06, 2020, 01:54:24 PM
Quote from: Brad;1138189
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.

Quote from: jhkim;1137574
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/

There can be differing views on this -- this is just one analysis. But it's at least looking at the history and trying to learn from it.

Quote from: Brad;1138189
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. Masks are just one of many possible safeguards, but they're useful and effective. They don't protect the wearer much - rather, they're mostly for protecting other people from you. If you're infected and don't realize it, a mask will limit how much you spread around the infection.

For example, protesters should wear masks and maintain distance, and not doing so increases the risk that they pass on infection. And sure, many liberals have shown bias in how they talk about conservative protests compared to liberal protests. Just like how conservatives show bias in how they talk about protests.

But political bias doesn't mean that no objective reality exists, or that the whole disease is a hoax.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 06, 2020, 02:22:52 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1138216
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on July 06, 2020, 02:40:34 PM
Quote from: Brad;1138221
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 06, 2020, 02:46:29 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1138232
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.

So then why aren't they required when standing in line to get on a tube chute but bars are closed..?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 06, 2020, 04:41:36 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1137537
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.

The Lancet "study" where they gave already gravely ill people lethal doses of hydroxylchloroquine to "prove" it didn't work, you mean?

Quote from: jhkim;1137574
It has a century since we've had a pandemic considered this bad,

This isn't even as bad as the 1968 flu, never mind 1918.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1138232
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 06, 2020, 05:46:41 PM
Quote from: Kiero;1138247
Asymptomatic transmission is bollocks. People know they're ill when they're ill.

I disagree.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on July 06, 2020, 09:30:55 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1138232
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 half-assed numbers we already have prove its all bullshit fearmongering over the sniffles.

But this is just an exercise in mass submission.

Will you stay home when we tell you?
Will you let us close your church?
Will you let us destroy your jobs?
Will you let us trample your rights and the Constitution?
Will you wear a face diaper?
Will you let us inject you with a "fast tracked" vaccine?
Will you keep believing the media even though we keep changing the storyline?
Will you attack and threaten friends, family and neighbors who disobey?
Will you live in constant fear?

And the answer by the majority of Americans has been YES.

My response has been, continues to be, and will always be NO followed swiftly by FUCK OFF.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: yancy on July 07, 2020, 07:06:52 AM
I still haven't been able to find a free face mask. I'd prefer one with proven efficacy to protect me (and others) from Covid-19, but I'm very low income and I don't know if I can afford even some shitty thing I could buy on etsy, and I wouldn't trust those if I paid for 'em.

Where do I get these things? I don't wanna kill grandma :(

I love grandma :)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: spon on July 07, 2020, 09:26:05 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1138250
I disagree.

So does the ONS

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53320155
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 09, 2020, 04:17:21 AM
Quote from: spon;1138305
So does the ONS

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53320155

Crappy small sample:

Quote
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

Reported on the biased BBC. Colour me utterly unimpressed.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 09, 2020, 08:05:38 AM
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?'.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 09, 2020, 11:33:17 AM
Quote from: Kiero;1138626
Crappy small sample:



Reported on the biased BBC. Colour me utterly unimpressed.

The CDC has been proven demonstrably wrong for the past three months, but I'm supposed to just take whatever they say NOW at face value. Because, you know, it's a government agency full of expert scientists who have no political agenda. Even though the dude running it is gonna make millions off a charlatan vaccine.

So, yeah, never believing anything any government agency says again.

Quote from: Ghostmaker;1138635
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?'.

Well it IS worse, as that's ~17% increase! DOOM AND GLOOM! See, I can write for the newspaper.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 09, 2020, 04:55:56 PM
Quote from: Brad;1138650
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 09, 2020, 05:02:36 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1138715
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on July 09, 2020, 05:05:36 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1138715
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.

  What is the conspiracy in government agencies can have an agenda that maybe does not line up with the best interests of all the citizens under said government, and acting on that agencies may "massage" numbers.    I can not say what government agencies are beyond reproach, but there are a few (ATF, FBI, IRS, for just a few) that have had some actions and behaviors exposed the past decades that can erode some trust in government institutions.  Maybe you should tell him which ones are trust worthy?  The problem I have with most government agencies, they tend to end up staffed top to bottom with some level of bureaucrat after enough time, and bureaucrats do not always advance or stay in position due to their level of competence or stark honesty.  I can even put forward that many rise to the level of their incompetence and then stay there by making sure to "play ball".  I am not so sure it is conspiratorial to expect some government institutions to be staffed with toadies.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 09, 2020, 05:38:10 PM
Quote from: Brad;1138718
CT nutter because I don't believe the government..?

Surely you're joking.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 09, 2020, 05:44:00 PM
Quote from: oggsmash;1138719
Maybe you should tell him which ones are trust worthy?

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 09, 2020, 05:52:35 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1138730
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.

Sure, I'll grant that...maybe it's closer to 99.5% of the time.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on July 09, 2020, 05:55:34 PM
Quote from: Brad;1138718
CT nutter because I don't believe the government..?

Surely you're joking.

Given their track record:

Dont wear masks they dont do anything to You must wear masks.

Dont go outside or you will kill Grandma to Go outside, pack together as tight as possible for mostly peaceful protests or you will kill Gandma

Why would you not believe whatever the Government is currently saying?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on July 09, 2020, 09:29:00 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1138733
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.

  This is fair, but if this is necessary to verify government agency information.....it does not speak of what I like to think of high trust in institutions.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on July 14, 2020, 07:31:36 AM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 14, 2020, 09:03:37 AM
Quote from: rgalex;1139691
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on July 14, 2020, 09:46:47 AM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1139711
What's the number? 'Cause back when NYC tried to institute a snitch hotline it didn't go well AT ALL.


Let's see... here we go:

Quote
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 14, 2020, 11:41:57 AM
Quote from: rgalex;1139716
Let's see... here we go:

BRB, gotta go buy a burner phone. :D :D :D
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on July 14, 2020, 12:23:29 PM
It's about 50/50 with places around me giving a shit if I wear a mask or not.  The main grocery store I use asked me if I wanted one as I walked in and I said no thanks and they didn't say anything more.  The Subway by work, a CVS and most gas stations in the area told me I couldn't come in so I left.  There are a few diners that didn't care.

I have noticed that a lot of people are now wearing them.  More than at any point before now.  At the grocery store I'd hazard to guess that I was 1 of maybe 5 people I saw in there without one on.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on July 14, 2020, 01:50:13 PM
Quote from: rgalex;1139716
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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on July 14, 2020, 02:05:50 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1139762
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)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: insubordinate polyhedral on July 14, 2020, 02:39:25 PM
Quote from: moonsweeper;1139770
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on July 14, 2020, 02:52:35 PM
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1139780
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...
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: insubordinate polyhedral on July 14, 2020, 03:22:51 PM
Quote from: moonsweeper;1139783
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...

Yeah. I was all set to celebrate the death rate being not so bad as feared until I saw the stuff coming out about neurological entanglements and damage. https://www.healthline.com/health-news/covid-19-linked-to-major-neurological-conditions-including-stroke-brain-swelling

There ultimately may be nothing we can do except hunker down, monitor blood oxygen carefully, and deal with whatever the neurological impacts turn out to be. But if there's a high rate of brain damage associated with the disease I don't think its safe to call off precautionary measures yet.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 14, 2020, 03:27:34 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1139762
So like the Gestapo, Stasi, NKVD etc? Snitch on your family/friends/coworkers/neighbors to get browny points with the dictator?

Yup.

But the good news is that such snitch hotlines tend to get targeted and messed up. New York City had one and it collapsed because people were sending it dick pics and stories about how they saw Mayor deBlasio in an Olive Garden parking lot giving blowjobs.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 14, 2020, 04:09:36 PM
Quote from: moonsweeper;1139783
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on July 15, 2020, 12:16:23 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1139799
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
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 15, 2020, 12:47:26 AM
Quote from: moonsweeper;1139909
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 15, 2020, 04:56:05 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1139914
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.

Haha, yeah right. If they had fatality statistics to sensationalise, they'd be doing it.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: spon on July 15, 2020, 05:34:46 AM
Yeah "50,000 new cases" is a lot more newsworthy than "another 350 deaths". But deaths from Covid lag by about a month apparently, so if the infection rate really is as bad as reported, expect the deaths to increase by mid August. In America the median age of confirmed Covid cases is less than for the rest of the world, so hopefully that will lower the death rate (younger = healthier = less death via pre-existing conditions).
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on July 15, 2020, 10:09:12 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1139799
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)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 15, 2020, 11:34:59 AM
Quote from: moonsweeper;1139947
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)

Interesting. Thank you. It does also say that the actual positivity rate has increased from 6% to 18%, and that conforms to what I've seen (and posted). The lab errors are a thing, but don't overlook the threefold increase in "real" cases nor the increases in hospitalizations (more than sixfold for my system).
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 16, 2020, 01:12:21 PM
Today my count is 411 hospitalized, with 41 of those in ICU (and 29 of those on ventilators).
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 25, 2020, 10:18:50 PM
My numbers have dropped in the last two weeks; count is around 360 hospitalized and 40 in ICU (don't have updated stats on ventilators). Still way higher than April and May, but starting to trend downwards.

We have also seen an increasing number of HCW with infections, but most seem to track back to community contacts rather than workplace exposures. Not going into why that's the case, but it's what the RCAs are showing.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Cloyer Bulse on July 26, 2020, 06:44:07 PM
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.

The mainstream media knows that most people are too stupid to remember what they said last week, let alone months ago.

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)

Science is NOT a body of inviolable facts, it is a continual process of discovery. "Settled science" is not a thing. What you hear in the mainstream media is cherry-picked opinions. When they say, "listen to the science", what they mean is "listen to the scientists that we have carefully selected and paid."

I couldn't care less if there are 40 people in the ICU. What I want to know is where are these millions of dead and dying people upon which the lockdowns and mask-wearing are predicated?

When things go horribly wrong, it's usually 99% midwits screwing up and 1% predatory psychopaths who are there to take advantage of the situation. The reason why dictatorships don't work is because it only takes one psychopath to crash a civilization.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on July 26, 2020, 10:03:17 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1140214
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 27, 2020, 05:58:28 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1141895
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on July 27, 2020, 12:58:24 PM
Quote from: Cloyer Bulse;1141865
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.

If this is partisan U.S. politics, how does that explain the entire rest of the world? For example, South Korea had a massive campaign of mask-wearing and social distancing back in February before it was much of an issue in the U.S. Israel is one of the more right-wing world governments, and the Netanyahu government implemented lockdowns as well. The government of every country is struggling with covid-19, and in most countries, it's not a partisan issue of left/right the way that it is in the U.S.

I'm not even sure what your position is, actually, since your claim in the science thread (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42327-Liberals-Are-Against-Science!&p=1140797&viewfull=1#post1140797) was:
Quote from: Cloyer Bulse;1141865
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.


Is your position still that no one is sick? If so, what do you think happened in Italy and other places in the world outside of U.S. politics that claimed to have many deaths?


Quote from: Cloyer Bulse;1141865
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 agree with you that the average person doesn't read scientific and medical journals. But among the people who do read such journals, there is widespread belief that the pandemic exists. All of the medical and scientific professionals that I know are of this opinion, independently of any mainstream media. I've read this article, for example, on the effect of mask mandates:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2662657/

Masks don't generally protect the wearer, but they reduce infections by preventing the wearer from unintentionally spreading. It's not a big effect, but it is significant.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 27, 2020, 01:29:00 PM
Time for some link bombing. Have fun.

Fauci on masks:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/dr-fauci-made-the-coronavirus-pandemic-worse-by-lying-about-masks/ar-BB15zyW3
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/02/17/nih-disease-official-anthony-fauci-risk-of-coronavirus-in-u-s-is-minuscule-skip-mask-and-wash-hands/4787209002/
https://news.yahoo.com/fauci-says-everyone-wear-masks-165031498.html

Fauci on chloroquine:
https://principia-scientific.org/fauci-knew-about-hcq-in-2005-nobody-needed-to-die/
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/27/fauci-hydroxychloroquine-not-effective-against-coronavirus-283980/
https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/07/hydro-treatment-study

Reporting Covid deaths:

https://cbs12.com/news/local/man-who-died-in-motorcycle-crash-counted-as-covid-19-death-in-florida-report
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/birx-says-government-is-classifying-all-deaths-of-patients-with-coronavirus-as-covid-19-deaths-regardless-of-cause
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/health-department-says-england-counting-anyone-who-died-after-testing-positive-for-coronavirus-as-related-death
https://canadafreepress.com/article/the-cdc-confesses-to-lying-about-covid-19-death-numbers/
https://cbs12.com/news/coronavirus/dozens-of-florida-labs-still-report-only-positive-covid-tests-skewing-positivity-rate
https://www.texasobserver.org/covid-19-tests-combine-texas/
https://www.timesfreepress.com/news/local/story/2020/jul/20/hamco-virus-hospitalizations/527894/#/questions/2602258

So yeah. I have questions about just how legit this 'pandemic' is.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on July 27, 2020, 06:22:55 PM
It seems to me that if there really is a Wuhan pandemic then the government would not allow mass gatherings of people.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on July 27, 2020, 06:46:50 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1141932
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!
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 27, 2020, 11:42:09 PM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1142017
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!


This old shit again.

Ask FactCheck weighed in April 21: "The figures cited by Jensen generally square with estimated Medicare payments for COVID-19 hospitalizations, based on average Medicare payments for patients with similar diagnoses."

Ask FactCheck reporter Angelo Fichera, who interviewed Jensen, noted, "Jensen said he did not think that hospitals were intentionally misclassifying cases for financial reasons. But that's how his comments have been widely interpreted and paraded on social media."

Ask FactCheck's conclusion: "Recent legislation pays hospitals higher Medicare rates for COVID-19 patients and treatment, but there is no evidence of fraudulent reporting."

Julie Aultman, a member of the editorial board of the American Medical Association's Journal of Ethics, told PolitiFact it is "very unlikely that physicians or hospitals will falsify data or be motivated by money to do so." (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/04/24/fact-check-medicare-hospitals-paid-more-covid-19-patients-coronavirus/3000638001/)

Now with some "Yes, But" to help the reality stand out from ignorance. Don't let the fools on social media shape your reality.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 28, 2020, 01:58:33 AM
America's Frontline Doctors SCOTUS Press Conference Transcript (https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/americas-frontline-doctors-scotus-press-conference-transcript?fbclid=IwAR0d5W5mDeTeygwGcBrcyJazXyfBANLWq69bs_VTyVb4MlREyiKxfEWuWAc)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on July 28, 2020, 02:27:32 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1142075
America's Frontline Doctors SCOTUS Press Conference Transcript (https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/americas-frontline-doctors-scotus-press-conference-transcript?fbclid=IwAR0d5W5mDeTeygwGcBrcyJazXyfBANLWq69bs_VTyVb4MlREyiKxfEWuWAc)

Greetings!

Wow. A trainload of medical doctors--experts from all over the country--basically saying that Covid is fucking bullshit. Yeah, they have some medicinal treatments that can deal with the virus, kids are highly resistant, and people can choose to wear a mask or not. And kids can go back to school, and we can reopen our businesses, and get going. Keep an eye on things, be cautious, but the whole panic and lockdown is all a bunch of fucking bullshit.

I agree. These doctors are courageous to stand against the authoritarian mantra--wear a mask, shut up, and wait for a "vaccine."

Good stuff to hear!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on July 28, 2020, 05:23:08 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142065
This old shit again.


LOL. CARES act specifies a 20% bump on the American Hospital Association website.
Apparently, FactCheck.org can't match my 10 seconds on Google.
Creates a Medicare add-on payment of 20% for both rural and urban inpatient hospital COVID-19 patients;
https://www.aha.org/special-bulletin/2020-03-26-senate-passes-coronavirus-aid-relief-and-economic-security-cares-act (https://www.aha.org/special-bulletin/2020-03-26-senate-passes-coronavirus-aid-relief-and-economic-security-cares-act)

Healthcare is one of the most corrupt industries in America. I did headhunting for the senior care industry and we serviced assisted living and skilled nursing chains. Medicare "revisions" were constant after audits, every Director of Nursing Services and Administrator was hired based on their skill maximizing Medicare dollars, and let's not start on the crazy rampant elder abuse.

Nurses are the only true caregivers in hospitals (when not rehearsing for tiktok videos). Doctors can barely spend 3 minutes in the room before fleeing like vampires from the sun and each micro-visit is $350 or more. After my dad's final hospital stint, we got over 60 different bills, many from doctors who never saw my dad, but since everything was covered by Medicare, what was our incentive to spend hours on the phone reporting?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 28, 2020, 05:26:15 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1142075
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on July 28, 2020, 05:43:32 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142086
The video that transcript was taken from has been taken down for spreading false and misleading information.


And everybody can watch it on BitChute!!!




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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on July 28, 2020, 06:41:53 AM
Greetings!

Wear a mask, shut up, and wait for a vaccine.

Going on 6 months of this bullshit now. Originally, the lockdowns were supposed to be for two-four weeks, so that we could 'Flatten the curve" and our hospitals wouldn't be overwhelmed.

Now it's shut the fuck up, wear a mask, stay locked down and wait for a vaccine? There may never be a comprehensive vaccine. Even if a vaccine is developed, it might only be in 3 months, 6 months, or even longer. *Maybe*

So until then, everyone stays locked down, kids stay home, and people that do most of anything except sit on their ass in an office get to sit at home, unemployed. The elites and the fortunate tech people get to continue collecting a paycheck while "working at home."

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
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 28, 2020, 08:32:23 AM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on July 28, 2020, 08:39:18 AM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1142101
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.

Sure sign of someone promoting the Narrative over and against the facts. That he discredits himself in the process is invisible to him.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on July 28, 2020, 09:47:20 AM
The Vaccine if their truly is one is probably months away imo.

Myself just doing the quarantine basics of wearing a mask and proper social distancing when I can. Unlike some of you down in the USA they can fine us for not following proper protocol starting at 1000$+. In any case I see stupidity from both sides. Either being too paranoid about the virus vs thinking that their personal opinions are perfect shield means never getting sick.

Like I told someone complaining about business refusing to serve them I used the below image and just told them to reword American to Canadain

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4717[/ATTACH]
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: spon on July 28, 2020, 09:55:52 AM
Quote from: SHARK;1142092
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

Hi Shark,
         you're right about the young having far less to fear from COVID (although we have no idea about any long-term effects - hopefully minimal), but how are you going to isolate everyone who is over 60 and vulnerable? Not all of us live in our own apartment/house. Lots of people share houses with the older generation. Or is it only rich people that get to isolate? Coming out of lockdown is vital but what do you about those who can't isolate but need to? I have no answer to that one.

Oh, and on the "flatten the curve", that was always going to be a long term strategy. If you are going to "flatten the curve" you need to do it until you have herd immunity or a vaccine or have ramped up your health services to cope. Anyone who said 2-4 weeks was deluding themselves (and others).

Cheers,
Spon
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 28, 2020, 11:00:18 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142086
The video that transcript was taken from has been taken down for spreading false and misleading information.


What's it like to be continually deluded because you put ideology above science?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 28, 2020, 11:24:16 AM
Quote from: RandyB;1142106
Sure sign of someone promoting the Narrative over and against the facts. That he discredits himself in the process is invisible to him.

I'm just learning how fucking stupid many of the people here are and it's very clear that this site is full of crazy-ass, right-wing conspiracy nutjobs. And I say this as a conservative.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 28, 2020, 11:25:10 AM
Brad, you're a pathetic piece of shit. I'm done trying to engage with you as anything but that.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 28, 2020, 11:25:52 AM
Quote from: Brad;1142119
What's it like to be continually deluded because you put ideology above science?

You tell me asshole.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 28, 2020, 11:46:49 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142124
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 28, 2020, 12:24:23 PM
Quote from: Brad;1142127
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.

Third option. Your sources are shit. Your argument is shit. You are shit. Fuck off.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on July 28, 2020, 12:48:24 PM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1142088
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.

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:
Quote
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.


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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on July 28, 2020, 12:58:24 PM
I will say this again.. there will never be a vaccine.
Granted you might be sold a vaccine but it won't work.. that is it won't protect you for longer than two months.
Science has tried this again and again with this type of virus no success for the last 50 years.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on July 28, 2020, 01:22:13 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1142136
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.

"I don't think that her ministry work should be evidence against her medical claims per se."

Yes, yes you do think it should, which is why you did, this is called an ad hominem, address her arguments or "investigation" not shit that has zero bearing on it.

Funny enough you don't do the same with the leftist motivated "research".

Mind you, I don't know or care what she said/wrote, not saying she's correct or not, just pointing your blatant hypocrisy.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 28, 2020, 01:39:38 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142086
The video that transcript was taken from has been taken down for spreading false and misleading information.


Yes, the doctors are getting Stalinized for speaking out.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 28, 2020, 01:42:05 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1142136
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.

I don't care about her background. I care that multiple doctors are giving an alternative perspective on Covid-19 and getting silenced for it.

I care about the evidence, not mudslinging.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on July 28, 2020, 01:47:16 PM
Quote from: jhkim
"But I expect that somehow I'll just be accused of political bias and naiveté for investigating her this way."


You might have just added credence to her claims for some of us. :-)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 28, 2020, 01:50:57 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142133
Third option. Your sources are shit. Your argument is shit. You are shit. Fuck off.

Hahah wow...their website is being scrubbed off the internet for DARE going against Fraudci and his medical gestapo. So again, are you in on this scam, or just being a fucking moron?

Quote from: jhkim;1142136
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on July 28, 2020, 01:53:14 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142086
The video that transcript was taken from has been taken down for spreading false and misleading information.


"When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say."
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 28, 2020, 02:09:18 PM
They have their "science". No questions past this point please.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on July 28, 2020, 03:49:32 PM
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4724[/ATTACH]
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on July 28, 2020, 03:59:06 PM
Cheap, easy to get generics that the family GP can administer on a therapeutic basis doesn't make anyone money.  Stop being so foolish.  The science is settled -- pharma companies/senators love money!
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on July 28, 2020, 04:40:57 PM
Greetings!

Well, initially, I had more faith in the main response to the virus. However, as the *months* have passed, I have grown more skeptical and suspicious. Beyond that, however, people need to get back to work, and make a living. In spite of the chance of getting the virus. That's a *CHANCE*. If you don't work and pay bills, you will soon be homeless, and starving. That's not a chance--that is a CERTAINTY. You will lose everything--your house, your car, your possessions, comforts, everything, reduced to living out of a backpack. Ultimately, the medical doctors and experts can argue--and pharma and politicians can rub their hands at making money--but losing everything and living out of a backpack under the bridge is the reality many people face if they submit and obey the narrative.

So, fuck the narrative. It really doesn't matter what the official narrative says--because it doesn't change the reality that most people are facing if they obey the narrative.

People need to get back to work, and just deal with the virus themselves. Wear a mask, wash hands, social distancing, yada yada yada. The lockdown stuff needs to be ended though for damned sure. Don't even tell me we need to have lockdowns for a goddamned thing when the same fucking officials say its just fine for thousands of people to get together for a BLM riot. That is one huge clue right there that there is something deeply wrong about this whole thing. Churches have to be closed down--but abortion clinics need to stay open. Likewise, weed shops can also stay open. It all seems very selective to me as to what the Liberals want to stay open, and what they want to restrict and close down.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on July 28, 2020, 04:42:02 PM
Quote from: Brad;1142146
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 28, 2020, 04:59:27 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1142164
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.

Multiple doctors treating MANY patients separately using similar methods isn't corroboration enough? There are countless stories about HCQ being used successfully, but every...single...one is called "anecdotal". But discredited studies that overdosed 20 people are cited as counter-evidence. All because a bunch of people can make a lot of money from a fake vaccine.

Further, if this thing is such a dangerous killer, why wouldn't you at least try to use something that is 1) extremely cheap, 2) very safe, and 3) easily obtainable as a method to mitigate symptoms? Are people on their death bed just supposed to wait around for fucktard "scientists" to run double-blind studies for months instead of using something that has been demonstrably shown to work?

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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 28, 2020, 05:59:10 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1142164

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.


Until then, do you think it's justified to censor her and the other doctors? Because that's what's happening.
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: TNMalt on July 28, 2020, 06:34:54 PM
Here is a link that talks about the malaria drugs used so far. Lists studies that confirmed and did not confirm the results. https://www.goodrx.com/blog/coronavirus-medicine-chloroquine-hydroxychloroquine-as-covid19-treatment/
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 28, 2020, 07:00:56 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1142136
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 28, 2020, 09:51:27 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142176
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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 28, 2020, 10:25:15 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1142190
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on July 28, 2020, 11:01:26 PM
Ladies and gents, I see no reason to come down so hard on Happy Daze.

Assuming he's actually in nurse and clinic management (not to doubt him, but its the internet and nobody knows anybody), Happy Daze is dealing with the US healthcare system from the inside which sucks at the best of times, let alone during the shamdemic. When I was headhunting in healthcare, I'd get calls for Nursing Directors with crazy ass stories about how the healthcare sausage is made.

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.

As for her religiosity, when my father was dying, his doctor asked if he could pray to Allah at dad's bedside for his healing. Thus, we know the doctor was a worthless quack who is obviously ignorant of SETTLED SCIENCE!!! and should be totally ignored.

Or, he was a gentle man of faith who devoted his life to the healing arts, and when he reached the end of man's science, he turned to his religion.

BTW, I'm 10000% cool with Dr. Immanuel losing her medical license IF she's proven to be lying.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 28, 2020, 11:07:16 PM
One of the references the doctors were promoting before they were silenced.

https://www.newsweek.com/key-defeating-covid-19-already-exists-we-need-start-using-it-opinion-1519535

Perhaps this will help our friends who want to point at one specific person instead of the substance of their claims.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 29, 2020, 02:54:15 AM
Quote from: Brad;1142196
Ad hominem is the penultimate path for the hypocritical before they burst into flames.


No shit dumbfuck. I've given up having any real conversations with the likes of you. You all want to spread your CS nutter-butter all over, fine. I'm just here to make fun of how ridiculous you all are now. There's nothing real on this site anymore, so I'll just keep throwing out a heaping helping of "go fuck yourselves you terrible shits" as there's nothing better to do.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on July 29, 2020, 03:56:14 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142217
There's nothing real on this site anymore

Greetings!

Hey, HappyDaze! What do you mean by that?

Concerning the virus, I don't know why you guys get so hostile. There is a virus. That's a fact. It is all over the country, and all over the world. The debate comes from how to respond to the virus. There are some people--mostly the elderly, with other comorbidities--that are vulnerable to the virus. Most other people are not likely to die from the virus. That seems to be universally accepted as fact. As for what mitigation measures to take, that seems to be well in the hands of individual people and individual communities. I think that is the way it should be.

I appreciate your knowledge, HappyDaze, and your perspective. There seems to be lots of inconsistencies within the political leadership in handling the virus, and many of the doctors and such experts seem to be all over the map--or conveniently lining right up with various political leaders that seem to want everyone to "Wear a mask, shut up, and wait for a vaccine." There is a whole lot of problems with such an attitude, you know? The virus isn't like the Black Death, though many people seem to act like it is. I'm always reminded of the very low death rate of this virus--it is what, less than 1% for people under 60 that are healthy? And the death rate of those over 60 is like, 1 1/2% to 2% or something very low. So, all of the draconian authoritarianism and the hysterical alarmism by some seems not only out of place, but also very suspicious.

Ah well. It's ok for everyone to have different opinions.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on July 29, 2020, 04:07:54 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1142200
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.

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:

Quote
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.

From this, it sounds like there's potential but more study and especially a double-blind trial is warranted.


Quote from: Brad;1142166
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:

Quote
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.

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.


Quote from: Ratman_tf;1142172
Until then, do you think it's justified to censor her and the other doctors? Because that's what's happening.
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.
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 29, 2020, 04:09:38 AM
Quote from: SHARK;1142221
Greetings!

Hey, HappyDaze! What do you mean by that?
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 29, 2020, 04:42:39 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1142223
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.

No shit, No one has suggested otherwise.


Quote
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.

Huh. I don't consider Breitbart very responsible. I think they've devolved into a shock consertavive rag since Andrew Breitbart died.

No comments about my follow up post? Can we stop gawking at the strange-o doctor lady that people are using as a smokescreen?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on July 29, 2020, 08:34:54 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142224
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.

That wouldn't be happening if there wasn't a full court press to hide and/or highly selectively edit any news that the left media complex considers against their narrative.   It's a bit rich to be demanding facts and science all the time while that is going on, because now there aren't many sources that you can trust. Even when you do get a hold of the original source, unfiltered by the media, you don't know what else it out there that they are suppressing.

Basically, the left has decided that the way to win any argument--including ones on policy supposedly based on science--is to not have the argument.  They get to say what they want, and everyone else's views are discredited by whatever means necessary.  You can scream about what that does to discussion all you want, but that's the nature of the beast right now.  Your ire is directed at the wrong target, blaming the people for not giving into this pathetic state of affairs instead of the people causing it.

Maybe we need to start "reclaiming our time".
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 29, 2020, 11:02:19 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1142223
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.

As I understand it there are some serious ethical issues revolving around using patients in a double-blind study like this. I'm not saying you're wrong -- the more data we gather, the better -- but there may be complications with giving one patient what might be a cure versus NOT giving it to another.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 29, 2020, 11:27:00 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142224
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.

Tell us how you really feel.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: TNMalt on July 29, 2020, 12:33:50 PM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on July 29, 2020, 01:34:01 PM
Quote from: TNMalt;1142246
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.

Idiots spreading fake news isn't helping.  But here we are anyway.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on July 29, 2020, 01:39:19 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1142223
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.


That's because most doctors consider it unethical to NOT treat their patients!  (To give sick patients placebos.)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 29, 2020, 01:47:43 PM
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1142247
Idiots spreading fake news isn't helping.  But here we are anyway.

Well then, idiot, stop being here spreading fake news.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on July 29, 2020, 02:00:32 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142249
Well then, idiot, stop being here spreading fake news.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 29, 2020, 02:04:02 PM
Quote from: TNMalt;1142246
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.

https://issuesinsights.com/2020/07/27/florida-is-a-case-study-in-media-induced-covid-19-panic/

Remember, there is a difference between 'reported' and 'occurred'. And when someone seeks to blur the lines, you might wonder why.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 29, 2020, 02:16:52 PM
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1142251
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'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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 29, 2020, 02:21:08 PM
Quote from: TNMalt;1142246
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on July 29, 2020, 02:44:57 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142254
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.

Oh, so you are "reclaiming your time".  Thought so.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on July 29, 2020, 02:55:58 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1142255
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.

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.




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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 29, 2020, 03:05:09 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142254
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.

So why bother posting..? Serious question.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 29, 2020, 03:05:49 PM
Quote from: DocJones;1142259
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on July 29, 2020, 03:06:44 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142254
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on July 29, 2020, 03:12:47 PM
Quote from: Zirunel;1142263
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.

No one here is about "deep conspiracies".  That implies something hidden and subtle.  This is outright censorship and propaganda.  That there may be some factual useful bits mixed in with the noise is almost unavoidable given the volume.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on July 29, 2020, 03:15:09 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1142262
It's that the news and authorities are often flying by the seat of their pants on this issue

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 29, 2020, 03:26:49 PM
Quote from: Brad;1142261
So why bother posting..? Serious question.

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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on July 29, 2020, 03:34:48 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1142262
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.

Greetings!

I agree, Ratman. There is a virus going on, but there is a whole lot of bullshit being pushed along with it. I think it is interesting that poltical worldviews seem to play heavily into how ordinary Americans respond to the virus. Liberals are all in favour of *mandatory* mask wearing, want people to shut up and don't question the narrative, have everything locked down, and wait for a vaccine. Conservatives, on the other hand, favour people being free to choose whether or not to wear a mask, and favour an open economy and society, and embrace questioning the official narrative.

There's been studies and polls done which reflect this dynamic, specifically concerning the virus and the government and authorities response to the virus.

I'm also skeptical because the story keeps changing, the goal posts keep being moved, and the Liberal's response seems to just boil down to "Wear a mask, shut up, and wait for a vaccine while everything is locked down!"

I just cannot accept that response to the virus. Fuck that, you know? I'm not doing it.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 29, 2020, 03:37:07 PM
Quote from: Zirunel;1142266
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 29, 2020, 03:53:00 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1142273
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 29, 2020, 04:05:14 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142269
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?

Why you mad, bro? Maybe get some mental help.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1142276
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.

No mask crew.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on July 29, 2020, 04:08:24 PM
Sweden now:
(https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/NINTCHDBPICT000596156082-1.jpg)
(https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/NINTCHDBPICT000596156084-1.jpg)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 29, 2020, 04:12:24 PM
Quote from: Brad;1142279
Why you mad, bro? Maybe get some mental help.


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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on July 29, 2020, 04:14:08 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142276
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.

If you're one of the vulnerables stay the hell in your basement.
 - signed asshole shithead DocJones

Or come out prepared...
(https://library.cofc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/bubbleboy-toiletpaper.jpg)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on July 29, 2020, 04:19:14 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1142273
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: TNMalt on July 29, 2020, 04:25:06 PM
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1142251
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 don't have anyone on my ignore list as I pee standing up. Also, putting someone on ignore is such a beta move. Only a beta cuck soy boy would do tha.t
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 29, 2020, 04:30:41 PM
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1142286
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.


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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on July 29, 2020, 04:31:24 PM
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"?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 29, 2020, 04:32:29 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1142294
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"?

I always thought it was CT (conspiracy theory), but what do I know...

Anyway, someone is a "CT nutter" if they don't blindly follow the edicts of un-elected bureaucrats.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on July 29, 2020, 05:14:49 PM
Quote from: Brad;1142293
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 29, 2020, 05:53:03 PM
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1142300
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 state/town has an order in place that you have to wear one when you "can't maintain 6' of distance", and all the businesses have signs about it being mandatory. If you actually read the order, it's worded in such a way that it's entirely voluntary. Hence, they know it's not legally enforceable but want you to believe it is. Whatever...I went to lunch today at a local Mexican place, no mask, no one said shit to me, and no one even cared. The waitress had one, but I think that was to avoid notice from code enforcement, not because she thought it was effective. If she had asked me to wear one as I walked in, I would have done so as a courtesy to the restaurant, NOT because I was adhering to some illegal, unenforceable mandate. I have yet to make any stink about it at all because so far everyone has been very reasonable about it. If it REALLY is to protect other people, then why aren't the most vulnerable people staying at home? I see lots of old people who literally DGAF, hence I figure if they don't care, why should I? They're the ones that will get sick from this crap, not me.

Quote
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.

Well, that was the original plan, wasn't it? Make sure the hospitals could accommodate the surge of patients, wait it out a bit, then just assume everyone would get the virus but we'd be able to deal with it effectively. That morphed into a literal fascist lockdown where people are being sent to jail for daring to open their businesses. I live in one of the hottest parts of the country, I work out constantly (the gyms reopening really helped my mental health...), am under the age to start worrying, and take my vitamins and eat well. My risk factor is like zero. My dad is in his 70s and had a knee operation and has a history of high blood pressure, but he told me he doesn't give a fuck about this stuff because, I quote, "I saw a lot worse shit in Nam." He was a field medic, and was a nurse for years after he retired, so if he isn't worried I don't think I should be, either.

Is the virus real? Yes. Is it deadly for a certain group of people? Yes. The same people who would die from a severe flu season, though, so why the fuck we're treating it like the black plague amazes me.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 29, 2020, 07:06:46 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142282
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?

Get over yourself.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 29, 2020, 07:07:37 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1142294
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"?

I assumed it was Coalition States. Skulls out for Human Supremacy!
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 29, 2020, 07:09:24 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142276
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.


Is that why people wore masks with vents?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 29, 2020, 07:31:14 PM
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1142286
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.
....

;)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on July 29, 2020, 07:44:33 PM
Dr. Fauci endorses Tinder hookups 'if you're willing to take a risk'  (https://nypost.com/2020/04/15/fauci-endorses-tinder-hookups-with-a-caveat/)
Shaking hands should be verboten.  

LOL
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on July 29, 2020, 08:16:20 PM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: spon on July 30, 2020, 04:33:37 AM
Quote from: Shasarak;1142313
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.

Plus ca change, as they say!
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 30, 2020, 08:18:06 AM
Quote from: Shasarak;1142313
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.

I suspect part of it is in our psyche. We are visually oriented, and are wired to see faces (sometimes when one doesn't actually exist; the man in the moon, or the infamous face on Mars). Disrupting that with a mask automatically puts us on guard.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on July 30, 2020, 12:19:42 PM
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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 30, 2020, 12:21:13 PM
Quote from: DocJones;1142370
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?

Through the power of alien DNA and the ejaculate of spirit rapists, our reptilian overlords already have a solution!
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on July 30, 2020, 12:28:47 PM
Quote from: DocJones;1142370
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on July 30, 2020, 12:54:15 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1142374
Retrovirus vs a flu virus, not the same thing.

Flu virus is not the same thing as a coronavirus
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on July 30, 2020, 01:15:22 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1142379
Flu virus is not the same thing as a coronavirus


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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on July 30, 2020, 01:18:11 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142371
Through the power of alien DNA and the ejaculate of spirit rapists, our reptilian overlords already have a solution!


No. I don't trust Bill Gates either. ;-)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on July 30, 2020, 01:28:33 PM
Quote from: DocJones;1142380
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.

If someone wants to keep the lockdowns until a working vaccine is found that someone is a fuckwad, there's no permanent vaccine vs flu virus, they mutate too easy, sooner or latter (and I hope it's sooner) people and governments are gonna have to come to terms that the lockdowns will cause more deaths and suffering than the Kung-Flu.

Hell even the useless ONU is already warning of this, people die from disease, not always we can do anything to prevent this, and when we can we, sometimes, shouldn't because the cure is worst than the disease.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 30, 2020, 01:54:51 PM
Quote from: DocJones;1142370
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on July 30, 2020, 03:53:26 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1142390
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.

I mentioned HIV and MERS and SARS to make the point that a "vaccine is right around the corner" is a lie.
Ohio banned HCQ for China flu immediately following the release of the aformentioned video. WTF!?!
Today they unbanned it at the request of the governor and much blowback by doctors.
It's all very very much suspicious.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 30, 2020, 03:54:06 PM
Anyone care to explain this?

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/yale-epidemiologist-accuses-fauci-running-disinformation-campaign

EDIT: ^^^you posted right as I did...yeah, this is total nonsense. Fraudci is a total tool.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on July 30, 2020, 05:39:34 PM
I would cite President Trump on this, from the White House site.

Quote
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.


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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on July 30, 2020, 06:38:26 PM
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)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on July 31, 2020, 06:24:58 AM
No, Covid-19 is not caused by a flu virus (although for some reason some people insist on pretending it is), nor is it a retrovirus. Completely different beast.

But it's true, we don't have a stellar record with coronavirus vaccines.

Common cold is caused by coronaviruses. No vaccine ever, despite fairly significant efforts in the past.

SARS -1 and MERS: no vaccine, although I understand a SARS vaccine was close to rollout but the outbreak ended so it was never deployed.

So if we get a Covid-19 vaccine it will be, I believe, our first ever coronavirus vaccine. One positive sign is that Covid-19 seems to be very slow to mutate, which may improve our chances of success.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on July 31, 2020, 09:38:30 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1142421
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.


Trump is treating Fraudci exactly as he should: an expert in the field of epidemiology. That has nothing to do with public policy; people voted for Trump, not Fraudci. Just because some expert says something doesn't mean we should do whatever he says. That's why the US is in this mess...those CDC experts were salivating at the fact all their years of work were coming to fruition and there was a real pandemic they could study. That resulted in some of the dumbest fucking possible decisions we've seen in 50 years.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1142423
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)


African children don't count, and in fact it'd be better if they were all dead. Just ask Bill Gates!
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 01, 2020, 03:36:09 AM
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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 01, 2020, 07:04:11 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142276
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: spon on August 01, 2020, 07:55:27 AM
Quote from: Kiero;1142644
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on August 01, 2020, 09:32:59 AM
Quote from: Kiero;1142632
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?


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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 01, 2020, 10:57:07 AM
Quote from: Kiero;1142644
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 01, 2020, 11:00:18 AM
Quote from: spon;1142645
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on August 01, 2020, 11:01:17 AM
Quote from: spon;1142645
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.

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.

Quote from: RandyB;1142649
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 have taken to calling it the altered normal state of things. I still got to the corner store to shop for food I wear a mask. I don't shame people for not wearing masks though I do stand up for store employees  when assholes clearly disregard the rules. I use sanitizer when entering and leaving a store either usually the one offered at stores or my own. Makes sure to wash my hands and keep my home clean. Ignore and all coronaidiots whether they be family or friends. If you want to take a risk and think your immortal and immune more power to you except your dead to me until you take basic hygiene procedures
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on August 01, 2020, 11:08:16 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142665
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.


Be careful.  You don't want to wrench your shoulder patting yourself on the back for not being an asshole to someone who actually agrees with the garbage dribbling out of your mouth.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on August 01, 2020, 11:10:26 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142665
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
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 03, 2020, 05:19:17 AM
Quote from: SHARK;1142670
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

I really think that being pleasant is just you playing a character around here. Sure, you have been pleasant enough, but really look at the shit you post. You carefully select very specific politically charged messages and feed the morons here their rage fuel. You often glorify violence, and you really push the us/them divide that the idiots embrace. And you do it all while staying cheerful and (largely) polite (i.e., staying in character).

It's really a shame that someone as educated and intelligent as you seem to be (and yes, I really appreciate your thoughtful gaming posts) doesn't realize or--more likely--doesn't care what the more ignorant fuckers here will do with what you put up. But then I remember that nothing here is real, and this is just you staying in character, or at least I will hope that's the case as otherwise you're a fucking monster.

And that's where I made a mistake: I've been trying to be genuine when posting in this shithole. Well, I've decided to play a new character here, something quite different from myself IRL. So don't worry about me, when I tell you to fuck right off for spewing hateful shit, it's just what my character would do.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on August 03, 2020, 08:27:06 AM
Shark do yourself a favor and don't feed the Troll. It's better for your sanity and well being in the long run.

The troll is acting like a child because he could not get his requested Echo chamber when it comes to a forum and now engaging in the Oppression Olympics!

Just let him post and ignore and move on.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 03, 2020, 08:27:23 AM
Quote from: SHARK;1142670
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on August 03, 2020, 08:37:19 AM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1142927
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 03, 2020, 11:08:25 AM
Quote from: sureshot;1142934
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on August 03, 2020, 11:30:49 AM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1142927
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 03, 2020, 12:06:27 PM
Quote from: Brad;1142982
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 03, 2020, 12:43:51 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142990
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.

Unlike you right?

Quote from: HappyDaze;1142974
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 03, 2020, 12:49:36 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1142994
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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: BoxCrayonTales on August 03, 2020, 01:02:59 PM
This is why I'm blackpilled. No matter where I look along the political spectrum, without fail I find people with beliefs that I find objectionable and unwillingness to imagine the perspectives of others. No only that, but I don't know what is and isn't moral anymore because everybody is demonizing their political opponents, rewriting history to suit their agenda, and denying accepted science and mathematics.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 03, 2020, 01:08:36 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142995
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 03, 2020, 01:13:00 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1143003
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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 03, 2020, 01:17:17 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1143005
Is that how they do it in Mexico? Is what will help me level up?

Yep, we constantly tell gringos with a white savior complex to go fuck themselves. Now go fuck yourself fucking gringo.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 03, 2020, 01:32:33 PM
Quote from: Kiero;1142644
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.


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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 03, 2020, 01:32:44 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1143006
Yep, we constantly tell gringos with a white savior complex to go fuck themselves. Now go fuck yourself fucking gringo.

Oh...I'm starting to see how that works. Wait, am I supposed to find "gringo" insulting. If so, I just can't. Especially not when you say it in such an adorable way. You're just so precious.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 03, 2020, 01:49:23 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1143006
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 03, 2020, 01:56:47 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1143018
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 03, 2020, 02:10:12 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1143022
He's not very smart or mature.

Like all trolls ever.

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).
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on August 03, 2020, 02:10:23 PM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 03, 2020, 02:11:43 PM
Quote from: sureshot;1143026
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.

Relax, I'm chatting with the Bugle. No point in me talking to the troll, I'm on his ignore list anyways.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 03, 2020, 02:13:11 PM
Quote from: SHARK;1142670
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.


Quote from: SHARK
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)

Quote from: SHARK
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)

Quote from: SHARK;1141632
No, no. If you oppose BLM you must be an evil racist!:mad:

Fucking morons. Leftists just need to be strapped down and lobotomized, and sterilized.
(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)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 03, 2020, 02:26:23 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1143025
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on August 03, 2020, 02:48:17 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1143033
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 03, 2020, 02:59:02 PM
Quote from: RandyB;1143047
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%
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 03, 2020, 03:15:35 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1143052
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%

Oh good, we have an "I think" regarding data the fool doesnt even work with. Can we all play that dumbfuck game? I think they are at about 60% when they should be at 100%. Ooh...this version of science sure is fun.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on August 03, 2020, 03:19:27 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1143052
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%

Not gonna compete over whose tests are less accurate. :D They all suck.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 03, 2020, 03:43:48 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1143033
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on August 03, 2020, 04:07:57 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1143064
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
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on August 03, 2020, 04:24:40 PM
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1143072
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

That has happened quite a bit...explain to me how hospitals getting $$$$ for positive results isn't resulting in massive corruption.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 03, 2020, 04:29:19 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1143064
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on August 03, 2020, 04:33:25 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1143082
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.

Stock up on popcorn, then. The lamentation of the soyboys will be appetizing, and their tears thirst-quenching.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on August 03, 2020, 04:57:26 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1143028
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)


Greetings!

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 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? They envision a fucked dystopian world that is entirely hostile to America, and to the culture, traditions, and way of life that I and other good Americans wish to preserve. There isn't anything there to debate, so in my commentary towards current events and people or ideologies within the videos and current events, I don't see any virtues or values in what Marxist traitors embrace and espouse. They desire to destroy my country, our civilization, and everything that good Americans value and cherish.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 03, 2020, 05:18:46 PM
The problem with Covid is that it is not just a physical virus but also a mental virus as well.

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.

I know that Gad Saad is coming out with a new book called The Parasitic Mind: How Infectious Ideas Are Killing Common Sense and Tim Ferris has his Tao of Seneca: Letters from a Stoic Master.

Does anyone else have any recommended reading for building your mental toughness?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 03, 2020, 06:14:08 PM
Quote from: spon;1142645
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 only vaccine I'm opposed to is the ridiculous one people are claiming we need for this strain which has all but burned itself out. My children are fully vaccinated against all the childhood ailments, because that serves a useful purpose. They never have the annual "flu jab", because that is utterly pointless. As is any "coronavirus vaccine".

Quote from: HappyDaze;1142663
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.


I follow useful rules. I don't kowtow to compliance theatre for an easy life.

Quote from: sureshot;1142666
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.


Not the way it works in this country, I haven't worn a mask yet and I'm not going to. I get served just fine, thanks for asking.

Quote from: Garry G;1143012
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?


I'm just as disinterested in that possibility as I have been every flu season I've been alive. It's a risk we all take being alive and interacting with other people. I've pretty much ignored all this compliance theatre bullshit the entire time this has been going on. I haven't been ill, no one around me has been ill.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 03, 2020, 07:22:46 PM
Quote from: Shasarak;1143093
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on August 03, 2020, 07:34:43 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1142974
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.


Wrong. Who is calling to cancel or ban any posters?

Notice how you're flinging poo in all directions, but nobody is demanding you be silenced.

Try that on other forums.

Here, you get to fling poo AND complain you're the martyr AND still not get banned.


Quote from: HappyDaze;1142995
Well, I'm new at being a raging, judgemental asshole,


It's doubtful you're new at being an asshole.

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.


Quote from: GeekyBugle;1143006
Yep, we constantly tell gringos with a white savior complex to go fuck themselves.


I wish the Trump campaign would invest more time and money into Latinos for Trump movement because I know this white savior bullshit doesn't fly because its so grotesquely bigoted. It's a great angle of attack for Trump.


Quote from: Brad;1143080
That has happened quite a bit...explain to me how hospitals getting $$$$ for positive results isn't resulting in massive corruption.


Everything science touches is pure!

Especially politicized healthcare!!

LOL.


Quote from: SHARK;1143089
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?


Marxism, like radical islam, is a religion. There's nothing to discuss with AntiFart or BLM. Are you really going to convince anyone to abandon their god? Can they say anything that would make you abandon America to their ideology and Biden's handlers?

We're way past the talking part of the dance.


Quote from: Shasarak;1143093
The problem with Covid is that it is not just a physical virus but also a mental virus as well.


Good point.

If Trump stuck to his guns and ended the National Emergency on Easter, things wouldn't have gotten out of control because taxpayer money is what's allowing the state governors and mayors to be little bitch tyrants. Without trillions of free cash, these states and cities would have had to rely on their own reserves. AKA, CoronaChan would have been quickly abandoned as the anti-Trump tool. Without the money stream, everyone would have returned to work and I suspect the BLM bullshit wouldn't have a 1/10th the energy if people weren't out of work and mesmerized by the shamdemic.

Trump has fueled his own destruction.


Quote from: Shasarak;1143093
Does anyone else have any recommended reading for building your mental toughness?


Twitter?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 03, 2020, 08:14:39 PM
Quote from: SHARK
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.
Quote from: jhkim
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.
Quote from: SHARK;1143089
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 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?
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 03, 2020, 08:29:42 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1143108
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 03, 2020, 09:02:56 PM
Quote from: Shasarak;1143119
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.
....

:)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on August 03, 2020, 09:54:17 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1143115
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.

Greetings!

*Laughing* Yeah, Jhkim, no "safe spaces" required. I certainly hope different people are welcome here. Having said that, yeah, this site is not ruled by SJW's and Marxists. So when such people like that want to get into it, yeah, there is plenty of pushback against SJW's and their ilk here.

As for you attending BLM events, sure, man. You do that. I've been to a BLM event, too.:D

Out here, though, BLM thugs are not allowed to run around burning, looting, and murdering. Amazing how polite BLM people are when you have a loaded AR-15 rifle in your hands. BLM events from Boise, north to Coeur D' Lane have been met by hundreds and thousands of citizens waving American flags, and armed to the teeth. People here prefer waving American flags, not BLM flags. Just like folks here don't believe in kneeling to anyone or anything except God. Lots of people here carry a Bible in one hand, and a rifle or a pistol in the other hand. Bullshit Marxists nonsense and rebellion isn't tolerated here.

My church doesn't have BLM flags. We proudly wave American flags at Church, too. I also have several neighbors that are police officers. We support our police here, where law enforcement is respected and honoured, just like our military veterans. God, Family, and America are what's honoured here--not murder, burning, screaming, and rebellion.

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. They believe in high taxes, and lots of big government. They hate Capitalism, and want anti-American propaganda taught in all of our schools. They want to make excuses for criminals, and to coddle them endlessly. They hate the police, and want police departments disbanded and defunded. They want to restrict my rights to keep and bear arms. They want to ignore and violate the Constitution of the United States of America.

All of that represents an alien, evil culture, Jhkim. It is not a culture that I or millions of Americans support. Good Americans will never submit and get on their knees for such an ideology and culture, Jhkim. That is an unavoidable fact. The Marxists have been Reeeing and pushing for this, Jhkim. Always pushing, laughing, sneering, making demands after demands.

There's gonna be a point where other Americans are gonna start making demands of these Marxists, BLM and Antifa. Making demands that there won't be any discussion about, and the Marxists aren't gonna like one bit. Marxists cannot be "negotiated" with. The culture you are pushing for is hostile and oppressive to the culture that millions of Americans cherish, Jhkim. Where have you been? On the BLM website, they claim to be against Christianity, the nuclear family, and Western Civilization. BLM leaders have admitted they are MARXISTS. BLM leaders have admitted that their goal is to DESTROY AMERICA.

Why would you support BLM, Jhkim? Yeah, you, your family, friends, neighbors--all of you--support BLM, while their goals have been plainly stated, and you are just fine with that? You are right, Jhkim, supporting BLM puts you on the side of Marxism and traitors to America.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on August 03, 2020, 10:56:46 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1142927
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.


Greetings!

*Laughing* That's right, my friend. I'm a fucking monster!:D

I glorify violence.:D Well, somehow my great country is being overrun by violent Marxists, fucking traitors to our Republic. They are funded and supported by worthless, cock-sucking anti-American politicians. All of them hate real Americans. And I'm supposed to kneel to them, and grovel and beg, and remain quiet and submissive. Just back down, and let them take over, and destroy America.

No, I'm not backing down, and I'm not gonna keep quiet, sir. I'm not getting on my knees.

Why shouldn't I be angry? Furthermore, violence is simply part of life. Some people you just can't reach, so, you get what we have here today. I don't like it any more than you men do, but this is the way they want it. So, they get it!:D

If Leftists truly wanted peaceful discussion--that train left the station a long time ago.

I think about how peaceful Marxists are--the BLM and Antifa thugs--when I read about the young white girl gunned down by the black BLM thugs for saying, "All Lives Matter!" I think about how peaceful they are when they shot and murdered Mr. Dorn, a 77 year old black retired policeman in St. Louis. I think about the little 8-year old black girl shot and murdered by BLM in Atlanta, Georgia. I think about the white BLM thug who shot into a car with an AK-47, attempting to murder an innocent citizen. I think about how the BLM thugs have beaten police officers, thrown Molotov cocktails at them, attacked people with baseball bats, and burned down cities.

Every true American should always remember these things, and never forget what the fucking Democrats are really supporting, and what they really stand for.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 04, 2020, 04:24:44 AM
Quote from: SHARK;1143127
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 04, 2020, 04:26:30 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1143108
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.

Proper hygiene has been far more important than "modern medicine" in achieving all those victories over infection and disease. People often seem to overlook the importance of running water and handwashing.

The impact of coronavirus has been limited because it's ultimately little different to every other seasonal strain of virus that comes and goes. The only thing that has made this "novel" is the panicked over-reaction of governments in destroying their economies whilst interrupting the normal development of herd immunity with pointless lockdowns.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 04, 2020, 04:58:05 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1143162
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 04, 2020, 05:10:08 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1143109

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 don't get how it works do you? In my field, you don't get to be a subject matter expert without being questioned. This isn't like Trump and his fucking wack-ass pet subject matter expert doctor with her spirit-husband rapists, alien DNA, and reptilians in government bullshit. Oh no, you fuckers here will deepthroat that shit because it fits your narrative. Trump always rolls well on his reaction checks with the NPCs here, and so do all of the most quacked-out right wing conspiracy theories. 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. So why fight it? It's not like anything here is real.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on August 04, 2020, 05:37:03 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1143162
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.

Greetings!

Marxists want to destroy America. The BLM leaders are self-admitted Marxists. BLM leaders have admitted their goal is to destroy America. Democrats have increasingly embraced Marxism. Your assessment that the majority of Democrats are ordinary people who want to live their lives in peace--is meaningless, when they support Marxism. Furthermore, as we have seen the Democratic party become more and more radical and Marxist--the idea that the majority of Democrats are ordinary people is weak. 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.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on August 04, 2020, 05:45:46 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1143165
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
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 04, 2020, 06:01:20 AM
Quote from: SHARK;1143169
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 04, 2020, 07:06:42 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1143171
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 04, 2020, 07:35:45 AM
Quote from: Kiero;1143178
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).
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on August 04, 2020, 07:51:56 AM
Quote from: Kiero;1143178
Marxists only know how to destroy; we have the history of the 20th century, covering multiple places and 100 million corpses as proof.


Yep.  And the "liberals" that side with them in the name of justice are the first ones against the wall when the Marxists finally get enough power to put people against said wall.  On that unhappy day, the people that fought the Marxist are already dead, and the "liberals" discover that they are alone with no pesky others to their right worrying their delicate sensibilities over how people should act.  It's a shame they don't get to enjoy this state for very long.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 04, 2020, 08:12:07 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1143179
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 04, 2020, 08:39:55 AM
Quote from: Kiero;1143183
No, some of them are useful idiots who enable the Marxists, and are swiftly disposed of when the commies get their way.

These are the same ones that all the chicken littles say are coming for our old books, right? Yeah...no, the fucking idiotic doomsayers around here are so hilariously full of shit. My books are still fine, too...
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on August 04, 2020, 12:00:07 PM
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

Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 04, 2020, 12:10:43 PM
Quote from: SHARK;1143229
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


So if the day comes that you and your hometown buddies are viewed as a domestic enemy, will you hold to your duty and defend tomorrow's America from them?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on August 04, 2020, 12:30:00 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1143171
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.


All well and good, but the United States isn't a democracy...
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on August 04, 2020, 12:36:13 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1143171
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.


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
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 04, 2020, 01:31:51 PM
Quote from: SHARK;1143168
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.

I think you're in denial if you think it's not so, most likely from believing exactly whatever Youtube tells you -- because of course Youtubers are paragons of truth and virtue, and would never deceive the way that politicians do.

In general, I vote based on established track record and platform. Most of Democratic candidates are the same people as were in charge during the Obama years - and they were not particularly progressive, somewhat frustratingly so, in my view. The accusation of Marxism among lawmakers is largely driven by a blatantly shifting definition -- where countries like Sweden are considered capitalist and free, not proof of the success of Marxism -- but any attempt to implement social programs like what they have is labelled as Marxist.

Quote from: Kiero;1143178
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."

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 04, 2020, 01:46:39 PM
Quote from: SHARK;1143243
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on August 04, 2020, 02:22:05 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1143256
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 04, 2020, 02:58:53 PM
Quote from: moonsweeper;1143267
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on August 04, 2020, 03:07:43 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1143273
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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 04, 2020, 04:27:16 PM
Quote from: moonsweeper;1143275
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on August 04, 2020, 04:34:24 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1143289
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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 04, 2020, 04:58:56 PM
Quote from: moonsweeper;1143290
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?

Figure that one out on your own. I stated what does happen; it matters not to me whether or not it should happen.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on August 04, 2020, 07:33:59 PM
Anyone who thinks they can twist the true meaning of the oath to force patriots to bend the knee to "whatever we claim America is today" needs to read up on what Honest Abe actually did with his Presidential power when he decided to save the nation.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on August 04, 2020, 08:47:11 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1143166
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.

LOL. If that was remotely true, then we wouldn't have the MSM declared experts in your field is so absolutely terrified of any doctor or scientist who dares questions their narrative.

Where's the vigorous scientific debate when an accredited and experienced doctor claims to have healed hundreds?

Nowhere to be seen, but plenty of attacks on her religious beliefs. Makes me wonder if the religious attacks would be the same if she was a African Muslim instead of an African Christian. Just kidding!!  Like we didn't already know!!

And it's not rocket science. As I've posted repeatedly, this shit is simple. Anonymize her patient data, analyze her patient data, determine if her findings are correct, and then either act on her findings or prosecute her for medical fraud.


Quote from: HappyDaze;1143166
Now reasonable theories? Scientifically based theories? Fuck no, not here. You might believe them IRL, but not when here.

I don't post anything I won't say in real life. That would be lame.

I'm well versed in scientific research and the shamdemic has been a disgrace of failure by our scientific community, and the vast harm done will haunt us for at least two decades.


Quote from: HappyDaze;1143166
Here stupid shit pours out like a bad day after a Chipotle binge.

Dude, you've been flinging poo like a meth monkey.

And you can keep doing so without any fear of banning.

Clearly, you either need to vent or you're enjoying venting. Either way, your one handed typing skills are excellent!
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 04, 2020, 11:22:27 PM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1143331
Dude, you've been flinging poo like a meth monkey.

It has been more fun around here anyway.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 05, 2020, 05:08:04 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1143250
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 05, 2020, 05:31:13 AM
Quote from: Kiero;1143369
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.

There is also the possibility that Biden is just an opportunist using the moment against his opponent. Biden the candidate and Biden in office might look very different. That's not an endorsement, it's just acknowledging that all politicians wear many faces.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on August 05, 2020, 08:19:30 AM
Quote from: Shasarak;1143350
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 05, 2020, 08:45:22 AM
Quote from: sureshot;1143385
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 need to specify which troll you're talking about, because I'm the amusing one, motherfucker.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on August 05, 2020, 11:52:21 AM
Quote from: Kiero;1143369
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on August 05, 2020, 11:55:33 AM
Quote from: KingCheops;1143426
Just so long as it continues to line his and his family's pockets he's content.  Very model of a modern plutocrat.

"He is the very model
Of the modern global-plurocrat..."

Gilbert and Sullivan would have a field day.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on August 05, 2020, 03:12:49 PM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 05, 2020, 05:15:45 PM
Quote from: KingCheops;1143458
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 05, 2020, 07:35:44 PM
Quote from: Kiero;1143477
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on August 05, 2020, 10:35:18 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1143388
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 06, 2020, 04:03:28 AM
Quote from: sureshot;1143508
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.

Luv u too sweetums.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 06, 2020, 08:13:56 AM
Quote from: Garry G;1143492
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on August 06, 2020, 08:59:46 AM
Quote from: Kiero;1143527
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 06, 2020, 10:01:26 AM
Quote from: Kiero;1143527
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 06, 2020, 10:02:34 AM
Quote from: RandyB;1143532
And meatpacking plants, at least here in the U. S.

Meatpacking plants everywhere. What is it with that?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 06, 2020, 10:17:27 AM
Quote from: Garry G;1143537
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.

I haven't had any time off, I've been working this entire time. I'm even classed as a Key Worker, no claps for me, though. I'm a second class Key Worker who doesn't work for the hallowed NHS (most of whom have been idle this entire time, having sacked off their workload to prepare for a "surge" that never came). But you're right, they're not furloughed, they've been given effectively paid leave at full pay for the most part. Nice work if you can get it.

If the teachers aren't in the classroom, they're not working. It was only in the last weeks of June that teachers at my kids school started doing anything resembling work, no idea what they were doing before that.

Quote from: Garry G;1143537
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.

Bahahaha, utter drivel. Hardly any staff have been wearing masks, and in England mask-wearing by the customer has only been mandatory for two weeks.

This strain of coronavirus is neither particularly infectious, nor deadly if you're not old and/or sick. The unnecessary lockdown, on the other hand, is pretty fatal to the economy and has likely killed more people than it saved.

Quote from: Garry G;1143537
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.

If the data is unreliable, how do you know they're "excess"? People die all the time, total strangers who were close to death dying gives me no pause whatsoever.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 06, 2020, 11:04:19 AM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 06, 2020, 04:54:36 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1143546
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:
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 06, 2020, 06:05:37 PM
Elect more fascist democrats

Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 06, 2020, 06:26:02 PM
Quote from: Shasarak;1143581
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 06, 2020, 06:47:52 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1143591
Sorry. Hellhole.

My wife is from Otahuhu. You're lack of appreciation of my irony doesn't even disappoint me.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Hawkwing7423 on August 06, 2020, 11:34:59 PM
My school district in a "red" state was telling us all summer that they would go back to school with masks and social distancing. Lo and behold, today it's announced that instead a hybrid system is being used. Even red states partake in the mania. Of course, teacher's unions have been left all along, and administrators for decades at least. Based on a few months ago, my kids were learning next to nothing with e-learning. I work full time and my wife is attending college.

Having a kid on the spectrum who really likes structure, this is going to be disruptive for his calm. Will it all be back to business as usual after the election?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on August 07, 2020, 01:30:58 AM
Hawkwing, sorry to hear son is suffering. As an ex-special education teacher, I have been advising parents that their children have (so far) lost an entire year of education. If I was El Presidente, I'd have every kid redo the last year. Not just because of the lost class hours, but because the emotional and psychological trauma of the shamdemic. While parents have been panicking over the virus and economics, their kids have been sponging in all that...but processing it (very poorly) through their developing minds.

If your son has an IEP, please note that he has federally protected rights to whatever educational plan and services the district has committed to within the IEP. You and your wife should sit down and review the IEP in detail, because I doubt the "e-learning" fulfilled many (if any) of the requirements.

However, while "federally protected rights" sounds great on paper, I know many districts do everything to deny, minimize and lie about special education services. Of course, parents have the right to sue, and your child will age quickly as the lawsuit drags through the court system for 1-3 years. Based on the legal chatter I've seen, when this shamdemic ends, the courts will be overloaded for the next 5 years.

I've been giving all my special education parents the same advice, even before the shamdemic. I was not a fan of home-schooling in the past for numerous reasons, but the many realities of our current education system combined with the innovations in communal home schooling and e-learning have changed my mind. I would not trust my child's education (or my pet) to the current crop of educators and their soul-crushing, worthless, drone-producing system.

My mom, a devout Italian Catholic schoolteacher for 40 years, can't talk about the modern school system without dropping f-bombs and threatening demon summoning.

PS: Kids not "on the spectrum" also really like structure. Most (not all) of the kids who "hate" structure also do better with structure. The key is to define "structure" and analyze what aspects of structure are most effective for that particular child.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 07, 2020, 05:31:10 AM
Quote from: Garry G;1143546
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.

Wow. You know a significant proportion of the 1.4 million people (though only 550,000 in actual front-line care) who work for the NHS? That must be hell keeping up. I've heard countless anecdotes from all around the country of hospitals that are empty, worse still private hospitals barred from doing any work because the NHS commandeered their capacity, then did nothing with it.

Primary care was closed. For most places there was no "surge" in coronavirus cases to deal with. So what "work" have they been doing, exactly?

Quote from: Garry G;1143546
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.

There was nothing before June, barring a few exercises that could have been easily prepared by one person (and looked recycled). More to the point, they weren't in the classroom, since only some teaching assistants were there. My kids went back in June, thankfully, but there were hardly any teachers around. They also didn't bother with the charade of social distancing, once the parents buggered off.

All the talk about it "not being safe" is obstructionism from the teaching unions. Children are less susceptible and less transmissible than adults, they are literally in one of the safest workspaces there could be. Never mind that the virus can't be all that infectious given supermarkets have been fine all this time.

Quote from: Garry G;1143546
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.

Nice when England subsidises your state's very existence to the tune of £15bn a year, isn't it? If the death statistics themselves are unreliable (yesterday they admitted tens of thousands were wrong) how can you be sure they're excess due to coronavirus?

Quote from: Garry G;1143546
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.

We'll see how clever New Zealand is when they open up again, with no herd immunity whatsoever.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 07, 2020, 06:00:50 AM
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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 07, 2020, 06:58:26 AM
Nonsense Kiero. Utter piece of nonsense.

To be fair I will ask what you think the 67,000 excess deaths are. What uptick could have caused such a thing?

I'm willing to take a bet on New Zealands success though. They'll do fine with herd immunity once a vaccine is established that can grant it. You see that's how you get herd immunity.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 07, 2020, 10:10:37 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1143639
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?

And the air inside the supermarket forms a bubble around you and follows you around so no virus can escape the magical barrier.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 07, 2020, 11:16:26 AM
Quote from: Shasarak;1143598
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.

You seem weirdly defensive about your country. You should do more to celebrate how well it avoided the 2008 recession, the vibrant arts scene and how successful Jucinda Arden has been and not just in battling the virus. Listen to some BBQ reggae and be happier.

Also to be fair the Scots got in a leaky boat, travelled around the world then decided to live in Dunedin because they missed the shitty bits of Scotland.

You should just be happy you can go to see Fat Freddy's Drop. This is year two of delays for me.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 07, 2020, 12:31:22 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1143660
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 07, 2020, 02:39:24 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1143676
If only an e-wall had been built to block stupidity like this from crossing the border.

Scratch a leftist, find a bigot.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on August 07, 2020, 06:45:45 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1143691
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!)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 07, 2020, 06:55:56 PM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1143733
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!)

I'm sure Biden is completely unaware of having said that. Not saying that he didn't.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Hawkwing7423 on August 08, 2020, 02:44:48 PM
He said it, I watched it. It's easy to find on the Internets.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 08, 2020, 02:47:32 PM
Womp, womp

Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 08, 2020, 02:58:23 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1143830
Womp, womp


https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/87844
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 08, 2020, 04:02:09 PM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 08, 2020, 04:39:31 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1143835
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.

Those that suggest YouTube as a source of anything real are among the worst kinds of idiots. Sadly, it's the common practice around here.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 08, 2020, 04:41:48 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1143835
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 08, 2020, 04:55:25 PM
Quote from: Shasarak;1143842
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 08, 2020, 05:39:00 PM
Sorry I'm not up on my conspiracy theories and very easily confused. Why is the miracle cure hydroxychloroquine being suppressed? Why does it matter if this is only a harmless flu that just kills old people who nobody cares about? Is it bad in the US or is everything fine? Are the excess deaths because more people are at home due to lockdown so it's all swimming pool and trouser related fatalities? Why does anybody like Crowded House?

I'm genuinley confused about what everybodies reasoning over what seems to be a straightforwatd pandemic. I mean it's an international crisis so there must be an international conspiracy creating it if it's actually just a bad cold. Who is this shadowy organisation?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 08, 2020, 05:48:44 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1143847
Oh, we're back to the Leftists Are against Science! thread then.


I'm listening.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 08, 2020, 06:03:11 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1143835
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.

Hydroxychlorquine has already been investigated to treat malaria and other conditions. It's effectiveness against Covid and it's potential side effects, like every other drug that exists, has been politicized.

Quote
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.

But the Orange Man mentioned it in one of his speeches! Now it's bad and evil and we shouldn't even discuss the drug in case someone magically obtains bucketfulls of a prescription medication and starts gobbling it down like candy!

Give me a break.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 08, 2020, 09:19:00 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1143835
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 08, 2020, 10:24:02 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1143882
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.

Forget your video, dumbass. Your doctor is versed in the epidemiology of CANCER, not the epidemiology of INFECTIOUS DISEASES. That's a pretty huge difference, as his colleagues at Yale pointed out in the link I used to destroy your YouTube trash almost as soon as you posted it. But let me break it down for you: all diseases are not alike. Your boy is not an expert in the types of diseases that include Covid-19. Add to that the shortcomings of his so-called research, and you look like a fool without any need to Trump-bash.

Oh, and "not a simple doctor, but a PhD" just shows how ridiculously stupid you really are.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Chivalric on August 08, 2020, 11:03:40 PM
The person in question is both an MD and a Phd, so that's probably what GeekyBugle meant by "not a simple doctor, but a PhD"
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 09, 2020, 03:22:26 AM
Quote from: jhkim
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.
Quote from: Shasarak;1143842
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.

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.


Quote from: GeekyBugle;1143882
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.
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 09, 2020, 04:18:04 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1143909
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.

Like what?

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."

You really can't stop people from jumping off of rooftops because they saw Superman flying in a cartoon, or drinking fish tank cleaner because they think it maybe kinda sorta sounds like something else.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: ThatChrisGuy on August 09, 2020, 10:21:03 AM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1143917
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 was a straight-up murder and you'd have to work hard to convince me otherwise.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: TNMalt on August 09, 2020, 11:00:38 AM
https://khn.org/news/dont-fall-for-this-video-hydroxychloroquine-is-not-a-covid-19-cure/
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 09, 2020, 11:34:02 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1143909
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)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 09, 2020, 11:59:04 AM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1143940
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)

There's no need to pretend it doesnt exist, you ignorant shit; we can just point out where it's discredited for being utter shit work. That's how science (including medical science) works.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on August 09, 2020, 01:51:59 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1143847
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!"
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 09, 2020, 01:59:04 PM
Quote from: Zirunel;1143951
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on August 09, 2020, 02:14:23 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1143952
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.

Fair enough. I don't actually believe that in the real world, and in the main, "Conservatives are against science." But there sure was a lot of that on display here. Apparently to an uncomfortable degree, since the thread was abruptly locked.

 EDITED TO ADD: further to that, I don't believe anti-science people here were showing their hidden liberal side. What I do believe is that there is a growing anti-science, anti-intellectualism that has its conservative face, its liberal face, and even it's mushy middle face.  To me, it's troubling, but whatever, the assault on science comes from all sides and even from the middle.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 09, 2020, 02:58:46 PM
Quote from: jhkim
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.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1143917
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 09, 2020, 04:48:12 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1143964
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 09, 2020, 09:19:02 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1143964
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?

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.

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on August 09, 2020, 09:44:14 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1144000
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.

Greetings!

Exactly, Ratman!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 09, 2020, 09:54:59 PM
Quote from: Shasarak;1143968
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.

THIS, ten trillion times this.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 10, 2020, 08:28:43 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1143964
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)

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 10, 2020, 12:45:33 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1144052
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.
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. The argument is that it's better to just open up and let anyone give medical advice without censoring fake treatments or studies -- because censorship is bad. I consider that solution to be *far* worse. The censorship isn't just leftist media - even Breitbart took down it's video of "America's Frontline Doctors" and replaced it with an article critical of Dr. Immanuel -- when here on this very forum I was blasted as "hating empirical evidence" for questioning it. I think Breitbart was doing the right thing here. Giving out medical advice is fucking dangerous and companies should be hesitant to do so, rather than just treating it as people's right to express their opinion.

By personally pushing hydroxychloroquine, Trump politicized the issue in the U.S. -- but Covid-19 is a worldwide problem, and I don't buy that, for example, Israel is rejecting hydroxychloroquine as a cure because of "Orange Man Bad".
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 10, 2020, 01:24:52 PM
Womp, womp

Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 10, 2020, 01:39:23 PM
That's why the more sensible approach has been to look at excess deaths which the UK didn't use. Excess deaths are more than the UK governments flawed stats. As I've said In open to a reason for these deaths but there's only one big thing being talked about this year.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on August 10, 2020, 01:55:10 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1144093
Womp, womp


WOMP WOMP INDEED! That's right, Hermano! But there's no political circle-jerking being done by various officials to manipulate the public, right? And fucking morons wander why we are suspicious of official narratives?

Stupid fucking conservatives deny science! Amiright? Reee! Reee!

Damn right people should be suspicious of the official fucking narrative.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 10, 2020, 02:25:06 PM
To be fair nobody in their right mind is agreeing with the official narrative of the UK Conservative party. As I've said excess deaths are a better measure. I'm not sure why you won't give the Conservative Party the time of day though. I mean they're conservatives, it's in the name an a'hing.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 10, 2020, 03:56:17 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1144085
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.


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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 10, 2020, 04:30:22 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1144085
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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 10, 2020, 05:06:00 PM
Quote from: Shasarak;1144148
How many fake studies would you accept in your "journals"?  1 in 10, 2 in 10?  4 in 10 still good, still mostly scientific?

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 10, 2020, 05:12:57 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1144141
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 10, 2020, 05:26:38 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1144164
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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on August 10, 2020, 05:32:01 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1144176
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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 10, 2020, 05:48:35 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1144176
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?

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 10, 2020, 05:49:21 PM
Quote from: RandyB;1144177
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 10, 2020, 05:53:03 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1144183
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 10, 2020, 05:55:04 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1144182
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 10, 2020, 05:58:49 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1144188
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.

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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 10, 2020, 05:59:37 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1144191
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 10, 2020, 06:00:45 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1144191
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.

Don't be so sure about that. GeekyBitch is high on the list of conspiracy nutters around here. His delusions make for endless entertainment.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 10, 2020, 06:06:07 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1144194
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?

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).
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on August 10, 2020, 06:06:32 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1144191
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 10, 2020, 06:12:56 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1144158
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.


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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 10, 2020, 06:14:25 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1144195
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.

How did Sweden avoid the coordinated power grab not-conspiracy though? You see In not saying their approach was wrong for them but I'm not sure it would have been right for other areas. If it's only one country how did they escape this madness you talk of. Are they doing the cure?

Who are the right people and why do they hate them? Most people seem to find the Swedish to be pretty inoffensive, we all love ABBA.

I'm slightly joking in part but I need to see a coherent narrative where there was coordination in using a pandemic to exert control over the populace whilst mucking up the stats in such a way as to present less deaths than the excess death stats whilst tanking their economies whilst profiting over denigrating the miracle cure. Tell me a story that makes sense. The story that currently makes sense to me is that a load of countries turned out to be badly prepared for a pandemic and we're all paying, that makes sense to me.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 10, 2020, 06:19:04 PM
Quote from: Shasarak;1144205
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.


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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 10, 2020, 06:20:46 PM
Quote from: RandyB;1144201
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 10, 2020, 06:25:12 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1144200
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).

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 10, 2020, 06:33:07 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1144208
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.

You dont protect the common people by censoring science that you dont like.  The common people are always going to seek their scientific advice from the other common people that they know or half remembered science lessons they learned 50 years ago or, probably most likely, from what ever advertising that they have seen on TV.

Heck studies have shown that GPs are also influenced on their prescribing habits by the advertisements that they have seen.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 10, 2020, 06:37:06 PM
Quote from: Shasarak;1144213
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 10, 2020, 06:38:05 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1144212
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!
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 10, 2020, 06:45:33 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1144216
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!

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 10, 2020, 06:46:33 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1144176
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 10, 2020, 06:49:20 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1144220
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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 10, 2020, 06:50:48 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1144221
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 10, 2020, 06:54:08 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1144222
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 10, 2020, 06:57:29 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1144221
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!
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 10, 2020, 07:18:21 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1144223
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.

I don't. It's simply a narrative they found appealing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_baby_balloon
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 10, 2020, 07:20:04 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1144224
That's theRPGsite...keeping the crazy trains running on time is priority 1!

You know you want me. ;)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 10, 2020, 07:40:35 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1144219
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.


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)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: TNMalt on August 10, 2020, 08:12:43 PM
https://youtu.be/nYdFVY5rmlU
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 10, 2020, 08:36:05 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1144215
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.


You should check out Ben Goldacres books particularly in this case Bad Pharma (https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Bad+Pharma) but Bad Science is good too:

Quote
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on August 10, 2020, 10:30:50 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1144209
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.

Deliberately disingenuous confirmed.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 11, 2020, 03:03:14 AM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1144230
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 11, 2020, 11:08:45 AM
Quote from: Garry G;1144278
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!"
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 11, 2020, 11:42:26 AM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1144311
"I don't like your explanation therefore you're peddling conspiracy theories hur dur!"

Stating the obvious like the imbicile you really are doesnt disprove it. More and more people are starting to call you on your shit, GeekyBitch, and I find it refreshing.

But maybe there's a conspiracy here too...
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on August 11, 2020, 01:39:01 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1144052
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 11, 2020, 01:53:27 PM
Quote from: Zirunel;1144332
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 11, 2020, 02:05:58 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1144311
"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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 11, 2020, 02:35:42 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1144337
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 11, 2020, 02:50:09 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1144341
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.

Yes, folks, this is what it looks like when a lizard drops tail and runs.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on August 11, 2020, 02:51:57 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1144335
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.

Well, I had a look at the FDA revocation of emergency use authorization, and it doesn't exactly put the brakes on ANY use of HCQ for Covid. What it says is that because of the health risks, patients must be closely monitored, either in a hospital setting, or as part of a clinical trial. In fact, it encourages doctors who want to prescribe it for Covid to enroll their patients in trials. Sounds like due diligence to me, not slamming the brakes.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 11, 2020, 02:57:55 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1144341
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 11, 2020, 02:59:51 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1144346
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on August 11, 2020, 03:57:15 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1144347
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...
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on August 11, 2020, 04:12:02 PM
Quote from: Brad;1144356
Almost like some of these accounts are being paid to post...

The hell? I dunno about you, but posting here is an absolute money-loser for me. Time I could spend doing something else. I can afford it so okay. But  one reason I only post in fits and starts, and don't live here full-time like some.

EDITED TO ADD: I notice you have quite a large number of posts under your belt, any hints on how to monetize this? Maybe I'm missing out.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on August 11, 2020, 04:15:56 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1144347
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.

Quote from: Brad;1144356
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 does appear to be the case. And the vitriol when they get called out for their lies is trivially predictable.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 11, 2020, 04:30:14 PM
Quote from: Brad;1144356
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'm not sure there would be enough money for me to be paid to post if you're talking about me. Probably cheaper to moonlight in a pub or something. Who would pay me to post and how much would they pay? Asking for a friend.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 11, 2020, 04:34:35 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1144347
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.


To be fair you're not taking my answers seriously at all. I've brought up the whole excess death thing a few times and you've not given me a reason for them. Once again I only got pulled into this because of the nonsense UBI claim then you engaged me. We agree that the published death stats from the UK government are nonsense, I give an accepted alternative and you dinghy it. I'm not sure I should be the one being accused of not being up front.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on August 11, 2020, 04:37:04 PM
Quote from: RandyB;1144360
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 12, 2020, 12:16:37 PM
Quote from: Brad;1144367
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.

How does it work though? It seems weird that a website would change their name for more net unless it is a sponsoring thing. That seems to be different from getting big money for posting to a forum for a fairly obscure hobby.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 14, 2020, 06:05:01 AM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on August 14, 2020, 08:52:37 AM
Quote from: Kiero;1144830
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 14, 2020, 09:18:44 AM
Quote from: RandyB;1144844
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."
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on August 14, 2020, 09:54:30 AM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1144847
"Treason ne'er prospers; why, what's the reason?
If it doth prosper, none dare call it treason."

Exactly.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 14, 2020, 05:29:57 PM
Quote from: Kiero;1144830
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.


Herd Immunity is Sweden.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 16, 2020, 11:57:22 AM
Quote from: Kiero;1144830
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 16, 2020, 12:10:32 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1145101
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 16, 2020, 01:01:05 PM
Quote from: Kiero;1145102
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.

Numbers wise coronavirus is absolutely equivalent to polio whilst not equivalent to the common cold. We don't aquire herd immunity to any of the stuff you stated.

That was my first response and then I saw the influenza thing. You actually believe that a vaccine against influenza is a waste of time. You think that more people should die of influenza. That's an interesting take on the vaccination debate but one that makes you look a bit daft. Okay, very daft.

I figure you go on some sort of gut feeling, possibly after a heavy meal. Can you cite the coronavirus vs common cold stats? I need a laugh.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 16, 2020, 01:12:45 PM
Quote from: Kiero;1145102
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.
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
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 16, 2020, 01:17:26 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1145107
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

Don't you swing your stats around! I happily stand corrected over polio.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 16, 2020, 02:15:35 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1145107
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÷328200000 = 0.052102377

EDITED to correct the last operation was missing 200k gringos.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 16, 2020, 02:19:47 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1145116
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

That is fantastic news and I live in hope that infections don't get so high that the death count becomes directly related to population of any given country. A vaccine would be the absolute best way to avoid that and I hope one becomes available as soon as possible.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 16, 2020, 03:23:39 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1145116
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 16, 2020, 04:25:26 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1145126
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.

It's called perspective.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 16, 2020, 10:41:50 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1145126
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/
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 17, 2020, 03:08:20 PM
Quote from: Pat;1145166
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 17, 2020, 03:42:31 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1145280
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.

Why would you separate out the UK from Europe? Because this isn't a disease that uniformly affects an entire region. Even the country level is imprecise, with Lombardy being overwhelmed in Italy, with the rest of the country being much less affected. And the US isn't equivalent to a European country, it's equivalent to the whole continent. Separating out even one or two hotspots helps show how concentrated the deaths are, and starts to highlight how little other areas have been affected.

And in this specific case, it highlights how many people Andrew Cuomo killed.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on August 19, 2020, 10:48:09 AM
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!!!!!!"
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 19, 2020, 03:46:45 PM
Quote from: Brad;1145500
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!!!!!!"

What is your standard of proof? Is it proven solely by website itself? The domain was created in June 5, 2020 by anonymous people who claim "We are PhD researchers, scientists, people who hope to make a contribution, even if it is only very minor." It is on the same server as three other domains:

https://c19hcq.com/   (a mirror of the material)
https://c19death.com/    (returns raw content "you are awesome")
https://c19perspective.com/   (returns raw content "you are awesome")

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 19, 2020, 04:15:03 PM
More broadly to Brad -- I don't want to be dismissive or hostile. I accepted your source and tried to read through it seriously. I posted on some inconsistencies that I found in what I saw there, but I am willing to continue to read more on the subject.

I would like genuine debate on the subject. Science should not be political, I feel, and so our political differences shouldn't prevent discussing about standards of proof and the actual evidence in this case.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on August 20, 2020, 04:33:02 AM
Quote from: Garry G;1145117
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.

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!
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 20, 2020, 08:03:14 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1145641
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.

There are some promising candidates, but it's worth remembering that lengthy and thorough clinical trials for vaccines exist for a reason.

https://www.aamc.org/news-insights/here-s-why-we-can-t-rush-covid-19-vaccine
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 20, 2020, 08:31:34 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1145641
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!

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. There isn't much give for a spike in another virus. So yeah please wear your face nappy to stop spreading shit around.

In the end I hope you're right though. I have absolutely no ideological opinion on this. I hope that it all just blows over and we can get back to a normal life.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on August 20, 2020, 04:02:17 PM
Taking a look at New York City and what its liberal democrat leadership has done to it.

Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on August 21, 2020, 11:27:52 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1145541
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".
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on August 21, 2020, 11:55:20 AM
Quote from: Brad;1145832
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".

You forgot politics.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 21, 2020, 12:35:38 PM
Quote from: Brad;1145832
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".

And here we see B-rad's stupidity again. His "countless thousands" which either means he can't fucking count--because thousands means there's a number (and that can be counted)--or he's just pulling nonsense from his gaping twat. B-rad complains about science but can't even grasp numbers, hilarious.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 21, 2020, 01:05:06 PM
Quote from: Brad;1145832
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on August 21, 2020, 01:16:14 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1145853
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
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 21, 2020, 01:20:04 PM
Quote from: Brad;1145856
Sure

Thank God you agree.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on August 21, 2020, 01:41:38 PM
Quote from: Garry G;1145857
Thank God you agree.

Whatever floats your boat, ace.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 21, 2020, 02:05:10 PM
Quote from: Brad;1145860
Whatever floats your boat, ace.

Teckle
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 21, 2020, 02:32:05 PM
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?

Quote from: jhkim;1145541
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.

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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on August 23, 2020, 05:11:58 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1145865
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 23, 2020, 09:59:44 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1145865
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?
Quote from: Brad;1146173
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.

Well, thanks at least for giving a clear answer.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on August 23, 2020, 10:43:00 PM
MediaBear is YouTube musician who's been doing great parody videos of 80s songs about the CoronaChan nonsense. He also did Safety Mask  (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONfvD8hbofo)and I Wear My Face Mask in The Car (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DDXG-dHugc).

Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on August 23, 2020, 11:34:32 PM
Quote from: Brad;1145500
So...we still going to pretend HCQ is an "unproven drug" as it relates to mitigating Chinavirus problems?


Yes.

Quote from: Pat;1145653
There are some promising candidates, but it's worth remembering that lengthy and thorough clinical trials for vaccines exist for a reason.





Quote from: Garry G;1145659
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.


Can't wait for more TikTok nurse dance videos and footage of empty hospitals!


Quote from: Garry G;1145659
So yeah please wear your face nappy to stop spreading shit around.


Fuck that!

The fearmongers keep telling me that I'll kill everyone if I don't wear a mask, but it's been months and I still have neighbors!!!

Masks are bullshit and the China Virus has a 99.8% recovery rate. The face diaper nonsense is an amazing test to see how many people will submit to fear and obey propaganda.

As a student of Sun Tzu and Machiavelli, I bow deeply to China's Emperor Winnie the Pooh and our world's hidden masters. I hope they're reptilians!


Quote from: Garry G;1145659
I hope that it all just blows over and we can get back to a normal life.


It won't blow over until (a) the shamdemic no longer has any political value or (b) citizens force the gov't to end the sham.


Quote from: jeff37923;1145729
Taking a look at New York City and what its liberal democrat leadership has done to it.


I grew up in the scary 70s NYC, but as a kid you don't have perspective. We'd hear gunshots, look around and go back to playing stickball and the girls would return to their sidewalk teaparty. We found dead bums twice, saw lots of chalk outlines, and dodged out of the street when the cops and ambulances would go flying past. [the street is where the stickball field was located]

NYC will become interesting because Comrade DeBlasio doesn't leave until after December 31, 2021 and he's full tilt lunatic at this point with zero incentive to not overdrive his far left agenda. If Trump wins re-election, he'll support the post-election riots and when the Fentanyl Floyd trial goes sideways, he'll support the BLM 2: Fire Bomb Boogaloo, plus he'll do the 2nd Wave CoronaHoax to the max so by the time he's done, Paul Joseph Watson will have to do another video called "New York is a Double Mega Shithole!" But this is what New Yorkers voted for. Just like every other leftist city.

Of course, the exodus of NYC wealth will accelerate, and that will cause its own cascade of disasters. AKA, "trickle down economics" isn't "nice", but its vital to most major cities.

And that's fine. It just means NYC will be the hot spot for rebuilding and reinvestment in the 2030s.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on August 24, 2020, 07:50:32 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1146196
And that's fine. It just means NYC will be the hot spot for rebuilding and reinvestment in the 2030s.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on August 24, 2020, 09:21:12 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1146190
Well, thanks at least for giving a clear answer.

https://youtu.be/x5u-lJNsO7A?t=4420

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.

Bonus content: https://twitter.com/Politi_Chatter/status/1297315324895932416
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 24, 2020, 10:58:07 AM
For those who are interested in herd immunity, why we may have reached it ahead of expectations, and why there's a good chance there won't be a second wave in the more heavily affected areas:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.27.20081893v3
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.23.20160762v1
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/369/6505/846?_ga=2.106785153.3660080.1597510732-1307329675.1597510732
https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/52/7/911/299077
https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-tricky-math-of-covid-19-herd-immunity-20200630/

Quick answer: Heterogeneity. The models that predicted herd immunity would be reached at 60–70% assume everyone in the population is equally susceptible to the disease, which is not how diseases work. Different people have different levels of susceptibility, and those who are easier to infect tend to get the disease earlier, meaning the remaining population gets more and more and more resistant. Estimates and models that account for this range from about 40%, down to 20% or lower. If the latter is correct, places like the UK and NYC have probably reached it. An additional note is this is affected by population and circumstances as well (anything that changes the R0), so places or populations with lower risk, like rural or humid areas, will reach herd immunity even sooner.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 24, 2020, 05:29:48 PM
Hi, Brad. Thanks for continuing discussion. I did still want to address my concerns about the site c13study.com, though. Did you look at both the paper and the c13study page I linked? That seems like a big discrepancy. If you're just dropping the point, then it feels like you're just ignoring what I say, and if I find fault in your next source, you could just drop that and pick up another. Do you still feel that the c13study.com site is reliable? Where do they get that graph and quote?


Quote from: Brad;1146233
https://youtu.be/x5u-lJNsO7A?t=4420

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...
I 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.


Quote from: Brad;1146233
Also RE: masks - https://mobile.twitter.com/TomFitton/status/1297551231620194304

So yeah...total bullshit.

I don't get that conclusion from the text. The Tweet is showing text from this page:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/public-health-recommendations.html

Below is the text which was highlighted in the Tweet. The bold section is my emphasis.

Quote
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 24, 2020, 06:09:51 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1146283
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 24, 2020, 06:36:28 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1146287
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 24, 2020, 07:50:10 PM
Quote from: Pat;1146289
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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 24, 2020, 08:02:36 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1146301
Good lord, what the fuck kind of mask are you wearing that equates to heavy armor?
Is there a facepalm emoji?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 24, 2020, 08:25:33 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1146301
Good lord, what the fuck kind of mask are you wearing that equates to heavy armor?

The fucking good kind that normies are not allowed to buy.

You know, the kind that actually can filter virus particles.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on August 24, 2020, 08:25:36 PM
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1146216
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.


NYC cycles faster because its the major Atlantic port, national finance center and has 500 years of history and myth. It's a great example of the concept of "Good Times makes Weak Men, Weak Men make Bad Times, Bad Times make Strong Men, Strong Men make Good Times" and the cycle continues.

And yes, I said MEN because MEN drive civilization. When the Strong Men arise from the coming Bad Times, you can bet there will be a reckoning for feminism. Feminism, SJWism, constant crying about microaggressions, etc can only exist in Good Times.


Quote from: HappyDaze;1146287
Amazing how many gamers will push for every +5% bonus in a game but not in real life.


You have discovered the fabled MASK OF COVID!!! It grants you +1 save vs. minor disease, but your PC now has Disadvantage to all INT and WIS rolls.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on August 24, 2020, 09:31:30 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1146283
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.

RE: video
https://www.bitchute.com/video/6TSA46UvJWSH/

Starts at about 20 minutes in. That directly addresses the first part of your post.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on August 24, 2020, 09:54:06 PM
Greetings!

The CDC says MASKS don't do a fucking thing. NO FUCKING EVIDENCE. Watch the video with Tucker Carlson.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 24, 2020, 10:17:17 PM
Quote from: Brad;1146317
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.

https://www.nist.gov/blogs/taking-measure/my-stay-home-lab-shows-how-face-coverings-can-slow-spread-disease
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on August 24, 2020, 10:19:28 PM
Quote from: Pat;1146324
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/
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 24, 2020, 10:27:46 PM
Quote from: Brad;1146326
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.

Which is not a counterargument against the effectiveness of masks. It's a counterargument against stupid.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on August 24, 2020, 11:13:57 PM
Amazing how a bandana stops the megadeadly CoronaEbola, but Hanes + Levis have zero chance against a fart.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on August 25, 2020, 10:46:18 AM
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.

Since that's all psychological, you could get most of the benefits by wearing colorful wristbands or anything else that is a more forceful example of the old "tie a piece of string around your finger to remember to do something" trick.

In most stores, you could get 80% to 90% of that benefit by simply requiring the mask when going in and checking out.  Then just leave it hanging on your neck while shopping.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on August 25, 2020, 12:13:35 PM
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1146370
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on August 25, 2020, 12:24:50 PM
Quote from: KingCheops;1146379
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."
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on August 25, 2020, 03:05:52 PM
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1146380
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 25, 2020, 03:17:45 PM
Quote from: Zirunel;1146403
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on August 25, 2020, 04:10:17 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1146408
Holy shit! A mature, responsible attitude towards masking--on the RPGsite of all places! Wow...

And thank you.

Um...you're welcome....

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. It does seem like this is being blown up into some kind of "Man in the Iron Mask" imprisonment when it is really so much less.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 25, 2020, 04:43:17 PM
Quote from: Zirunel;1146413
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on August 25, 2020, 04:53:49 PM
Quote from: Pat;1146418
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on August 25, 2020, 05:31:58 PM
Quote from: Zirunel;1146421
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".
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 25, 2020, 06:14:26 PM
Quote from: Zirunel;1146421
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 25, 2020, 06:18:12 PM
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1146428
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".

Oh, fuck you dude. I'm entirely my own self. If you care enough, go look through 4 years of my posting, you dumbass motherfucker. When someone wants to engage without the tired-ass SJW bullshit whenever someone disagrees, then you'll see my reasoned arguments. But for the moronic NPCs of this site (and yes, son, you qualify), well they can eat shit.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 25, 2020, 07:58:08 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1146436
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. ;)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 25, 2020, 08:06:13 PM
Quote from: Shasarak;1146452
Heh, easy going like a brick to the head. ;)

Only on Tuesdays.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 25, 2020, 08:30:28 PM
Quote from: Zirunel;1146421
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.

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.

If fear is the mind-killer, this is the conversation-killer. I typically make the mistake of trying to explain what I really believe, but it never works. And there's no way to advance the conversation, because it inevitably circles back to "I didn't say that".
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on August 25, 2020, 10:03:18 PM
It's more than just stepping out of line and being jusdged an SJW. It's as PAt posted unless one push and encourages the carefully constructed personal narratives either one is both an enemy and not worth listening to.

To use an example of an ex-friend who once Trump came into power in 2016 went full SJW and kept complaining more and more about what I was posting in my feed. He knew full well the way I feel and think about certain subjects yet I was still a "bad" person for thinking differently. n my end I was willing to let bygones be bygones though I muted his Facebook feed and ignored his SJW outbursts in person. An example of his narrative was how myself and more Liberal friend of ours were having a discussion about the how the new casting of a black Batwoman was done as a diversity hire and SJW response was to call us racist and misogynistic. When it clearly is a diversity hire. The original character has always been white and pointing out a race swap in a TV show to appease SJW is racist. Yeah don't piss on my leg and tell me it is not raining.

I expect many to suffer full mental breakdowns if Trump wins as many are so certain of their positions, opinions and narratives on subjects that reality has a way of going against the narrative. In essence it is not about having a difference of opinion and being called and SJW. It is wanting to live ones life with an echo chamber and when people don't give one said echo chamber they become the enemy. Non-SJWs act like that too except more and more except that the SJWs outnumber those that are not.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on August 26, 2020, 08:47:03 AM
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 is 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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 26, 2020, 08:51:36 AM
Quote from: sureshot;1146535
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.

Maybe because I'm working M-F you dumbass and I'll save making long posts for the weekend.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on August 26, 2020, 10:52:33 AM
Quote from: Pat;1146459


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.


That can happen.  What can also happen is that a troll will depend on everyone else playing by those criteria and giving the most charitable interpretation possible to everything said--and then will play stupid troll tricks with that.  Some of the smarter ones obviously even really enjoy it, but not everywhere has that class of trolls.  Moreover, I distinguish the pure "troll" here from those who push right up that line with extreme debate techniques.  That is, they don't really care what anyone really thinks--they are in it to "win" the argument.  

Normal people will only put up with troll behavior for so long.  Normal people will only put up with the "debate" when it is clearly called out--frequently with an agreed upon premise from which the debate can begin.  We've all been in that room where several people are having a conversation about what they believe.  It's usually mild.  Maybe a few questions for clarifications.  Then "that guy" has to turn it into a debate while pretending it is still just a conversation.  Pretty soon, it isn't mild anymore.  I'll sometimes tell them if you want to have a debate, let's have a debate.  We'll pick a starting point and go from there.  No, no, don't want to do that, we are just talking.  Bullshit.  

Now, sometimes the person that pulls that trick doesn't understand social cues, especially young, supposedly "college educated" males.  I can sympathize--been there, done that, got the T-shirt a long time ago.  After enough times of not getting the hint, you stop talking to them.  Especially if they are still doing that nonsense in their mid-30s.  Otherwise, wait until they grow up a little, then we'll talk.  In the meantime, let the adults have our conversation.

But mainly, it is the debating technique of the "not off the rails but leaning that way" left to insist that anyone who disagrees with them about the nature of reality is racist, in lock-step, ignorant, and too many other motives ascribed to list here.  The rest of us are tired of the giant fucking blind spot--to put the most charitable explanation on the behavior.  If that makes me Manichean in that respect, I can live with it.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on August 26, 2020, 11:58:27 AM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on August 26, 2020, 12:00:38 PM
I almost forgot the required trolling comment.

Real Men Don't Wear Masks!
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on August 26, 2020, 06:04:04 PM
Quote from: DocJones;1146563
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!"
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 26, 2020, 10:39:49 PM
Quote from: DocJones;1146563
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.
Quote from: Brad;1146586
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:

https://www.ejinme.com/article/S0953-6205(20)30335-6/fulltext

I'd put that in the positive column together with the other studies. Interestingly, it contradicts the claims at c19study, which pitched that hydroxychloroquine is only effective when taken early, not when administered upon admission to the hospital. There was another recent paper studying side effects, which found hydroxychloroquine seemed safe on its own -- but there was evidence of dangerous side effects when taken together with azithromycin.

http://outbreaknewstoday.com/hydroxychloroquine-and-covid-19-two-different-studies-78345/
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on August 27, 2020, 05:26:21 AM
Quote from: Zirunel;1146403
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.


If the elderly couple are scared of the sniffles, they can stay home.

Amazing how the road to tyranny is just submission to one "a tiny, tiny sacrifice" at a time.

How many thousands of business must be destroyed to keep your neighbors pacified?

How many millions of children must lose years of education so your neighbors "feel safer"?

How long do the rest of us have to put our lives on hold to please your neighbors?


Quote from: HappyDaze;1146536
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 27, 2020, 06:34:29 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1146638
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on August 31, 2020, 12:59:59 AM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 31, 2020, 02:49:10 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1147032
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.

You're reading that ass-backwards. 6% of those that died didn't have anything else going on, but consider that any single comorbidity--like hypertension which > 45% of Americans are estimated to have--takes them out of those numbers even though hypertension isn't likely to have killed them on its own. But, since we're using a site that Media Bias/Fact Check says "Overall, we rate Townhall Right Biased and Questionable based on consistent one-sided reporting that always favors the right and numerous failed fact checks," this is likely no surprise at all to anyone that it's totally skewed.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on August 31, 2020, 03:52:01 AM
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)
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 31, 2020, 04:32:38 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1147042
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)

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on August 31, 2020, 09:06:56 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1147032
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.

And you can already see the spin spin spin going on...scrubbing Twitter, shadowbans on Facebook, etc. You're not allowed to quote the fucking CDC, that bastion of unassailable scientific sovereignty, if their numbers don't match the media narrative.

INB4 "FOLLOW THE SCIENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" Literal LOL...anyone with a lick of sense knew this was bullshit from the start.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 31, 2020, 09:22:58 AM
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 31, 2020, 05:25:15 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1147062
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 31, 2020, 05:56:44 PM
Quote from: Shasarak;1147113
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?
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on August 31, 2020, 06:26:42 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1147115
The quality source for this "fact" would be?


From searching on "crash victim reported as covid-19 death"
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...

go to Chinatown to celebrate Chinese New Year's/lock-down
don't wear a mask/wear a mask
flatten the curve/if it saves even a single life
anti lockdown and 2A protests; you are literally killing grannies/(much larger) anti-racism protests; apparently makes you immune to Covid

Let's not forget sending Covid positive patients to nursing homes. And don't get me started on the quality of the Covid modeling, or that only deaths from Covid are accounted for and deaths from lockdown are ignored.

In a previous life, I worked on a project with very strict (NQA1) quality assurance requirements. As part of the project there was an analysis performed by one of its many partner organizations. During the discovery process (the project was litigated) emails were found where the analysts were taking shit about QA. That was deemed to have tainted the work. It had to be scrapped and redone by another organization, at a cost of $1M.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on August 31, 2020, 06:56:51 PM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1147045
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.

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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on September 01, 2020, 04:00:24 AM
Quote from: dkabq;1147118
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:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm

Whether the comorbidity death rate is a 0.05% correction or a 5% correction will depend on what the infection fatality rate really is, which can also be difficult to measure. But the excess death measure is an independent check on that. Plus, there are dozens of countries all of which have measured significant covid-19 deaths. There are valid differing arguments for what's the best way to deal with covid-19, but I don't think there's good argument that it's all a deliberate hoax by the CDC.


Quote from: dkabq;1147118
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.

In the U.S., since the states are handling the isolation and lockdowns each in their own way, it would seem like a good case to have a red state try this. If no red states are trying this, I'd want to know why.


Quote from: dkabq;1147117
From searching on "crash victim reported as covid-19 death"
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...
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.
Title: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on September 01, 2020, 05:15:18 AM
Every year, people with co-morbidities die from the flu. We've known for a long time those with co-morbidities are the most likely to die every year. I'm sure the vast majority of those 80k Americans who died in 2018 from the flu also had 2-3 deadly factors working against them.  

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.

And what do we shutdown, lockdown and panic about in a bad flu year? Absolutely nothing.

By hey, all this panicking for a pittance of deaths out of 350 MILLION surely won't have any negative long term affects on children, teens or the economy!

Remember little ones, be afraid. Be afraid of invisible things. Which could be everywhere. No one is safe. Everyone around you is diseased. You might be diseased. Now grow up with these memories seared into your skulls.

...and become the weakest, most obedient and most broken generation in human history.


Quote from: Brad;1147059
You're not allowed to quote the fucking CDC, that bastion of unassailable scientific sovereignty, if their numbers don't match the media narrative.

I wonder if social media behave the same if their sacred WHO masters agreed with the CDC numbers.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Hawkwing7423 on September 01, 2020, 08:37:06 PM
Every radio station's hourly news segment starts with new COVID cases every time. The fear porn mongering by the media has been endless.
USA is now merely 5 away in deaths per million from Sweden which did almost none of this bullshit.


If you sit in a restaurant the COVID won't get you, but if you stand it will!
If you protest with BLM it won't get you but if you go to church it will!


Dennis Prager today said that 1 in 3 restaurants in California may close this year.
https://pjmedia.com/columns/dennis-prager/2020/09/01/the-lockdown-has-gone-from-a-mistake-to-a-crime-n871865


My wife and my coworkers believe the narrative completely. I have to say the mainstream media, which at this point I consider simply evil, have hit a home run this time. I despise them but I admire their excellence in sowing endless fear.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 02, 2020, 04:14:55 AM
Dennis Prager today said
Abiother 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: spon on September 02, 2020, 05:40:03 AM
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? 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 02, 2020, 05:57:36 AM
Dennis Prager today said
Abiother 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.

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:
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on September 02, 2020, 07:48:26 AM
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:
- 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.
- Speaking of which, just how bad was the flu this year?  There were hints a few times that it might be rough, but the numbers are getting mangled in the poor COVID testing process.  If a patient gets pushed over the edge by COVID the hospital or nursing home makes more money than if the same patient dies from the flu. The COVID tests are picking up other viruses.  Don't even try to tell me that this isn't being abused--the only question is how much.
- How many people did the lockdown kill?  We'll probably never know for sure, but it definitely killed some--e.g. people with dangerous but not killing heart attacks refusing to get care because of fear of COVID, then suffering a second attack.  Suicide rate is up. 

That's all on top of the fact that even a variation on the flu, like COVID, is still deadly to some people.  We get a nasty variation on the actual flu every 10 to 20 years that kills at about the same rate as COVID, and probably for the same reasons.
Not to be callous about it--but as an imperfect analogy, consider what a nasty winter or particularly hot and dry summer does to living things. It kills them--including some that made it through the last few such lesser winters or summers.  Things that could handle a few 20 degree days or a stretch of 90 degrees with a little rain can't handle a couple of weeks of around zero degrees or almost two months of 100 degrees and no rain. Heck, those conditions even kill a few people--usually elderly and sick ones. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 02, 2020, 08:19:35 AM
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:
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/


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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on September 02, 2020, 09:17:19 AM

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?


The US has moved to a more service-based economy over the years, that is why the restaurants are the canary.


Even if the insurance pays fully, the lost revenue and the increase in premiums will drive a large number of businesses under.


But hey, for the globalists that's a feature not a bug...I mean we obviously can't have people going into business for themselves and getting out from under the wage slave thumb...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: robiswrong on September 02, 2020, 09:39:14 AM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Hawkwing7423 on September 02, 2020, 07:08:46 PM
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)

Marketwatch is extremely biased on the globalist, anti-Trump side. We need to have complete years to compare. I guess there could have been a spike when people like Cuomo shoved COVID patients in nursing homes. We will see when this is all over.

Even if the COVID death count is genuine, that means retirees need to take more precautions, not everyone else.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Hawkwing7423 on September 02, 2020, 07:39:24 PM
I found this data to be interesting:


https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Weekly-Counts-of-Deaths-by-State-and-Select-Causes/muzy-jte6


It shows Illinois has a 16% increase in deaths as of last week and Indiana has an 8% increase. Indiana has been negative vs. last year for the last 3 weeks, which may point to a COVID bubble.
I am very curious to see how it looks when the entire calendar year is done.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 02, 2020, 07:47:16 PM
Too early to say for sure.  Probably a mixture of several things, such as:
- 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.
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.
If this is the case then it will be interesting to see if people who have recovered die earlier then you would normally expect.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 02, 2020, 08:10:45 PM
It's probably a month out of date, but at one point the average age of coronavirus related deaths in Pennsylvania was 84.

The average Pennsylvanian lives to 78.

The highest estimate I've seen for the number of years of life lost for an an average coronavirus death is 12, and that's based on average years of additional life expected based on age, sex, and long term conditions. Since it uses an average and not the lifespan on the margin[1], it serves as an upper bound, and the real number is likely much lower.
https://wellcomeopenresearch.org/articles/5-75/v1

[1] 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: spon on September 03, 2020, 05:51:07 AM
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.


Indeed, and that's one of the nasty things about this virus - it has the greatest effect on people who were vulnerable anyway. It's one thing to know that your Grandma/ Grandpa is frail and might die/get very ill at any time. It's quite another to know that you might infect them with COVID and cause that death/decline. Yes, you might have done that last year with the flu, but flu shots are a thing and COVID appears even nastier.


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.
 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on September 03, 2020, 08:01:18 AM

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.
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. 

We do know that the same thing happens with other diseases.  When an otherwise healthy person dies from the flu, it's usually because it caught them at a bad time (stress, low vitamin levels, not enough sleep, dehydrated), probably trying to power through it, gets pneumonia.  Out of all the people that get pneumonia, some are going to have serious complications and some are going to die.  The silver lining in that is that the same thing a person ought to do to cope with it is get the sleep, eat well, hydrate, etc.  And when that isn't sufficient, get care.  Which all has other positive benefits besides merely avoiding diseases. 

Note that the lockdown makes the coping and the getting care more difficult for a significant portion of the population.  Unlike, say, random car accidents that you can only do so much to protect against and maim and kill indiscriminately.  Those are down with the lockdown.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 03, 2020, 10:05:12 AM
And even if Covid has severe after-affects, what do we do about it?


We can't stay locked down until a hypothetical vaccine emerges, and even willing and dilligent people are going to get slack after months and years of mask wearing and social distancing.





Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 04, 2020, 03:50:00 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 04, 2020, 06:21:49 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 04, 2020, 06:24:02 AM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 04, 2020, 06:37:37 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 04, 2020, 02:36:57 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 04, 2020, 02:53:57 PM
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.
That's the wrong question.

The number of people who will die or get serious long-term complications from sars2 is small, and almost entirely concentrated among the elderly. Those who have serious co-morbidities are at higher risk, but that doesn't invalidate the age distribution. Being fat and 30 means you have a higher risk compared to other 30 year olds, but only a tiny number of 30 year olds will be seriously affected, so the risk is still very low. It does not mean that that 30 year olds will start dying at the same rate as the elderly, just because there are a lot of fat people. It does mean the tiny fraction might increase a little in fat populations, and that among the tiny fraction of 30 year olds who end up with serious complications, fat people will be highly overrepresented.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on September 04, 2020, 03:17:06 PM
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?


As an American with at least two of those 'factors' (over 45 and diabetic) I have this to say.
Kiero is absolutely right...It isn't HIS job to take care of me, it is MY job to take care of me.
I refuse to wear a fucking mask because they don't do any good and someone with more factors than I have supports this....Thanks Aunt Nancy!  ;D


My biggest issue is the fact that I have put on about 8-10 pounds since I can't go to the gym...but hey according to Governor Mikey, its to protect the people... ::)


...and I don't know how other people with health issues feel but I personally wish HD would stop virtue signalling for me.  I am an adult and I can take care of my own health conditions...or I can decide not to take care of them and die from diabetic complications.


...but that would be on me, wouldn't it?

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on September 04, 2020, 05:33:08 PM
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?

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*
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 04, 2020, 06:25:04 PM
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?

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*
You have a truly idiotic idea of what constitutes an essential liberty.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 04, 2020, 06:28:34 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Hawkwing7423 on September 04, 2020, 08:17:56 PM
The US with lockdown has passed up Sweden with no lockdown in deaths per million.


Seems lockdowns weren't that necessary.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 04, 2020, 08:31:21 PM
The US with lockdown has passed up Sweden with no lockdown in deaths per million.


Seems lockdowns weren't that necessary.


In hindsight.
I didn't mind "15 days to slow the spread", but what we have now is clearly politically motivated foot-dragging.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 04, 2020, 08:37:58 PM
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?
No, thats right the new narrative is that everyone else has to wear a mask to protect you.  Well except when you have an urgent need to go out with your 10,000 closest friends of course.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 04, 2020, 09:40:55 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on September 04, 2020, 11:38:30 PM
I personally stopped pushing my view on how people should act in COVID-19. If a person does not want to wear a mask then don't. at the same time don't get too close to me and make sure to wash your hands and follow basic hygiene. If I am standing in line and your breathing down my neck with no mask your backing up one way or the other. Either with a kind word or a swift hard kick or knee to the happy sacks. I am all for freedom of doing what you want during Covid-19 have consideration and respect for others. I don't have grandparents at home my fiance does and I am not putting them at risk for no one who can't follow at least basic quarantine procedures.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on September 04, 2020, 11:44:20 PM

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.


The same people who scowl at the person grabbing a cig outside the bar will say this with a straight face while powering down a meal of 10 deep-fried chicken tendies slathered in ranch, a bowl of tapioca pudding, and a Diet Coke, after loosening their too-tight size 46 pants.


And after a while, they’ll be looked at socially as smokers are now, if lots of people have to take on unwanted economic harm to protect the Colonel’s shit-tier immune system.  60% of the US used to smoke. 


People were willing to do the unusual while data was collected on an unknown.  Asking for more isn’t going to fly on guilt-wings for long.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: worrapol on September 05, 2020, 04:20:16 AM
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.


Just saw some Democrats on tv arguing that small business being good for communities or the economy in general was a right-wing myth, and that looting and burning down all small businesses would be the best possible thing for real communities.
 ??? :o ::)
I think your error is in assuming small business owners are little people. Poor people don't need small businesses, government is supposed to give them everything. Amazon and Walmart aren't "rich" they donate Democrat, they're part of the "good" elites who only think of helping the poor... or so I hear...
 8)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on September 05, 2020, 11:50:06 AM
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?

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*
You have a truly idiotic idea of what constitutes an essential liberty.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 05, 2020, 11:55:47 AM
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?

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*
You have a truly idiotic idea of what constitutes an essential liberty.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 08, 2020, 05:00:24 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: spon on September 08, 2020, 05:26:04 AM
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:

"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."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 08, 2020, 05:38:07 AM
Try again:

"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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on September 08, 2020, 07:13:34 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 08, 2020, 08:51:09 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on September 08, 2020, 01:20:50 PM
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.


Weirdly enough I've just been reading about this in the Secret Barristers new book, which I highly recommend, and it's actually the basis upon which lawyers argue for reparations in court in England and Wales . The raising of the amount which is claimed for in small claims has unfortunately meant that many more people have had to represent themselves as a small claim does not include legal costs being paid if they win. It's a fascinating chapter.


I suppose it has some bearing on Keiros nonsensical claims as he is liable for some of the effects he has on others besides taxation. I would argue that he has a larger responsibility to others and as a member of society he has gained from our shared responsibility to each other but I wouldn't bother. He's a weird wee man who seems unable to see beyond his own nose so what's the point.


Check out the book though, it's very good.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Chris24601 on September 08, 2020, 05:01:03 PM
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:

"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."
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.


Of course I also suspect that there’s part of that law beithat being selectively left off of that description... that you only owe others a duty of care IF you caused the problem.


Otherwise literally everyone on the planet is guilty of failure to provide care every time I stub my toe and they took no steps to prevent it or sooth my injury afterwards.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Delete_me on September 08, 2020, 05:21:28 PM
The details differ between the 50 states, but generally that English tort law above is just as valid in the US and has been since... well... since it was just English law and not US law. The duty of care you owe another is a very old concept in the Common Law tort system.
Generally, yes, you must somehow be the cause and the cause must be foreseeable to a reasonable person. (And good luck defining any of those terms. Short version: don't ever try to "everyone is responsible for themselves only" in court without really knowing what you're doing. Get a lawyer or, with the reasoning you've shown in this thread, you're going to be out a shitload of money.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Hawkwing7423 on September 08, 2020, 11:05:34 PM
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.
The governor of Wisconsin lost in their State Supreme Court but other courts such as in Illinois have been feckless.


Laws are only for some people. See marijuana in the US, sanctuary states, and now COVID mandates.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on September 08, 2020, 11:07:59 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Hawkwing7423 on September 08, 2020, 11:10:55 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 09, 2020, 03:06:23 AM
On September 2, the CDC imposed a nationwide moratorium on evictions in the US, for everyone making $99,000 or less (twice that for dual filers). All you have to do to qualify is fill out a form from the CDC, and give it to your landlord.

This is notable for a number of reasons. To start, it's completely unprecedented. Before COVID-19, federal government had never suspended rent. Not during the Great Recession, or the Great Depression. Not during past epidemics, like the 1918 flu or the tuberulous outbreaks in the 19th century. Not during any war, including WW2. This is a momentous change and expansion of the fundamental limits of government, yet there was no public debate. A note just appeared in the Federal Register.

It's also the CDC acting under their own authority. There was an earlier halt on evictions, but it was part of the CARES Act. So while it was legally dubious, at least it was passed by Congress, and politicians can theoretically be held responsible. The scope is also remarkable: Unlike the moratorium in the CARES Act, which was limited to federally-backed rentals and mortgages, this new order applies to all rentals, nationwide.

The statute the CDC cites as their authority says:
Quote from: 42 CFR § 70.2.
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.

More than that, it's a horrible idea. Setting the precedent that the federal government can wave their hand and impose huge costs on landlords adds a massive amount of risk, because there's no reason to assume the government will stay their hand next time there's a financial crisis. Landlords will flee this corner of the market, selling their properties at fire sale prices to speculators, resulting in the mostly small businesses who run the low end of the rental market consolidating into a smaller number of much larger businesses. Prices will rise for tenants, and landlords will become more distant and less responsive.

Not to mention the damage done to the economy as a whole when the government decides it can void or amend contracts, at a whim.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-eviction-declaration.html
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/09/04/2020-19654/temporary-halt-in-residential-evictions-to-prevent-the-further-spread-of-covid-19
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/42/70.2
https://reason.com/2020/09/01/the-statutory-authority-for-the-nationwide-eviction-moratorium/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Chris24601 on September 09, 2020, 06:06:32 AM
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.


So he backed of and rewrote it so that there’s no penalty to not wearing a mask, you’re just supposed to feel really bad about not wearing your medically useless but government approved symbol of submission.


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.


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.


Extra steps added? Two, Contacts actually reduced? Zero.


And to top it off the attendant who was sharing the exasperation over the stupidity of it told me they’ve been reusing the cup all day because the manager didn’t want the expense of a fresh cup for every transaction. So you’re shoving your hand down into a cup to reach your card that’s had every person in line ahead of you doing the exact same thing.


THIS is the epic level of Stupid the fear-mongers have produced; wear useless masks (that depending on the design may actually aerosolize the water droplets of your breath so any contamination actually travels further) while making everyone has to stick their hand into the same cup.


Communist governments routinely had their subjects perform meaningless gestures the subject knew was meaningless or a lie [size=78%]because their participation in the lie degraded people’s resistance to the State.[/size]
[/size]
[/size][size=78%]The government leaders have had a taste of what totalitarianism feels like and don’t want to give that up. That’s what this endless masking and arbitrary shutdowns are about; it’s a power trip by authoritarian busybodies.[/size]
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: spon on September 09, 2020, 06:36:10 AM
Try again:

"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.
Apology accepted
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: spon on September 09, 2020, 06:38:06 AM
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:

"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."
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.


Kiero has stated he lives in the UK, so perhaps I do have a point?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 09, 2020, 06:52:36 AM
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.

Another example is the local Walmart, which recently closed all but one of their entrances, and put security between the entrance and exit doors, so they're within arm's reach of people going in and out. So instead of allowing people to space out and keep their distance, they're forcing everyone into a channel where they are required to pass close by each other. This isn't because the Walmart has little traffic or is understaffed; it's one of the busiest I've ever seen, with blue vests everywhere. And that doesn't even get into the staff counting people coming or going, or the flow once you're inside the store, which are equally terrible.

The lines and counters were stupid back when all non-essential businesses were closed, but reimplementing an even stupider solution now just seems absurd.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 09, 2020, 08:12:11 AM
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?

I believe you know exactly what I'm talking about and are pretending to be mentally disabled.


English tort law may be accepted as 'in the interests of the law' but it is not binding law. In fact, misuse of English defamation rules actually led to a law being passed in the U.S. which flat out states 'if you want to enforce a defamation verdict here, it must meet OUR requirements'.


In other words, English tort law is nice but it has no legal standing beyond background and (normally) good and fair application. Blackstone's Commentaries, for example, is not binding law, but it's excellent advice.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Hawkwing7423 on September 09, 2020, 11:48:20 AM
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).


https://www.illinoispolicy.org/state-legal-memo-illinois-governor-needs-lawmakers-approval-before-extending-emergency-powers/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Delete_me on September 09, 2020, 09:47:37 PM
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.

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.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Hawkwing7423 on September 09, 2020, 11:13:35 PM
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.

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.)
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.

I left Illinois in 2018 when it was clear that we would have a terrible Governor no matter what. However, I still work in Illinois and pay taxes in Illinois. Taxation without representation and all that. Illinois is going down the drain no matter what happens. They will never touch their precious pensions which are the main cause of the fiscal insolvency.  Either they will pass the amendment to the state constitution to start raising the taxes and drive all the millionaires (and eventually the middle class) out or they can explore bankruptcy in the future. If they pass the amendment, it will just accelerate the emigration from Illinois which is already happening.

And as for me wasting my time posting on an Internet forum, you can't tell me how to use my own time. Put me on ignore or screw off.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Delete_me on September 09, 2020, 11:50:32 PM
You didn't look at the date that rule was published did you? Nor did you notice the exception I already pointed out.
EDIT: Also, you may want to check your reading comprehension. I didn't tell you what to do with your time.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Hawkwing7423 on September 10, 2020, 12:14:14 AM
You didn't look at the date that rule was published did you? Nor did you notice the exception I already pointed out.
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. 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...


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. I still have a lot of friends and family there and are sorry to see them shredding their economy even further. Pritzker has even used the mandates as political punishment to counties which are more red and allowed the other counties to not have the same mandate under the same conditions because they are more blue.


Again, I can't say I understand the "exception you pointed out" which is just a sentence. Your link leads to pages of legalese. The media doesn't explain to the layperson why his mandates are legal or not, they assume they are legal because they are all Democrat in Illinois. 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Delete_me on September 10, 2020, 08:58:00 AM
Oh I read it.
Reading does not equal comprehension.
Quote
It was snarky and arrogant. . .
True.

Quote
. . . 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.


Quote
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.

Quote
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.

Quote
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.
So let me try to help you as to what all that 'legalese' (it really wasn't) is trying to say:

First: Title 77 of the Illinois Administrative Code is the section of the Admin Code that governs Public Health. The Illinois Administrative Code is all the implementing rules that the different agencies must follow, so since Title 77 is over Public Health, it's what everyone looks to for health related matters.


Second: In the Illinois Administrative Procedures Act, the Legislature gave the Executive the ability to create emergency rules, in addition to the normally slow, methodical, and plodding rulemaking procedures. These emergency rules stipulate that you can put a rule in place for 150 days, but you cannot put the same rule in place more than once in a 24-month period. However, you can work through the normal rulemaking process while the emergency rule is in effect.


Third: In order to create an emergency rule, there must BE an emergency, declared by the Governor. So we look to the Illinois Emergency Management Act (IEMA). IEMA states that the governor can declare an emergency for an open-ended list of reasons (that is, it's not an exhaustive list). Among them is epidemic. If he declares an emergency, then he has certain emergency powers for 30 days. After which, THOSE POWERS CEASE, BUT THE EMERGENCY IS STILL VALID. This is important.


Fourth: Taken together, this means that the governor can declare an emergency, have 30 days of emergency powers, then create a rule that lasts for 150 days. This gives you a total of 180 days to work with.


Lastly: If you look at the same part of the Illinois Administrative Procedures Act that gives emergency rulemaking authority, you will see that it exempts matters of public health (that is, Title 77). Because of the nature of those emergencies, the executive agencies can introduce multiple emergency rules until either a final rule is completed in accordance with the Act, the Governor ends the emergency, or the Legislature declares the emergency is ended (which is not in the current law, I'm just pointing out that they actually could do this at any time).


NOW: I will now pivot over to why that Illinois Policy link you gave doesn't say what you think it says (or what they want you to think it says). What Illinois Policy Center wants you to think it says is that this whole thing is horribly illegal. Here's what it actually says:


(1) There's an informal opinion drafted in 2001 that says the Governor can't do this. Several of these laws have been amended since 2001, including to plug the issues the 2001 AG brought up.  These were all minor technical administrative fixes that didn't garner any big hubbub at the time because nobody cares about the "little" details. (Oh wait, they're not so little after all, are they?)


(2) Darren Bailey petitioned the court to grant an injunction against the Governor's order. The court granted it. For him only. Bailey then realized he pleaded wrong and asked to file an amended lawsuit, because he wanted EVERYONE exempted, not just him. The Appeals Court said, "No." (Which is not in the story you linked, that's a more recent development in late July, because it takes time to work through the courts.) Before that no, however, the Governor asked the Supreme Court to intervene, as is his right to ask, and the Supreme Court said, "No." Which means it stays with the appellate court (who then issued their ruling of "no" to Bailey).


So let me give you the abridged version that doesn't come through clearly to people who aren't used to reading court cases (which is most of us; once you learn that skill, it really, really changes how you view the news):


BAILEY: This rule fucking sucks and there's a hurdle he hasn't met yet here.


DISTRICT COURT: Ok... you're technically correct in this area, but there are a dozen other areas you failed to cite so we'll grant you your order just to get you the fuck out of our court. It applies only to you.


BAILEY: Wait wait! That's not what I meant! I wanted everyone exempted! Here, here! I found this Memo that backs me up! Appeals Court, let me go back to the District and try again! Please vacate the order so I can start over!


GOVERNOR: Supreme Court, can we just fucking end this buffoonery now since we know this will get to you eventually?


SUPREME COURT: Oh fuck no. Ya'll finish having your tantrum down there. Don't make this my problem.


APPEALS COURT: Bailey? Yeah, fucking no. You don't get 2 bites at the apple. If that's what you wanted to plead, you should have fucking done it the first time around. Either you or your lawyer is an idiot.


BAILEY: Fine! I'm appealing to the Supreme Court!


SUPREME COURT: Are we going to put him on the docket? Uh... sure, I guess. But make him go through the normal proceedings, just like we told the governor. So we'll see you in... I dunno... January, maybe? Expect a ruling by next July. (Unless, of course, there's a final rule in place by then in which case the whole thing is moot and we don't rule on hypotheticals so... muwahahahaahahahaaha!)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Hawkwing7423 on September 10, 2020, 09:24:10 AM
Even 180 days will be up soon. I would be shocked if they will just stop all the mandate nonsense then, including rules from back in March.


Also "gave up" yeah I gave up on Illinois. It's been on a downward trend for 70 years or more. I went to Indiana where some people still believe in America.


Nice slight on me for "not fighting" LOL. Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory is a thing.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Delete_me on September 10, 2020, 09:31:36 AM
Glad to see a fellow Hoosier on the board.

Again: the 150 day rule just means they have to put a new one in place for Public Health. For any other rule, they couldn't do it twice in a 24-month period. For Public Health, they're exempted from that requirement and can just keep putting it in place until the emergency is ended.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 10, 2020, 11:06:11 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: The Spaniard on September 10, 2020, 11:16:31 AM
Glad to see a fellow Hoosier on the board.



Does an IU grad count?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Delete_me on September 10, 2020, 11:19:36 AM
I'll allow it! (You know... for what authority I have... i.e., none.  8) )
Besides, how could I hate IU? My upper level degree is from there (undergrad in Wisconsin at a private school).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: The Spaniard on September 10, 2020, 11:28:34 AM
Very cool.  Wisconsin has some good private schools.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on September 17, 2020, 04:47:08 PM
Nashville city government doesn’t want to confirm good news (link to Nashville local news network affiliate report)


https://t.co/HAEicSwYzc (https://t.co/HAEicSwYzc)








Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on September 17, 2020, 08:21:48 PM
Nashville city government doesn’t want to confirm good news (link to Nashville local news network affiliate report)


https://t.co/HAEicSwYzc (https://t.co/HAEicSwYzc)
Yeah. Saw that one this morning...
and then they wonder why we don't believe them and refuse to kowtow to their mask mandates.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on September 17, 2020, 11:53:18 PM
CoronaChan will continue until the people say NO.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 18, 2020, 08:12:10 AM
CoronaChan will continue until the people say NO.

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?
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.


Unfortunate, but them's the breaks. The smarter states need to start loosening their lockdowns, but a number of governors have been enamored of the power of 'emergency declarations'. Hopefully the recent smackdown in PA will start bringing them to their senses.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Chris24601 on September 18, 2020, 08:16:10 AM
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.

All the lockdowns are entirely at the state level; if you go to South Dakota right now they’re completely open (and never shut down). All the Feds did was issue guidance recommendations (which were not required to be followed, see SD) and those ended April 30th (yes, the Feds ended all shutdown recommendations over four months ago).

Federal law doesn’t give President Trump the authority to override state governments on state health laws (except via court rulings, which need to be initiated by state residents to have standing).

If things suck in California, that’s on Gavin Newsom and a state legislature unwilling to rein him in. In fact, when you look at all the places maintaining heavy restrictions; they’re all blue states/cities who are hoping for exactly the reaction you’re having; to blame the President for your economic hardship that the Dems are actually inflicting on you.

Red states are mostly open to varying degrees with most of the mask mandates and continued shutdowns coming from corporations (ex. Walmart demanding masking for entry... McDonalds and other fast food places still allowing only drive thru) or Blue cities in the Red states adding extra restrictions.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 18, 2020, 12:34:43 PM
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.

But I think it's admirable he hasn't.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on September 19, 2020, 05:42:42 PM
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.

I'm NOT a fan of the wild expansion of Executive branch powers that has occurred heavily during the 21st century because what can be used by one President can be expanded by the next and that's a losing game. But in the case of CoronaChan being used by the leftists to cripple America, that required Executive action to stop and now its too late. Small business shutdowns are heartbreaking and no surprise that consumer confidence levels are plummeting...and that could cost Trump his gig and cost us our nation. Manufactured crisis is the fast track to commie-town. 

And yes, Gruesome Newsom owns the California lockdowns...much beloved by most of his voters. Same with the double idiocy inflicted by Garcetti, LA's moron mayor and London Breed of SanFranSicko.

BTW, the Shamdemic panic level was/is high in LA, but I escaped it easily by spending time in the neighboring beach towns in Ventura. However, there's been a real creepy turn as the election is heating up to seeing Ventura getting equally dumb as LA, and friends from other parts of the state reporting a steady uptick in fearmongering, especially as evidence against the sham keep mounting.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spike on September 23, 2020, 11:51:16 PM
I have had the supreme joy of leaving a state with very little to no mask insanity (North Dakota) to one with an almost absurd attachment to masking... to the point where I can not even sit and enjoy a meal in a restaraunt (to be blunt, North Dakota's food culture is abysmal. Truly, epically abysmal. Decent steak and... nope, that was it. Decent steak. And I like steak, but... you know, a pika needs a little variety. I'd hunt small children for food, but, wait, that's just more steak at the end of the day, isn't it?)


Where was I?


Oh, yeah. So I was certain I would be arrested during my stay for basically refusing to abridge my rights to bodily autonomy and my right to not breath my own halitosis all day long, but as it turns out... my mom is in fact a full blown Karen, in addition to being a true believer on masks. Literally my first day visiting she was calling some business to talk to the manager about an employee who had been wearing their mask improperly.  I'll face jail over this issue, but...


So, spineless wimp that I am, I dutifully wear the pathetically pointless symbol of my submission to Big Brother every time I go out for coffee. 


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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on September 24, 2020, 12:36:56 AM
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.

BTW, lamb korma is easy to make. Stupid easy if you get the sauce in a jar, with some jasmine rice (as Amazon delivers to the Dakota).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spike on September 24, 2020, 12:36:56 PM
y'know... its not like I haven't made Indian food before.  I got an excellent shrimp dish recepie from a magazine twenty five years ago (so old it had Martina Hingis as the cover girl...) and I made it a couple of times, and later went to an Indian restaraunt that had more or less the same dish, name and all, and found I'd... done it right.


So why I haven't done this?  I dunno.. I keep getting hung up on my lack of chafing dishes, apparently.  Weird, especially since I've been eating it out of plastic bins in a paper bag because Olympia Washington (but not the suburb of Lacey... which no long has the Indian restaraunt I used to go to...) doesn't allow you to dine in.


So... thanks for reminding me that I'm actually a decent chef when I want to be!  :P
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 24, 2020, 07:01:38 PM
(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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on September 24, 2020, 09:54:36 PM
Restaurants are still closed here, Spike.

And a lot of other stuff going on, too.

So... could be worse.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spike on September 24, 2020, 11:58:16 PM
(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?




Yeah. I think its a jewelry store now. Luckily the place on 4th street in Olympia is still quite excellent, even though I have to drag my food an hour back to the house to eat it.... wasting money on the naan that way.   




Sorry to hear about Australia, Kyle. That's hard news.   Tell ya what: If you tell me what sort of food you prefer, I'll devour a plate in your honor before I return to the Badlands.   
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 27, 2020, 04:57:28 AM
The front pages of most of our national newspapers yesterday were running the government's advert to download their coronavirus "track and trace" app. They can get fucked, like I'm ever doing that.

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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on September 28, 2020, 05:22:14 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Trond on September 28, 2020, 09:56:01 AM
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.
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on September 28, 2020, 11:08:47 AM
Well and with Covid being "novel" and all the science is hardly settled.  So anyone accusing someone of "not following the science" is a fucking cultist.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 28, 2020, 11:23:21 AM
(you could also add, how many people have died from the lockdowns, due to losing their jobs, depression, or people going nuts?)


The UN is prediciting millions of deaths due to the economic impact of the shutdowns and disruption of economies.


https://unglobalcompact.org/take-action/20th-anniversary-campaign/covid-related%20hunger-could-kill-more-people-than-the-virus



Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 28, 2020, 03:31:39 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/09/23/houston-coronavirus-mutations/?arc404=true


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 28, 2020, 06:07:38 PM
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.
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.

Didn't stop 12 million muppets downloading the track and trace app that doesn't work and breaches GDPR and who knows how many other data protection laws, though.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 28, 2020, 06:19:55 PM
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.


We don't even have to take that tradeoff. We know now that age is one of the big factors, so be careful visiting your grandparents.



Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 28, 2020, 08:18:22 PM
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.

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).

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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 28, 2020, 09:45:38 PM
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.
The science is settled people.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 28, 2020, 09:46:23 PM
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.
The science is settled people.
There's a call for you from someone named 'Karen'... :D
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 28, 2020, 11:02:14 PM
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.
The science is settled people.
There's a call for you from someone named 'Karen'... :D
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on September 29, 2020, 02:19:03 AM
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.
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.
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.

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.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00210-0
https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/04/recessions-dont-lead-to-an-overall-increase-in-deaths/

It's different for Third World countries, though, where many people are on the edge of starvation. There, economic downturn often means an uptick in the mortality rate. One can still argue for prioritizing the economy in First World countries - but the specific argument that it means saving lives should be based on actual death rates.

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.

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
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.

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.


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).

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
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Delete_me on September 30, 2020, 09:57:00 PM
I see my learned colleague jhkim beat  me to  the punch here, but just to add to it...

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.

So just so we're on the same page here, your sources for this claim are, in order:

(1) A paper that was submitted for publication but never actually peer review AND was conducted SO EARLY in the pandemic as to be functionally useless. Plus, it was written by... an Oceanographer? I'll grant you he also does quite a lot of statistical analysis... but even the responses in that Article show flaws in his basic research when it comes to medical, pandemic, or virology issues.

(2) An article comparing Sweden's economy to the rest of the EU when Sweden objectively (https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-sweden-gdp-falls-8pc-in-q2-worse-nordic-neighbors-2020-8) saw a larger fall in its economy and higher deaths than its neighbors? (Note: comparing Sweden to the entire rest of the EU is like comparing New York to Montana and saying that because traffic is terrible in New York, Montana should buy fewer cars.)

(3) An article that is going off of wildly exaggerated figures (i.e. lying through statistics) instead of, again, comparing apples-to-apples. They're comparing Sweden to all of the US. Again... traffic in New York doesn't mean people in Montana should buy fewer cars.

(4) An article from May, before the major US waves starting striking the South and parts of the Midwest, and published by a man (Dr. Kolonovac, PHD) and a company (JP Morgan) who have a literal economic interest in avoiding lockdowns and no medical interest in the same (outside of a vaccine).

and

(5) An article by the same company that's just a metadata trend and makes no judgement calls one way or another but is all about how to maximize your profitability here. (Nothing wrong with that, mind you.)


And, interestingly, not a single source from experts who actually specialize in infectious disease transmission.


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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 01, 2020, 01:33:32 AM
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.

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. They also lost the clinical judgment side; doctors make judgment calls in uncertain conditions all the time, but large organizations like the CDC and WHO want to wait for all the evidence to come in, so are bad at that; and as a result they were slow on some common sense measures like supporting masks. The data has gotten better, and stronger consensuses have emerged, but we're still in the early days. The weirdness of the disease certainly hasn't helped.

That's why I have been focusing more on the economic side lately. 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.

Some new sources. Let's start with NPR, who yesterday ran a bit comparing Denmark and Sweden. They pointed out that the number who died in Sweden was a lot higher (6000ish compared to 700ish, IIRC; adjust for Sweden having almost twice as many people), but that Sweden's current death rate was about half Denmark's. They expect the death totals in the two countries to eventually converge (relative to population size), but that Sweden is and will be far better off economically. The guy they interviewed from Denmark talked about how it wasn't just the shutdowns, but how they varied erratically and kept getting turned on and off, that hurt business and drove away all their patrons. He went on to say he now thinks they should have done what Sweden did. I'm mostly mentioning this because I never expected a piece from NPR of all places to praise Sweden's response, which suggests it's getting wide traction.

Remember the Imperial College of London report, which early on on the pandemic used highly faulty models to predict over 2 million deaths in the US, and was the basis of a lot of policy? Even that report 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. I haven't seen any good explanation for the indefinite months-long lockdowns that ensued, except for political fear of high numbers now. There was a hammer and dance argument (https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance-be9337092b56) of intermittent lockdowns to keep the caseload relatively stable, but as the man from Denmark that NPR interviewed explained, an erratic series of lockdowns is really terrible for the economy, because businesses require predictability and it makes it hard for customers to plan or develop habits; and I don't think the actual curves we've seen in infection patterns vis-a-vis lockdowns match that plan. The rest of the arguments typically involve contract tracing or vaccines, but combine a lot of wishful thinking with a lack of specifics.

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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on October 01, 2020, 08:56:41 PM
I keep sneezing my boogers everywhere and STILL no piles of dead bodies!!

According to the CatDogCat, the 2020 flu season is now upon us!
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/season/flu-season.htm (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/season/flu-season.htm)

Anybody think the face diaper hysteria will end after the next flu season? That's April 2021.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on October 02, 2020, 08:20:05 PM
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.
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.

That doesn't mean ignore the experts. It means that in this case, not everything is yet settled. (a) This is a very new disease, (b) there are rushed studies with varying results, and (c) there are some inherent uncertainties particularly within issues of public policy. I'm a big advocate of science, but there are strict limits on how much we can know - particularly within less than a year. Also, physical and biological sciences are much more solid than behavioral sciences like psychology, economics, and public policy.

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.


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.

I agree that there is still a lot we don't know about the disease, because of a lack of time and investment in things like full double-blind trials.


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."

https://voxeu.org/article/labour-market-effects-covid-19-sweden-and-its-neighbours

And as I noted earlier, comparisons between countries are always tricky because there are many uncontrolled variables. Does this mean that if Italy hadn't had a lockdown, it's economy would be doing better? That isn't clear to me. If Italy didn't lockdown, then I strongly suspect that there would have been major citizen and consumer unrest after the spike in covid-19 deaths. I don't know what effect that would have on the economy, and I think it isn't completely clear.

Some other points:

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. And I've already given links that in other economic recessions, the overall mortality rate generally goes *down* rather than up in First World countries.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/04/recessions-dont-lead-to-an-overall-increase-in-deaths/
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00210-0
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5362282/

2) Well Being Trust appears to be a public charity launched in 2016 by a private Catholic hospital network. It's report is not peer-reviewed or published elsewhere, and I don't see what sort of cross-checks or reviews there are of it.

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.


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.

Again, here, I think it's the opposite. You claim to know for sure the Sweden's approach is right and Norway's was wrong, but I think that it's still up in the air. Furthermore, even if it turns out that the death toll does eventually balance out -- that doesn't mean that it was unreasonable for Norway to take the approach it did at the time.


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

I'm going through a number of these. The second-to-last one is looking only at a sample of people in a narrow age range (51 to 61) going through sudden loss of wealth. It's not contradictory with the overall result of reduced mortality from several other papers.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 03, 2020, 10:53:22 AM
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.
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.
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.

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.

We already had this discussion, many pages back. The shutdowns aren't just about cosmetic things, like people being unable to get haircuts (unless they're the Speaker of the House). They're about lives. Spousal abuse is up, suicides are up, kids have lost at least a year of schooling, depression is up, we're seeing all kinds of problems related to lack of social contact, the generation that just graduated are failing to launch, lifetime earnings are being impacted, businesses are dying like flies, people are being evicted, people are losing their jobs, people are losing their health insurance, people aren't sure what's happening to their retirement plans. This results in deaths, in lowered lifespans, in lowered health outcomes, in fewer educational opportunities, in fewer jobs, in fewer medical innovations, and in less capacity to deal with things like a pandemic. This affects people now, but also through the rest of their lives and even into future generations.

We need to be careful to only include the effects that are specific to the shutdowns not the wider pandemic for instance, but conversely that applies to the lack of a shutdown as well -- how many covid-19 deaths a shutdown would prevent, not the total death toll. And it's become very clear, based on an overwhelming amount of evidence, that the shutdowns cost more lives than they save.

And even if the evidence wasn't overwhelming, the shutdowns are horrific transgression on basic rights. Like the right to assemble. The right to visit your friends. The right to have a job. The right to go shopping. The right to leave your home. These are extraordinary measures, extraordinary expansions of government power, and extraordinary infringements on nearly everyone's life. As a result, the burden of proof that these measures are necessary should be extraordinary.

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.

You're fixated on excess deaths. That's completely the wrong approach. Death rates this year are well below last year. Does that mean we should ignore all the COVID-19 deaths? Of course not. We still have a pandemic, even if a host of related factors are driving down deaths from other causes.

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.

...  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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on October 03, 2020, 09:50:29 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 04, 2020, 08:13:39 AM
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.

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.
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.

Nor does that conflict in any way with the idea that this is a new disease, and we're still in the early stages. But note I also qualified that. I also said that things have gotten better. We have more information, and there's more consensus. We're still at the beginning, but no longer completely in the dark. To adapt Rumsfield's construction, the number of unknown unknowns have diminished.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on October 04, 2020, 04:25:18 PM
To adapt Rumsfield's construction, the number of unknown unknowns have diminished.

That seems like it would be a hard thing to measure.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 04, 2020, 05:16:11 PM
To adapt Rumsfield's construction, the number of unknown unknowns have diminished.

That seems like it would be a hard thing to measure.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 04, 2020, 05:44:46 PM
To adapt Rumsfield's construction, the number of unknown unknowns have diminished.

That seems like it would be a hard thing to measure.
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 04, 2020, 05:56:20 PM
To adapt Rumsfield's construction, the number of unknown unknowns have diminished.

That seems like it would be a hard thing to measure.
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.
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.
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.

The trick with sars2 was twofold: One, a lot of politicians, public health officials, and the media gave the impression things were far more settled than they actually were. And two, it's a weird disease. A lot of initial assumptions were wrong, and some of the weird things got blown out of proportion. But we have a much better idea of how it's spread, the real (IFR) fatality rate, and so on; while there's still uncertainty about things like the long term effects and prevalence.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on October 04, 2020, 07:43:26 PM
I don't know if the 75k suicides in half of 2020 vs. 50k average annual is accurate, however I could see it being true for this reason alone: lockdowns caused social isolation, thus the breaking of people's formal and informal support groups.

Here's a bet. I suspect next year's national standardized testing will be ignored by the MSM, and only limited articles will exist. I'm also expecting teacher's unions to push for abolishing of all standardized testing because the massive damage to the nation's children won't be undone.

Most especially with the youngest students who have lost critical building blocks and will be forced to stumble grade to grade without fundamental tools. Combine that with vastly diminished special education and the problem escalates, which will result in further dumbing down of education standards to cover the asses of teachers.

Of course, the breaking of America's children is a grand boon to the Marxists.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on October 04, 2020, 08:41:53 PM
We could get lucky and the increased interest in alternative schooling may break the union's back.
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on October 04, 2020, 09:53:18 PM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on October 04, 2020, 10:09:35 PM
If the Government takes away everyones car then there will be no more car deaths!

Genius!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on October 04, 2020, 10:52:31 PM

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 05, 2020, 08:34:47 AM
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...
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 05, 2020, 08:38:34 AM
We could get lucky and the increased interest in alternative schooling may break the union's back.
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...
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on October 05, 2020, 08:48:00 AM

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on October 05, 2020, 08:58:33 AM
We could get lucky and the increased interest in alternative schooling may break the union's back.
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...
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.

I do have direct experience.  I've also been paying attention to trends in the movement for 20+ years now.  The moderate estimates by the various home schooling movements puts the increase this fall as about double compared to last year--from about 4 million students to about 8 million.  It is difficult to say for sure, because that estimate is trying not to count "pod schools", neighborhoods hiring tutors directly, and other such alternatives, but only true home schooling.  Nor is it counting virtual school that is still administered by public, private, or parochial schools.  Since the lines get blurry between true home school, pod school, and the like, it could be off.

Also, unlike true home schooling, we have no history of how permanent the interest will be.  Home schooling is not for everyone, but the rates across the country have been steadily increasing for longer than my family was involved, with retention rates that have been fairly steady.  No one really knows how the new alternatives will be received long term.

Finally, the one thing that has really sparked the huge explosion over the last decade or so is--funny enough--radical changes in the public/home school cooperation in a few states.  Florida is particularly notable for this.  There was a huge fight several years ago, legislature versus the teacher's union, that basically was won by the legislature.  They changed the law that meant a student did not need to withdraw fully from a public school to take advantage of home school.  If the parent wanted to teach their grade school kids English/reading, let the public school do the rest, it was allowed. If the parent wanted to do everything else but let the kids participate in sports or band or take the school's chemistry courses, that was allowed.  Funding was done in proportion.  It only took a couple of years for most administrators to discover that a partially participating kid with good grades and a lot of motivation to do well was an overall boon--versus not getting credit for the kid at all.  They also discovered that such kids were a good example to others.

Ergo, the battle is not just public school versus everything else but the wedges within the public schools over--well a whole lot but not least those in public schools that really do care about kids and those that don't.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 05, 2020, 09:00:20 AM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 05, 2020, 09:34:47 AM
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....
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 05, 2020, 10:16:43 AM
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....
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on October 05, 2020, 10:21:37 AM
We could get lucky and the increased interest in alternative schooling may break the union's back.
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...
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.

One thing that has the unions upset is that the increased interest breaks down with the same general population percentages as our political parties. That means the increase is across political boundaries...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on October 05, 2020, 10:26:12 AM

And for no particular reason, I segued into a basic economics lesson....

That's ok.  If the current love of socialism/communism is any indicator more people could use it...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 05, 2020, 10:46:01 AM
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.

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.
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.
https://store.mises.org/Economics-in-One-Lesson-FREE-P11168.aspx

Minimum wages are just a type of price fixing, and the consequence of price fixing is always shortages. When the government fixes the price of bread, the producers will make less bread, leading to bread lines. The same applies when you fix the price of wages; jobs will vanish.

Sowell in particular does a good job of laying out why this is especially bad for marginal groups. For instance, before minimum wages were first instituted in the 1950s, black unemployment was lower than white unemployment. But after the minimum wage was set, the unemployed rate remained fairly flat for white men, but skyrocketed among black men, especially the young. There are two reasons at play. One is racism on the margins -- if there are few jobs and lots of people applying, employers can be picky, even when it comes to factors that don't affect production. So they can toss all those black resumes in the garbage, even if that includes some highly qualified workers, and it won't hurt their bottom line. But before the minimum wage, you could pay black workers less for the same work, so there was a strong economic incentive to hire them. In other words, tight job markets encourage discrimination, while a high demand for workers actively discourages it.

Two is actual skill level. Blacks were generally less skilled than whites, at the time. So when the job market tightens, they're disproportionately affected, because the least skilled are the first to lose their jobs, and the last to gain new ones. This is worse that it sounds, because it has long term effects. Since young workers are the least skilled, they're hit particularly hard. If they can't get jobs right away, this prevents them from building their resumes and developing the job skills needed to become more highly valued workers. So the minimum wage didn't just prevent young black workers from getting jobs, it hindered their advancement. That reduced their lifetime earnings, which in turn affects things like the money they have available for things like healthcare and education for their kids, so the disadvantages are passed down from generation to generation.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on October 06, 2020, 03:01:48 PM
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%.
The WHO estimates the seasonal death rate from the flu is ~1%.

You only have a 99.9% of surviving! 
Make your time now!
You are DOOMED!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 06, 2020, 03:11:57 PM
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.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/antibody-tests-support-whats-been-obvious-covid-19-is-much-more-lethal-than-flu/2020/04/28/2fc215d8-87f7-11ea-ac8a-fe9b8088e101_story.html
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Delete_me on October 06, 2020, 03:18:13 PM
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.

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.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 06, 2020, 03:28:25 PM
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:
https://swprs.org/studies-on-covid-19-lethality/
Ignoring the outliers (like Japan's 0.01%), most are in the 0.1% to 0.5% range.

Even the much cited and highly flawed Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz and Merone paper only claims a 0.68% global infection fatality rate.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.03.20089854v4
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Delete_me on October 06, 2020, 03:36:12 PM
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/))

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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on October 06, 2020, 03:38:07 PM
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)

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Delete_me on October 06, 2020, 03:43:19 PM
WHO: 10% of world’s people may have been infected with virus (https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbreak-archive-united-nations-54a3a5869c9ae4ee623497691e796083)

Well then, I stand corrected.  That is their current estimate. I was operating off confirmed numbers instead of estimates and shouldn't have been for your claim.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 06, 2020, 03:44:55 PM
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/))

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Delete_me on October 06, 2020, 03:48:28 PM
Yup, I see that now. Thank you for pointing it out.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on October 06, 2020, 04:33:52 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 06, 2020, 07:15:01 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on October 06, 2020, 08:33:45 PM

Collectives, comrade?

Is there some sort of problem with 'voluntary' collectives??  Sounds like freedom of association to me.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 07, 2020, 08:57:30 AM

Collectives, comrade?

Is there some sort of problem with 'voluntary' collectives??  Sounds like freedom of association to me.
One of the most functional and stable forms of collective is purely voluntary.

Of course, most leftists get their panties in a twist when you point out it's a monastery or convent.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 07, 2020, 09:26:37 AM
Another example of a voluntary collective is the kibbutzim of Israel. Unlike state-driven top-down socialism which always leads to horrors, voluntary communal associations have a long and modestly successful history, at least at the small- and mid-scale. The largest historical examples are the Free Territory of the Ukraine after the October Revolution, and revolutionary Catalonia in the 1930s, but they didn't last long; you can make a good argument they don't work at large scales. Kropotkin is probably the most important theoretician on the topic, and there's a fairly fleshed-out example of a kropotkinesque society in Ursula K. LeGuin's science fiction novel, The Dispossessed. She's sympathetic, but honest about the sacrifices required, leading to the book's subtitle "An Ambiguous Utopia".

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-the-conquest-of-bread/
https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/reviews/books/0-06-105488-7.html (review of The Dispossessed)

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on October 07, 2020, 10:10:49 AM
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.

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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on October 07, 2020, 10:55:37 AM

Collectives, comrade?

Is there some sort of problem with 'voluntary' collectives??  Sounds like freedom of association to me.
One of the most functional and stable forms of collective is purely voluntary.

Of course, most leftists get their panties in a twist when you point out it's a monastery or convent.



Voluntary collectives are the *only* functional and stable ones.

And monasteries and convents are the most functional and stable of them all.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Hawkwing7423 on October 07, 2020, 01:14:45 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 08, 2020, 08:27:54 AM
Don't worry Hawkwing, those doctors will be shortly flagged as evil Trump supporting white supremacists in 3, 2...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on October 08, 2020, 09:30:53 AM
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.

My wife and I are currently homeschooling our 5 year old daughter. It's been a royal pain in the ass, but 100% worth it. Had she gone to kindergarten like she was supposed to, she'd be learning about shapes and ABCs and other normal crap, instead she's reading on around a 3rd grade level and can do 1st grade math without issue, I figure she'll be 3rd grade math by the end of next May and who knows how good her reading will be. Also learning real history, gets religious education, does a lot of science, etc. Just a classical education instead of some bullshit indoctrination.


I realize I'm in a more unique position than a lot of other people in that my wife and I are both qualified to teach school and have a lot of education ourselves, but my buddy's wife (who is not well educated at all) asked us for materials and help and she's homeschooling her kids just fine. In my opinion, most people are just lazy as fuck and use school as some sort of daycare system and just cross their fingers their kids will learn stuff.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Steven Mitchell on October 08, 2020, 11:06:41 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on October 08, 2020, 11:49:34 AM
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.

Thanks, I appreciate the offer.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Koltar on October 12, 2020, 02:37:36 AM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on October 12, 2020, 05:03:16 AM
https://nypost.com/2020/10/11/who-warns-against-covid-19-lockdowns-due-to-economic-damage/

SCIENCE!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on October 12, 2020, 11:55:42 AM
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

Condolences dude.  That's terrible.

So far my FLGS in my area have stayed open but I can't imagine they're doing too hot.  Not being able to host Magic releases is a death sentence.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 16, 2020, 03:48:33 AM
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.

Lockdown-lovers are already trying to discredit it by signing it with silly names and crowing about it on Twatter.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Hawkwing7423 on October 26, 2020, 07:34:30 PM
Illiniois, at least the more populated counties, is locking down again. Die, small business owners!! Should have learned to code or something.

I'm glad that other people's fear of a virus with a 99.97% survival rate for non-elderly means I don't have to commute right now but I really fear how this bodes for an authoritarian future.

It's also an example of epic goal-post moving, when before it was flatten the curve and now we are worried about case counts, many asymptomatic. I guess people really want absolutist government when they are afraid.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 30, 2020, 06:35:27 PM
I just don't understand what they're afraid of.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on October 30, 2020, 07:43:01 PM
I just don't understand what they're afraid of.

“There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always— do not forget this, Winston— always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face— forever.”

Can’t  usher in the fabulous NWO if people aren’t begging the government to make them safe...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on October 30, 2020, 08:11:02 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Slipshot762 on October 31, 2020, 08:20:44 AM
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.

"When in trouble, when in doubt, run in circles! Scream & shout!"

We have the best panic button don't we folks? I can recall in highschool back in the 90's we had to attend rallys meant to warn us about how too much ozzy osbourne can cause suicide...I would think too little would do that instead, which is why I hold mtv responsible for curt cobains death.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on October 31, 2020, 04:49:48 PM
The nature of Western government is that it has only two possible states: apathy and panic.

This isn't a unique feature of western civlizations. Fear makes people irrational and susceptible to all kinds of thing.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Trinculoisdead on November 02, 2020, 01:44:44 AM
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.
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.

Anyway, just wanted to chime in.

As with all things parenting it's easy to get worked up and paranoid about whether one is doing a good enough job. But in my experience it doesn't take a whole heck of a lot to teach a child to a better level than they'd get in most public schools. Teach them to read and write and have them work through some textbooks every year. Give them a library card and they pretty much do the rest themselves. I've met a lot of interesting home-schooled kids who, I suspect, would not have had enough time or received enough encouragement in public school to pursue the various hobbies and projects that they learned from at home. To be fair, you do need a stay-at-home parent for home-schooling to work, and that's not for everyone.

The more difficult part is getting them out with groups of other kids, which is why it's great to hear that these sports groups, for example, are becoming more popular.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on November 03, 2020, 02:01:22 AM
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.
Q: Who starts and fuels the panic?
A: The Media
Q: Who reinforces the panic?
A: 501c3 'Charitable Organizations' (churches, preachers, civil advocates, NGOs, thinktanks)
Q: What is the response from the government?
A: More intrusion into the lives of the consumers( er, I mean citizens)
Q: What can be done about this?
A: Ignore or truthcheck the media, destroy the lawful concept of 501c3s NGOs and advocacy / thinktank groups, and vote non-party affiliated people into local, state, and national positions.
Or, just ask yourself: How do I escape from the hegelian dialectic infecting the West? Educate yourself before hating the greatest civilization known to man:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hegel-dialectics/
https://steemitimages.com/p/X37EMMe7x1dBWU9xCXaUwAR5jfFCThi35jniheFZXVwJPnaRXrMTKJysnc7T2DqxVyvx6yfvFw5v1YvVqjExeqRcCNevSjjTK9Qza?format=match&mode=fit
Title: Political Mess!
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on November 04, 2020, 11:19:46 AM
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.
Title: Re: Political Mess!
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 04, 2020, 12:01:14 PM
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?
Title: Re: Political Mess!
Post by: KingCheops on November 04, 2020, 12:28:11 PM
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.

It's the same difference as being able to go get flowers at walmart but you're a genocidal maniac if you want to buy flowers from a locally owned flowerstore.  It's the same difference as how you can sit and eat at a restaurant but the second you stand up and don't have a mask on you're a serial killer.

This collective mass hysteria and championing of feelings over rationality is going to be the defining traits of this age and future school children reading about us in their history books will ask "Why were they all such retards?".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 13, 2020, 07:22:43 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Luca on November 15, 2020, 08:38:54 AM
FWIW, a recent study by Italian medics, based on a previous screening project for pulmonary cancer which enrolled nearly 1000 sane people and examined them from September 2019 to March 2020 and conserved their blood samples, has found that several of those already exhibited Covid antigenes. 111 of those samples tested positive to serological test, and 6 of these tested positive to antigene tests, 4 of which dating to the start of October.
The conclusion of the study is that Covid was likely already circulating in Italy from summer 2019, i.e. over six months before China's official warning.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on November 15, 2020, 09:22:37 AM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Larsdangly on November 15, 2020, 12:16:07 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on November 15, 2020, 01:03:56 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 15, 2020, 01:20:01 PM
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.

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.
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 infection fatality rate (IFR), which is the ratio of the number of deaths over to the total number of people infected, is a far better number. But, obviously, this isn't as easy to measure as the CFR. The IFR requires representative population-wide studies, looking for the existence of antibodies. But we have that information now, for nearly all developed countries, and samples from the rest of the world.

The IFR varies, but in developed countries where the healthcare system hasn't been overwhelmed, it tends to be about 0.3%. That number may actually be inflated by a factor of two, because there are indications that the tests miss about half the infections (half the people who reports anosmia, the most characteristic symptom of the novel coronavirus, don't test positive for the antibodies). Countries with younger populations have much lower IFRs, like India (0.1%) and Africa (Kenya and Malawi 0.01%). The only places where the IFR even approached 1% is where there was a collapse of healthcare care, specifically elderly care (e.g. Spain).

A few Western countries
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.14.20062463v2
https://www.miamidade.gov/releases/2020-04-24-sample-testing-results.asp
https://pressroom.usc.edu/preliminary-results-of-usc-la-county-covid-19-study-released/
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.04.20090076v2
www.klinikum.uni-muenchen.de/Abteilung-fuer-Infektions-und-Tropenmedizin/download/de/KoCo191/Zusammenfassung_KoCo19_Epi_dt_041120.pdf
https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/publicerat-material/publikationsarkiv/t/the-infection-fatality-rate-of-covid-19-in-stockholm-technical-report/
India
https://theprint.in/health/lift-lockdowns-protect-the-vulnerable-treat-covid-like-a-health-issue-and-not-a-disaster/466786/
Africa
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.27.20162693v1
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.30.20164970v3
Spain
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.06.20169722v2

Your attempt to underplay the increased risk due to age is also incorrect. One of the disease's most remarkable aspects is how closely COVID-19's mortality profile matches the natural mortality profile. In other words, your risk of dying with SARS2 is almost perfectly proportional to your risk of dying without SARS2, which means it increases steeply with age.

In Europe, more than 90% of deaths were 70 years or older.  The median age of death in all first world countries with a developed health system is between 82 (Australia, Austria, England, Germany, Italy, Spain) and 86 (Canada, Switzerland) years of age. The exception is the USA, with a median of 78 years.

Even in Italy, where the IFR for those who were 80+ was 30% in the first phase (systems overwhelmed), and 8% in the second phase, the IFR for people 50 years and younger is less than 0.01%. In Spain, the IFR was less 0.03% for people age 40 or younger. In NYC, it was 0.12% for those 25 to 44, and 0.01% for those under 25. In England, 0.03% for those under 44 years. And those are all worst-case scenarios, where the systems were overwhelmed with patients.

Italy, Spain, NYC, England
https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.31.2001383
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.06.20169722v1
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.27.20141689v1
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.12.20173690v1

Note that death rates have dropped in half or more since the start of the pandemic, because treatments have improved.

About 10% of people who develop severe symptoms do develop persistent symptoms, which last for several weeks or months. This is still developing, but it's been oversensationalized in the media, which has reported things like permanently reduced lung function in a high percentage of young patients, but all indications are this is just covid-induced pneumonia, and thus relatively short term. The bigger concern is the effect on the heart. COVID-19 is primarily a cardiovascular disease, and there are reports of mild myocarditis. But again, this was initially oversensationalized, and now its incidence rate is considered to be comparable to influenza.

https://covid.joinzoe.com/post/long-covid
Initial
https://www.statnews.com/2020/07/27/covid19-concerns-about-lasting-heart-damage/
More recent
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.14.20212555v1
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2768914
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Larsdangly on November 15, 2020, 01:29:18 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 15, 2020, 01:54:36 PM
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.
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.

You're were also incorrect about the the steepness of the death rate, with increasing age. It's one of the steepest known, far more so than any other major disease. Your new claim that the death rate of someone 50 years of age is the same as the average death rate across the entire population is ludicrously false. Just consider one statement I made: "In Europe, more than 90% of deaths were 70 years or older". Looking at the IFR for specific age bands would further demolish your claim.

Your statements about the prevalence of antibodies are also highly misleading, at best. It's true, the percentage of COVID-19 antibodies is low in some countries, but that doesn't mean we're a long way from herd immunity. First of all, the initial estimates of a 60-80% of the population to develop herd immunity appear to be laughably wrong, with the real number 20% or less. Part of this is because of cross immunities. Studies have shown that antibodies and T cells from SARS1 provide cross immunity to SARS2 (but aren't detected by SARS2 antibody tests). Similarly, other coronavirus strains may provide cross immunity to some degree, and that may explain why kids are largely immune to the disease -- they've already been infected by other coronaviruses, and thus can throw off the novel one relatively easily. The peak in many areas, combined with antibody studies, suggests many countries or regions may be approaching or have achieved herd immunity, particularly those who took less drastic measures to contain the spread. The recent surge in cases without any increase in the death rate is also positive, because it indicates we're doing a better job protecting vulnerable (elderly, sick), while letting immunity develop among those who are at little risk from the disease.

Edit: I didn't say you were wrong about everything. I said you were wrong about a few specific things, but more importantly your overall post was misleading. I reframed the discussion, corrected erroneous details, added more information, and provided citations.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Larsdangly on November 15, 2020, 03:28:47 PM
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.

Your comments about the steepness of the age relationship is also a place where you think you are quoting numbers that disprove something I said but you clearly are not. 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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on November 15, 2020, 04:03:22 PM
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.

Greetings!

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! Yet somehow, the Liberal cock-sucking media, corrupt politicians, and other elites want US to believe that President Trump didn't win this election? Trump has been campaigning for *months* sometimes spending 16, 18 hours on the road, and appearing at rallies that have attracted huge attendance!! Trump also doesn't just show up in big cities--no, he also shows up in small towns off the beaten track--and huge numbers of voters show up to see him speak. Some of these people stand in line for HOURS or even in the rain--to get inside a Trump rally. FOR MONTHS this kind of campaign activity for Trump has gone on--but somehow, the Liberals wants us to believe that Biden won this election?

I just do not see it. I don't.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 15, 2020, 04:50:05 PM
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.

I already stated this.

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.

A dozen or so studies, so I'm only linking a handful
https://swprs.org/coronavirus-antibody-tests-show-only-one-fifth-of-infections/
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.13.20130252v1
https://news.ki.se/immunity-to-covid-19-is-probably-higher-than-tests-have-shown

It's also based on the numerous studies that came out in August showing that those affected by the SAR1 virus 20 years ago have cross-immunity with SARS2, indications that other coronaviruses may also provide cross immunity (children in particular may have had considerable exposures, since coronaviruses are one family in the complex of diseases that cause what we call the common cold), and various other analyses that indicate the traditional herd immunity threshold is way too high. See below for various arguments.

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/369/6505/846?_ga=2.106785153.3660080.1597510732-1307329675.1597510732
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.23.20160762v2
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.27.20081893v3
https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-tricky-math-of-covid-19-herd-immunity-20200630/
https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/52/7/911/299077

I don't have a complete answer to the rise in new cases, but I'll note the rise in new cases in the US is especially evident in areas that largely escaped the viruses, in earlier waves.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on November 15, 2020, 04:58:37 PM
Here are three absolute truths to remember by heart.

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 15, 2020, 05:06:28 PM
Here are three absolute truths to remember by heart.

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.
The content of this post is disputed.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on November 15, 2020, 05:41:21 PM
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.
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!

OK, so RandyB's claim is that Biden actually got less than 23 million votes -- significantly less than Jimmy Carter's 35 million in 1980 with a much smaller population.

My key question is this:  Did Hillary Clinton really get 65 million votes - 3 million more than Trump - in 2016? I would suspect you'd say that Clinton also had massive fraud. But if the 2016 election also had massive fraud for the Democrats, then why did Trump and the Republicans do *nothing* to reform the election process when they had three-way control of the Presidency, Senate, and House from 2016 to 2018? Why were there no national investigations into fraud, let alone convictions?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on November 15, 2020, 06:32:57 PM
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.

I guess 0.3% is near to 2% give or take a factor of 10.

 :-
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 15, 2020, 07:42:50 PM
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.

No. The fraud votes are less than 4 million.

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. 

It's high time for Americans to accept we are in a culture war, and it's patriots on one side and on the other side, 70M willing followers of the globalist/Marxists in control of our schools, media and half (or more) of all politics. 

It's why balkanization - regardless even if Trump wins - must be seriously discussed and planned because the cultural divide is an unbridgeable chasm which will only become wider, deeper and more violent at a faster rate.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on November 15, 2020, 07:54:07 PM
I am all for the midwest becoming its own country.  Maybe then the people in the cities can flee for greener pastures and leave the patriots alone.

EDIT:  By fleeing I mean ditching the midwest because there won't be a way to pay for all the social security programs.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 15, 2020, 09:10:35 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 15, 2020, 09:16:11 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on November 15, 2020, 09:39:30 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 16, 2020, 12:11:54 AM
Don't confuse Tumblr with real life.

In real life, 70 million people saw the months of riots and heard their anti-American rhetoric and then voted FOR the scumbags pushing the riots and the anti-American rhetoric.

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.

Everyone has seen the SJW bullshit on overdrive and 70M(ish) voters said GIMME MOAR OF THAT!!! Why? We can blame the 30 years of increasing indoctrination, but whether they voted out of indoctrination or whether they choose to harm America, the end result is the same.

But the culture war is FAR bigger than the election. The election is just polling numbers for each side, and no election in history has offered such a stark and opposing choices. Whether or not the 70M(ish) voters are on-board with the Harris/Biden plan doesn't matter because they loud and proud told everyone where they stand in the culture war.

The election won't shatter us. The culture war shatters us because there is no common ground, no common solutions, and increasingly, no common "reality."

BTW, Trump's legal team allegedly was "search banned" on Twitter, and the Conservative Treehouse website was deplatformed. The rallying cry on the "right" is all about abandoning Twitter for Parler, YouTube for Rumble or Bitchute all in an effort to create their own community and leaving the major Big Tech platforms behind to become their versions of RPG.net.

Where does ANY country go when the two sides of an increasing cultural divide decide to spend more time in their own echo chambers?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 16, 2020, 12:24:43 AM
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.

The internet's a big place. You find what you seek, but if you're comfortable where you are, you won't realize what's out there. Never ascribe to the culture war what can safely attributed to an insulated blanket of conformity.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 16, 2020, 12:37:04 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on November 16, 2020, 04:26:38 AM
At absolute best, Balkanization is “peace for our time”.  The pieces of Rome didn’t play nice with each other, and neither would the pieces of North American Rome.  Welding it together again would become goal #1 of every narcissist coming to power in the next several centuries.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 16, 2020, 09:05:21 AM
Kurt Schlichter's People's Republic series is supposed to be fiction, for fuck's sake.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 16, 2020, 09:12:34 AM
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.
The Numerberg defense doesn't apply, unless you think Trump is your master.

And not being familiar with a specialized piece of knowledge is not willful ignorance, it just reflects a different set of priorities. There are still a lot of people who don't give a fuck about politics, and rightfully so. High investment, little return.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 16, 2020, 11:26:00 AM
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.

They just wanted Trump to shut up. Otherwise, the public mostly voted for moderation.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 16, 2020, 12:16:19 PM
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.

They just wanted Trump to shut up. Otherwise, the public mostly voted for moderation.
"Moderate"

Do you just go around saying things like this because you want them to be true? Biden isn't a moderate. He really isn't much of anything, except a receptacle for Chinese money. Assuming he even knows where he is and what he's doing, which is NOT proven, thanks.

The ones you have to watch out for are his VP -- a literal political whore who took pleasure in locking up blacks -- and the possibilities for his cabinet, which include such luminaries as Beto 'We're going to take your guns' O'Rourke, the Irish Taco himself. Yeah, I'm feeling confident in the prospects for stability here.

I hope to God everyone focuses in so hard on Georgia that there's no room for chicanery and I get to hear Stacey Abrams cry some more. The best case scenario here is for the Senate to cockblock Biden and for conservatives to drag every presidential EO into court, just as the left did over the last four years.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 16, 2020, 01:09:44 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 16, 2020, 01:21:20 PM
... 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 website
Biden believes the Green New Deal is a crucial framework for meeting the climate challenges we face.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on November 16, 2020, 06:27:52 PM
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.

I guess it was not a hoax after all.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 16, 2020, 08:22:43 PM
... 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 website
Biden 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".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 16, 2020, 08:44:02 PM
... 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 website
Biden 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".
That's him, supporting the Green New Deal. Which is exactly what you said he didn't do.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on November 16, 2020, 09:07:08 PM
Pat you cannot expect honesty from Mistwell.  He has the TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 16, 2020, 11:25:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on November 17, 2020, 08:02:42 AM
Well, despite having a 'masks everywhere' mandate for over a month Ohio cases have gone up.  The solution is to mask harder.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 17, 2020, 08:18:48 AM
Well, despite having a 'masks everywhere' mandate for over a month Ohio cases have gone up.  The solution is to mask harder.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on November 17, 2020, 08:50:26 AM
Welcome to my reality over the past year. No one allowed into any stores or venues without a mask. The lawsuit will be a waste of money as they can use the current crisis to not pay. As well if your going to court on has to prove the medical excemption and no "I don't want to wear a mask" is not one of them. Best thing to do is to order online. I knew as soon as they would start hitting stores and other similar business where it hurts in their wallets suddenly the same stores would reinforce the no mask no entrance policy.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 17, 2020, 09:40:07 AM
Well, despite having a 'masks everywhere' mandate for over a month Ohio cases have gone up.  The solution is to mask harder.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 17, 2020, 10:31:50 AM
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.

Which matches the evidence:
https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-politics/
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.01.20088260v1.full.pdf
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-based-sound-data
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.01.20049528v1

... I could post dozens more links. Studies suggest masks don't work for COVID-19 and similar diseases, mandatory mask mandates in numerous states and nations appear to be completely uncorrelated with changes in the number of cases, and compliance rates tend to be high. The highly influential WHO study in the Lancet that was a justification for many mask mandates around the world has been criticized for having critical flaws, and the WHO was caught admitting their own recommendations were based on political rather than scientific reasons.

The most common explanation for why masks don't work is a growing realization aerosolization is more important factor in the spread of the disease than initially assumed. Aerosolized viral particles are carried in tiny droplets, which are too small to be blocked by surgical or cloth masks, and spread quickly throughout a room. Which is why ventilation may be more important than masks.

https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa939/5867798
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf
https://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/man-sollte-der-oeffentlichkeit-nichts-vorgaukeln-780632651447
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on November 17, 2020, 10:34:24 AM
I was following guidelines.  Under the previous restrictions people with medical conditions were exempt from the mandate.  And it's not like I was going around flaunting it.  I went out maybe once every 2 weeks to pick up supplies and was in and out as fast I could, usually less than 20 minutes.  Now I can't even do that.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 17, 2020, 10:55:52 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on November 17, 2020, 09:50:05 PM
Lockdowns! Lockdowns! Lockdowns! Keep the healthy inside so they become controlled and sick!
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 17, 2020, 10:07:02 PM
Lockdowns! Lockdowns! Lockdowns! Keep the healthy inside so they become controlled and sick!
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 17, 2020, 10:13:25 PM
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/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on November 18, 2020, 12:03:26 AM
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!):
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!)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 18, 2020, 12:56:42 AM
Until I hear about it from the nice folks at MSNBC or CNN, IT IS A CONSPIRACY THEORY! (especially if it's true!):
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 NY Times article is bizarre:
Quote from: the NY Times article
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 18, 2020, 07:11:31 AM
I am shocked, shocked to learn the NYT would lie through the their fucking teeth.

(Your Pulitzer for hiding the Holodomor, sir.)
(Ah, thank you.)

(with apologies to Casablanca.)

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 18, 2020, 01:51:03 PM
Expecting millions of people to properly wear masks is like herding cats with a garden hose.
Here in WA, we're starting another lockdown. Of places that have not reported any cases. (Gyms, resteraunts) and places like grocery stores restricted to 25% cap instead of 30%.
All we've gotten out of it so far is another panic buy of toilet paper.

I fully expect people will do Thanksgiving pretty much as they would have before Covid. Maybe people won't be able to travel out of state, but friends and family will still gather to break bread.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 18, 2020, 03:00:23 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on November 18, 2020, 05:42:19 PM
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.
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on November 18, 2020, 09:22:35 PM
A couple of those friends also happened to be executives in the California Medical Association who are the ones advising the lockdowns and "emergency" measures.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 18, 2020, 09:29:47 PM
Are we still supposed to follow the science?

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/)

Noting that he was also an expert in virology, Hodkinson pointed out that his role as CEO of a biotech company that manufactures COVID tests means, “I might know a little bit about all this.”

“There is utterly unfounded public hysteria driven by the media and politicians, it’s outrageous, this is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting public,” said Hodkinson.
https://summit.news/2020/11/18/top-pathologist-claims-coronavirus-is-the-greatest-hoax-ever-perpetrated-on-an-unsuspecting-public/ (https://summit.news/2020/11/18/top-pathologist-claims-coronavirus-is-the-greatest-hoax-ever-perpetrated-on-an-unsuspecting-public/)

LOL. Come on down CoronaClowns and tell us more about how scared we're all supposed to be about your laughable idiocy!!


The solution is to mask harder.

I absolutely love "mask harder"!!! Thank you!

BTW, I've been using Amazon Fresh for deliveries and various booze delivery companies (zero delivery cost, just tip) and when I calculate time and gas into the equation, I'm not paying extra vs. pre-CoronaChan store visits. And Pat's right about the curbside pickup option where you pay in advance and they drop your bags next to your trunk and flee from your CoronaCooties.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 18, 2020, 10:02:27 PM
Are we still supposed to follow the science?

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/)
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on November 18, 2020, 10:15:09 PM
Are we still supposed to follow the science?

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/)
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.
  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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 18, 2020, 10:47:23 PM
Are we still supposed to follow the science?

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/)
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.
  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.
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!

(https://i.etsystatic.com/5924954/r/il/8bb774/2461559612/il_794xN.2461559612_7gb7.jpg)
(https://phil.cdc.gov//PHIL_Images/23311/23311_lores.jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 18, 2020, 11:00:59 PM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 18, 2020, 11:05:54 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on November 18, 2020, 11:19:26 PM
Well now we know why HappyDaze lost his shit when people didn't buy into the Covid scam.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 18, 2020, 11:28:03 PM
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!
Bitch, please. These are from the article you quoted:

"Masks prevent people from transmitting the coronavirus to others, scientists now agree. But a new trial failed to document protection from the virus among the wearers."

"The study, published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, did not contradict growing evidence that masks can prevent transmission of the virus from wearer to others. "

"“There is absolutely no doubt that masks work as source control,” preventing people from infecting others, said Dr. Thomas Frieden, chief executive of Resolve to Save Lives, an advocacy group, and former director of the C.D.C., who wrote an editorial outlining weaknesses of the research."

See that part about "source control" in the third quote? That's exactly what I'm talking about, you dumbass. If you're going to throw up sources, try reading them and understanding them first.[/list]
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 18, 2020, 11:32:21 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 18, 2020, 11:34:46 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 19, 2020, 04:58:14 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 19, 2020, 08:05:45 AM
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?

You just want to be ruled, don't you?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on November 19, 2020, 09:27:00 AM
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?

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.   
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 19, 2020, 09:47:07 AM
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?

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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 19, 2020, 09:52:23 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 19, 2020, 09:57:09 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 19, 2020, 10:39:54 AM
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.
Yeah, I finally got fed up and added him to ignore as well.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 19, 2020, 10:48:32 AM
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.
Yeah, I finally got fed up and added him to ignore as well.
Bitches gotta preserve your echo chamber!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on November 19, 2020, 11:30:26 AM
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?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on November 19, 2020, 11:43:37 AM
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?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 19, 2020, 11:47:31 AM
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?

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.
You are fucking delusional. Healthcare workers providing healthcare services and making money from it isn't shameful; it's a profession.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 19, 2020, 01:13:36 PM
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 19, 2020, 01:41:18 PM
... 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 website
Biden 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".
That's him, supporting the Green New Deal. Which is exactly what you said he didn't do.

How much more clear can he make it. Biden Says He Doesn't Support the Green New Deal (https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/21498236/joe-biden-green-new-deal-debate). He said he "took inspiration" from it but that it's not that plan. Which is like saying the Hobbit movies "took inspiration" from the Hobbit book.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 19, 2020, 01:42:48 PM
Pat you cannot expect honesty from Mistwell.  He has the TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome).

No, I don't. If Sanders or Warren had been the candidate I'd have considered voting for him. I have a history of defending Trump supporters to those who do freak out about Trump, particularly on race issues. You have put me in a convenient box because it's easier to dismiss me than it is for you to grapple with nuance where I don't fit the boxes you are used to.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 19, 2020, 01:46:44 PM
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.

Seriously I despise Newsom.

First he kept his winery open after he told other ones to close. Then he sent his kid to in-person private school after he told public schools to close. Then he went to a party with more than three families with rich lobbyists after he told people to not gather with more than three families. Then some of our legislature flew to Maui on the dime of lobbyists after issuing to everyone else a travel advisory.

And the latest is he was caught lying about it being an outdoor event. It was indoors, and we have a photo and witness proof of that. He was trying to spin it as "outdoors" because a sliding glass door was open for part of the event, but was closed after someone complained about how much noise the party was making.

He's a hypocritical asshole. I look forward to signing the recall petition for him.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 19, 2020, 01:48:02 PM
Are we still supposed to follow the science?

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/)
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.
  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.
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!

(https://i.etsystatic.com/5924954/r/il/8bb774/2461559612/il_794xN.2461559612_7gb7.jpg)
(https://phil.cdc.gov//PHIL_Images/23311/23311_lores.jpg)

Ha, I've been wearing a Cobra Commander mask most days!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 19, 2020, 01:48:17 PM
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 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.

The ideal way to use masking is to combine a quality mask (or, preferrably, a respirator) with education on how to wear it correctly and building up the discipline to make consistent use of that knowledge. This is very hard to do even in a closed setting, but gets much harder in the wild.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 19, 2020, 01:49:25 PM
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)

Oh look, Pat is full of utter horseshit.

"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. Conclusion: The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use. The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Larsdangly on November 19, 2020, 01:57:31 PM
A useful link that quickly summarizes and provides links re. the latest understanding of the infection fatality rate:

https://fullfact.org/health/toby-young-ifr-tweet/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 19, 2020, 02:23:20 PM
A useful link that quickly summarizes and provides links re. the latest understanding of the infection fatality rate:

https://fullfact.org/health/toby-young-ifr-tweet/
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).

Let's not even get into how the tests seem to be having accuracy issues.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on November 19, 2020, 03:47:49 PM
Greetings!

Dan, of Heavy Duty Country, discusses Covid, Mask wearing, and politics.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on November 19, 2020, 04:00:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 19, 2020, 04:23:56 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on November 19, 2020, 11:29:20 PM
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-pandemic
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>
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 20, 2020, 02:58:08 AM
If you're going to throw up sources, try reading them and understanding them first.

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.

“Our study gives an indication of how much you gain from wearing a mask,” said Dr. Henning Bundgaard, lead author of the study and a cardiologist at the University of Copenhagen. “Not a lot.”

Dr. Mette Kalager, a researcher at Telemark Hospital in Norway and the Harvard School of Public Health, was persuaded. The study showed that “although there might be a symbolic effect,” she wrote in an email, “the effect of wearing a mask does not substantially reduce risk” for wearers.


So...the SCIENCE yet again proves Masks = Bullshit.

...Except for the SYMBOLIC EFFECT (of identifying the sheep)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 20, 2020, 03:05:35 AM
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.

There is no Biden.

Dementia JoJo didn't even know what his policies were when they let him out of the basement to mumble some gaffes to a dozen bored reporters.

However, his handlers are VERY pro-Green New Deal and have made that abundantly clear.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 20, 2020, 03:21:21 AM
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.

Did anyone expect HappyDaze to NOT be a sellout? He's made it clear he'll bend the knee to anything so at least this time he's pocketing some pennies while knelt to ground.

But healthcare managers becoming grifters is a common career path. When I was headhunting in the senior care industry, sleazebags were a dime-a-dozen and eager to sell your grandma's quality of life for profit points on a spreadsheet.

And there's plenty of government cash if you're helping push and justify the CoronaChan tyranny. When HappyDaze makes sure his "testing" center produces lots of "cases", he might get promoted next to a mandatory vaccination center.

Of course, that promotion comes with hazard pay and extra life insurance...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 20, 2020, 03:27:44 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on November 20, 2020, 03:37:44 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 20, 2020, 05:10:55 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 20, 2020, 06:25:05 AM
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.
I don't think he wants to understand.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 20, 2020, 06:29:38 AM
When HappyDaze makes sure his "testing" center produces lots of "cases", he might get promoted next to a mandatory vaccination center.

Of course, that promotion comes with hazard pay and extra life insurance...
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on November 20, 2020, 06:40:16 AM
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?

Greetings!

So true, Spinachcat! So many people are weak sheep! They yearn to be on their knees, gulping down jello.

Definitely a big difference between those who stand--and those who kneel!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on November 20, 2020, 07:39:28 PM
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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on November 20, 2020, 08:30:49 PM
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-pandemic
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>
Hm... I guess there's no rational, logical, nor scientific answer to my question. So, I'll answer it:
No one was forced to wear anything back then because no one was looking to MURDER their neighbors. Instead, back then, everyone I knew (up until 1974) kept their front doors unlocked.
AMAZING THE PROGRESS WE HAVE MADE.
Now, everyone drink some more of that Kool-Aid! Whichever version you prefer. NO ONE is here is capable of changing anyone else's minds.
fnord.


And now for something completely different...
https://v1.nitrocdn.com/PtUefQrfncdsWOjilqcqdvGyQbUvpoWC/assets/desktop/optimized/rev-b452e67/media/bbd2930e3d1aac383aebf52f50803d88.EnMpJrBWMAQzEOM
Lmfao! Poor bastards! Australia is becoming more like Austria was 84 years ago!
Interesting juxtoposition:
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/begins-orange-county-sacramento-el-dorado-county-sheriffs-will-not-enforce-gavin-newsoms-curfew-order/
https://twitter.com/WarTimeGirl/status/1329200974758633475
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/twitter-locks-tom-fitton-accurate-tweet-efficacy-masks-exposed-massive-danish-study/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 21, 2020, 05:41:34 AM
Spinachcat - I will try to explain again.

And again, you sound like an absolute moron but it is entertaining.

LA is wall to wall diaper sheep. We have idiots wearing masks in their cars because they love the shamdemic so much. Every store craps itself if you aren't diapered up. People here love their masks.

And what's the result? CASES! CASES! CASES!!!!!

But hey, the solution is to MASK HARDER!!!


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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 21, 2020, 05:57:21 AM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 21, 2020, 10:02:20 AM
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?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: shuddemell on November 21, 2020, 10:02:33 AM
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%."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 21, 2020, 11:11:05 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 21, 2020, 11:14:07 AM
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!
You're the one hyping up fear. You're just another flavor of anti-vaxxer.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on November 21, 2020, 12:36:10 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on November 21, 2020, 12:39:26 PM
Wait a minute, this whole coronavirus thing is all a plot by Big Testing to rake in the big money from testing centres? That's take I suppose.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on November 21, 2020, 01:26:08 PM
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.

That's completely off-topic to how they were successful at containing the disease *and* in restarting their economy. Your claim earlier was that masks don't work and indeed *nothing* works - we just have to accept all getting the disease, and shouldn't bother trying to take steps to contain it like masks or isolation. But it *is* demonstrably possible to contain the disease and restart the economy.


On the off-topic point, that's also not right. South Koreans don't obey their government - just three years ago, South Koreans impeached and kicked out their sitting president. They had a revolution in the 1990s where they forced a new constitution. As for being prey for China - Japan was kicking China's butt last century, until the U.S. helped China out. We demanded our troops be installed there - they didn't request it.


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.

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/d41586-020-03141-3

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: shuddemell on November 21, 2020, 01:52:40 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 21, 2020, 04:20:38 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on November 21, 2020, 04:25:13 PM
You're the one hyping up fear. You're just another flavor of anti-vaxxer.

Are you still an anti-vaxxer if you support vacines for other people?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 21, 2020, 04:48:12 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 21, 2020, 04:58:20 PM
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.

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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 21, 2020, 05:02:05 PM
....
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 21, 2020, 05:26:51 PM
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.

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)
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 21, 2020, 06:14:14 PM
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.

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)
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 21, 2020, 06:42:40 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 21, 2020, 07:20:24 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on November 21, 2020, 07:41:13 PM
Are you still an anti-vaxxer if you support vacines for other people?

Oh wait I can answer this one! Yes you are and stl of the worst kind. You see vaccination promotes herd immunity, not the stupid one of letting a disease ravage through your community but the proper one. Vaccination can't be done for many people due to health problems and sometimes just doesn't take. If enough people get vaccinated there's a drastically less chance of the disease being passed to these people. In short if you don't support vaccinating yourself you are a selfish cunt.

A goo example is that measles was eliminated from the UK but the brave actions of anti-vaxers managed to bring it back. These are people who want to take us back to the early to mid 20th century when we had a wonderfully high child mortality rate. Cunts.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 21, 2020, 07:49:19 PM
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.
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.

Plus, you're pretending that you're making some novel distinction that everyone else had missed. I was making the distinction that masks are more about protecting others than the wearer, much earlier in the thread, toward the start of the pandemic. Then evidence came out suggesting that masks might help protect the wearer, like the hamster study, and I updated my thinking. And then an overwhelming number of studies came out showing it didn't happen in the real world, leading to testing out new theories, and that's where we are now.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on November 22, 2020, 01:39:11 AM
It is kind of surreal when I'm outside and get the snot-look from someone obese and drinking a half-cup of sugar, but is wearing a mask.  Because I'm not helping prevent the spread.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 22, 2020, 03:43:41 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on November 22, 2020, 04:23:18 PM
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?

Waffle House? I'll beat you there and save you a seat. :)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 22, 2020, 07:49:27 PM
Watch it while its still satire.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 22, 2020, 08:02:41 PM
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!



I guess if everyone else's kid is a flipper baby, your kid gets in the NFL! You would have thought we'd be a tad more thoughtful about rushing a drug into mass consumption based on the history of science.

Oh science, how holy art thou?
https://helix.northwestern.edu/article/thalidomide-tragedy-lessons-drug-safety-and-regulation (https://helix.northwestern.edu/article/thalidomide-tragedy-lessons-drug-safety-and-regulation)

I wonder if today's 60 Minutes has the balls to investigate the CoronaChan vaccine in the future as they did in the past...



I guess that depends who's President...



Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on November 22, 2020, 08:20:32 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on November 22, 2020, 11:41:15 PM
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.
Yes, plans...
https://youtu.be/X6pzXrEBqR0
We should all go to church and see what is there (if anything...): http://subgenius.com/
fnord,  ::)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 23, 2020, 01:32:36 AM
Fauci the Clown already said getting a vaccine means you KEEP wearing a mask!

It's not the Onion, but CNBC might as well be.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/16/fauci-why-still-need-masks-social-distancing-after-covid-19-vaccine.html (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/16/fauci-why-still-need-masks-social-distancing-after-covid-19-vaccine.html)

CoronaChan won't end until people disobey en masse.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 23, 2020, 08:28:55 AM
Test the vaccine on the politicians first.

If they live, we win.
If they die, we win.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 23, 2020, 12:03:23 PM
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.

Only the more extreme bacterial infection, on a whole spectrum of things which can be cultured in masks (fungus and mould too), because we didn't evolve to wear filthy rags on our faces. Medical professionals don't normally walk the streets and exert themselves whilst wearing masks, so stupid analogy as usual.

I also look forward to the rash of respiratory problems years from now caused by inhalation of mask fibres, especially from re-use of those shitty, cheap, single-use plastic masks. Some of which say they don't contain glass fibres!

You mean due to the NHS fuck-up of ventilating frail people and thus killing them.

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.

I'm not ill, therefore there is no risk to anyone else. Same as was the case every year before this one when the usual seasonal viruses did the rounds. I "protect" others by not being ill.

And again, how is anyone protecting anyone else if they're repeatedly touching their mask and spreading their germs on their hands?

As for asymptomatic transmission, I think you're referring to this article.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03141-3

Quote
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.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on November 23, 2020, 12:58:24 PM
I find it incredible how supposedly intelligent people have invested in the idea that a strain of the common cold is suddenly the plague.

That's all I need from you.

In the end you're just another pathetic anti-vaxxer. Supposedly intelligent indeed.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on November 23, 2020, 01:56:56 PM
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.

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.

(https://asm.org/ASM/media/Article-Images/COVID-and-Flu-Preview-image.jpg)

Source: https://asm.org/Articles/2020/July/COVID-19-and-the-Flu


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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 23, 2020, 02:10:44 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 23, 2020, 03:30:38 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on November 23, 2020, 04:23:27 PM
Coronavirus's are not new, which is why we already have some resistance to even the lab engineered Chinese Wuhan Coronavirus.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on November 23, 2020, 04:31:00 PM
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

OK, fair enough. I spoke as if he was equating covid-19 with influenza, which was wrong. My apologies on that. I think I was conflating his with other arguments that compared covid-19 with the flu.

I agree that there are viruses within the broad coronavirus family that are part of the common cold, along with a mix of other virus families including rhinovirus and RSV. 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.

Covid-19 did not develop as a mutation of any part of the common cold. It is in a different genus and is thought to have mutated from animal strains. In general, viruses in the same family can have vastly different origins and vastly different lethalities. They are not strains of each other. For example, ebolavirus is of the Filoviridae family, which includes some viruses that are completely harmless to humans, and some with the devastating effects of ebola.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 23, 2020, 05:44:59 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 23, 2020, 06:13:28 PM
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.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/741360116998365184/SqhnVR-C_400x400.jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 23, 2020, 07:02:57 PM
And again, how is anyone protecting anyone else if they're repeatedly touching their mask and spreading their germs on their hands?

They PROTECT no one, but they PROJECT their willing submission.

I love watching diaper idiots open doors or handle carts, fruit or goods in a grocery store that the person in front of them was just touching. The BEST is when they pull down their diaper to sneeze!!

If the KungFlu wasn't just the sniffles, we'd have piles of bodies in the streets.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 23, 2020, 07:09:23 PM
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 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.

As for Hillary, please don't insult our hidden Serpent Overlords. You're making Thulsa Doom sad!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 23, 2020, 07:24:43 PM
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

He said no such thing. (https://spacenews.com/from-the-moon-to-the-earth-how-the-biden-administration-might-reshape-nasa/)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on November 23, 2020, 07:33:16 PM
Greetings!

Wait, Hillary Clinton isn't the Lizard Queen? ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 23, 2020, 07:38:06 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on November 23, 2020, 07:54:53 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 23, 2020, 08:01:19 PM
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.
I hope Netflix brings it back for another season.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on November 23, 2020, 09:47:52 PM
Here's a few things to argue about:
Just say no to forced vaccinations by the Corpors: https://twitter.com/AnthonySabatini/status/1330882574579871744
Just say yes to a tradition started by those who fought the REAL NAZIS: https://twitter.com/bigjohn850/status/1330890305210552321

Now, argue about WHY these things are detrimental to you, your children, your children's children, and your wife's boyfriends' childrens' children!
f-
-nor-
-d. ::)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 23, 2020, 10:05:56 PM
Greetings!

Wait, Hillary Clinton isn't the Lizard Queen? ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 24, 2020, 01:13:57 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 24, 2020, 04:40:10 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 24, 2020, 06:12:43 AM
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.
It certainly shows that you've bought real estate in that same neighborhood of stupid upon your flat-Earth.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on November 24, 2020, 06:39:43 AM
Greetings!

Wait, Hillary Clinton isn't the Lizard Queen? ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
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.

Greetings!

*Laughing* ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on November 24, 2020, 08:19:57 AM
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.

Remember when the previous Obama-Biden Administration decided that NASA was best used as a Muslim Outreach Program? Biden is definitely capable of similar fucknuttery. I do not doubt that NASA'a budget will be gutted and that the Space Program will be relegated to providing TrueFacts to support Man-Made Climate Change because that is what leftists want.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on November 24, 2020, 10:51:58 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 24, 2020, 11:24:59 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on November 24, 2020, 12:27:44 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 24, 2020, 01:17:20 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 24, 2020, 01:29:16 PM
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.

Pat, do you believe masks have bad side effects?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on November 24, 2020, 01:38:44 PM
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.

Oh no I didn't
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 24, 2020, 01:57:27 PM
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.

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.

I occasionally point out hypocrisy or idiocy. Don't mistake that for taking sides.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 24, 2020, 03:35:08 PM
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.

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.

I occasionally point out hypocrisy or idiocy. Don't mistake that for taking sides.

Fair enough.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 24, 2020, 03:59:52 PM
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.

Pat, do you believe masks have bad side effects?

I belive masks have bad primary effects.

There's a religious defererence to the effectiveness of masks. Few can quote the actual effectiveness of masks to protect themselves or others. And fewer still know how to use them effectively.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 24, 2020, 04:10:04 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 24, 2020, 04:39:27 PM
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.
It's not like there aren't instructional videos on Youtube.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 24, 2020, 04:41:45 PM

I belive masks have bad primary effects.


OK. What is the basis of your belief?

Quote
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.

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.

Quote
I 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.

Quote
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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 24, 2020, 04:43:55 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 24, 2020, 04:46:57 PM
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.

With other masks, the biggest problem is probably hygiene. If you wear gloves and work with hazardous substances, you know not to wipe your face or touch most surfaces, and you know how to take off gloves without getting what's on the gloves all over your hands. Masks should be treated the same way, but they're not. They're constantly adjusted, stuck in pockets, and thrown into glove boxes. People take them off by touching the mask itself not the cords, after their hands have been in contact with shared surfaces, like doors or PIN keypads.

Public health messaging at the start of the pandemic never really talked about how to handle masks properly, but at least they covered a few common sense hygienic standards, like not touching your face with your hands. I specifically remember an NPR show, where one of the guests was talking about how hard it was to remember not to do that. But they don't seem to even try, anymore. Instead it's all masks, as if masks were some magical token that repelled disease by their very presence. That's a shame. They should go back to talking about simple precautions.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 24, 2020, 04:51:07 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 24, 2020, 04:51:41 PM
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.
It's not like there aren't instructional videos on Youtube.

Are there? I never thought to look. They just put up signs at my grocery store that masks are required, so I bought a handful of cheap cloth masks and put them on when I go in the store, and after that, they go back in the packages until the next trip.

I only bring it up because I participate in these kinds of discussions, and became aware that there's more involved with mask wearing. I imagine most of the population don't. They just go through the motions.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 24, 2020, 04:57:50 PM

I belive masks have bad primary effects.


OK. What is the basis of your belief?

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.
Quote

Quote
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.

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.

Quote
I 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.

I went thought a bunch of masks when this first started. These are the best fitting I could find.
Quote

Quote
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.

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?

Because millions of average Joes aren't going to observe mask protocols like you do.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 24, 2020, 05:05:24 PM
Masks are 100% effective...at signaling your submission and fear.

If masks were effective at anything else, they would have been our standard wear for anyone entering a hospital, especially an ICU, especially during flu season, for the past 100 years.

While pneumonia with its impressive kill rate has run rampant through hospitals since forever, the mandatory mask nonsense only became "science" when it was needed to break people and its entirely dependent on everyone forgetting that any year before 2020 existed.

But really is it ANY surprise that cowards enjoy cowering and demand everyone join them in their weakness, delusions and virtue signaling?

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on November 24, 2020, 06:13:11 PM
At this point masks are just Star-Bellied Sneetchs

(https://www.middleweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/sneetches-beach.jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 24, 2020, 06:21:07 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 24, 2020, 06:32:44 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 24, 2020, 09:13:47 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 24, 2020, 09:56:16 PM
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?
So you can't explain it, but deflect onto Trump.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on November 24, 2020, 11:27:07 PM
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?
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!

fucking murderous pig.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 24, 2020, 11:36:35 PM
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?
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!

fucking murderous pig.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on November 24, 2020, 11:38:20 PM
Greetings!

Strange, I guess I do live in the Neanderthal lands! *laughing* LOTS of people here do not wear masks. People at the hospital, the grocery store, and restaurant workers wear masks. Everyone else? Not so much.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 25, 2020, 12:07:16 AM
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.

But of course! Anyone who does not bend the knee and "obey the science" is so obviously "deeply self conscious and insecure"! Nothing says self-confidence like unthinking obedience to your shamdemic masters.

Remember to hide inside Mistwell. Don't chew without your mask! No singing and no hugging Grandma because the virus with the 99.7% survival rate might get you!

But its funny how your shamdemic masters don't "obey the science" and have parties, vacations and gatherings all without masks, without distancing and without any the fear you and the rest of the sheep crave.

Funny that.

They are more likely to wonder if you are specially abled.

Project much?  If you look half as dumb as what you post, you've got a bad case of Down's syndrome. [But they are good people, enjoyed teaching them immensely]

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 25, 2020, 12:10:10 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on November 25, 2020, 12:17:15 AM
I do rock a Speedo. You finally got me HappyDaze.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on November 25, 2020, 05:24:43 AM
Thanksgiving is a wonderful time.  I’m enjoying seeing family again.  Puts things in perspective

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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on November 25, 2020, 05:25:43 AM
Double post
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 25, 2020, 06:43:30 AM
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?"
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 25, 2020, 10:54:26 AM
What I find most incredible is how discerning covid-19 is. Classist, even. Very few supermarket staff have been off sick since the start of the pandemic, despite them being exposed to the general public the entire time. Nor have there been outbreaks centred on retail locations.

Yet in the NHS, even parts which don't actually deal with coronavirus patients, most trusts are dealing with around a third of staff being off. That might be "off sick", "shielding" or "self-isolating". One trust reported 60% of their staff out. Curious.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on November 25, 2020, 12:15:11 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on November 25, 2020, 02:53:18 PM
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?"

In one of the games I play, I stopped 1 of the 72 Apocalypses.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on November 25, 2020, 07:03:41 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on November 25, 2020, 07:26:53 PM
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.

Greetings!

Damn right we need to "Punch Back!" I like the visual of curb-stomping the fuck out of them when wearing a solid pair of Doc Martin boots. A big, strong boot right to their soft, fat, Reeeing asses!

Ahh, yes. Just stay in that giant pot and slowly get boiled to death, like the Frog in the Pot. No, no, there's nothing going on here. There there. *rubs back* Everyone just remain calm.

Big Tech *Censoring* American citizens that don't swallow the fucking Liberal jello--banned, de-platformed, cancelled, or called "Misinformation". Conveniently, Twitter, Facebook, and Google are all right there, aligned with the Democrats, and pushing Liberalism, BLM, Antifa, and more.

Democrat Politicians--Biden, AOC, Bernie, Buttigeg, Beto O'Roarke, and more--all wanting to raise taxes sky high; get more in bed with Globalists; cock-suck on the Communist Chinese; Bow down to the UN; Confiscate our guns; Push more Abortion; Institute political procedures which enthrone the Democrats and defraud all future elections--the "California Plan"--taking what the Democrats have done throughout the state of California to a nationwide platform; Open the borders and let MILLIONS of illegal immigrants pour into our country.

Ahh, yeah. None of that inflicts fatal damage to our Republic, and our nation. The cock-sucking Democrats all think it is just fine and dandy. And these fucking Marxist scum, these filthy, diseased rats wonder and Reee about why good Americans consider them to be traitors?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 25, 2020, 07:43:27 PM
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.
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.

The complete opposite, in fact. We may not be able to steer the overall the culture wars, but this place is what we make of it. If we choose to be civil, if we make substantive arguments instead of personal attacks, then we can create something sheltered from the storms that surround it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on November 25, 2020, 08:07:21 PM
Pat, my posting falls within what I consider fair play for a free speech board in political threads in nutkinland.  Coffee shops in the 18th century weren't the pass of Thermopylae either.  I do encourage anyone who dislikes what I have to say, or how I say it, to mute me.  In political threads I will attempt to persuade on a right-brained level and not a left-brained one because the left-brained argument is a mirage for persuasion purposes.  I wear this on my sleeve; it's not hidden.   

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 25, 2020, 08:49:31 PM
And I'll continue to advocate for extending good faith instead of jumping to conclusions, and having discussions instead of shout downs.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 25, 2020, 09:33:24 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 25, 2020, 10:07:15 PM
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.

Your remind me of SHARK, that way. SHARK's switch seems to have been flipped with this election, while you've being doing the bait-dance longer, but you've both made quality posts when you're not flashing your sabres and riding into the valley of partisan death.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on November 25, 2020, 10:54:29 PM
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?
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!

fucking murderous pig.
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, I hate to disappoint people.  :P
But, I suppose my point has been made and dismissed as foolish. Just as I was accused of being too young to vote or a liar. Amazing to me the responses. Is it that you want to murder? Needing elbow room? Or is it that you want a better parking space? Less people, less problems, right?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 26, 2020, 01:39:27 AM
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.

Oh, brother! I give it a week.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on November 26, 2020, 02:24:51 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on November 26, 2020, 02:31:02 PM
The rhetoric battle, not kinetic ones. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 26, 2020, 02:33:21 PM
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?
So you can't explain it, but deflect onto Trump.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 26, 2020, 02:41:21 PM
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.

He does it here every day.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 26, 2020, 02:57:08 PM
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?
So you can't explain it, but deflect onto Trump.

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.

And if you think Biden will set NASA on the straight and narrow, you are delusional AND stupid. How efficient.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 26, 2020, 06:49:01 PM
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?
So you can't explain it, but deflect onto Trump.

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.

And if you think Biden will set NASA on the straight and narrow, you are delusional AND stupid. How efficient.

I didn't say I think Biden will set NASA on the straight and narrow you strawmanning jackass. Spinachcat said, "If Biden wins, he's promised to scrap the space program" and I called him on it responding "He said no such thing" with a link showing he said no such thing.

Then you acted like I had mentioned the Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Working Group at NASA, which I had not, and implied I must not know what I am talking about if I didn't know about that group, despite it not being in any way part of what I had said. Then you acted like that group was in some way related to Biden, which it was not.

This whole conversation with you appears to be you having a conversation with a ghost nobody else can see, and you thinking it's me you're responding to. Because literally not one thing you've said has anything to do with what I've said. Is it just easier to knock down arguments you wish I had made than respond to what I've actually said?

I am still waiting for Spinichcat, or you for that matter, to support his allegation that "If Biden wins, he's promised to scrap the space program." We both know it's a totally fabricated allegation. It's a lie. I am calling it out. Stop deflecting - if you think Biden made such a promise, link to it or shut the fuck up you weasel.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on November 27, 2020, 01:04:25 AM
Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.


Reply #806. READ IT!!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 27, 2020, 01:23:00 AM
Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.


Reply #806. READ IT!!
Your ramblings aren't proof of anything.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on November 27, 2020, 01:26:16 AM
Your ramblings aren't proof of anything.

Dance, monkey! Dance!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 27, 2020, 01:34:02 AM
Your ramblings aren't proof of anything.

Dance, monkey! Dance!
I don't like your song; try something that doesn't sound like REEEEE!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on November 27, 2020, 06:15:04 AM
Your ramblings aren't proof of anything.

Dance, monkey! Dance!
I don't like your song; try something that doesn't sound like REEEEE!

But you still dance to it.....

Dance, monkey! Dance!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 27, 2020, 10:47:08 AM
Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.


Reply #806. READ IT!!
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 27, 2020, 11:01:12 AM
Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.


Reply #806. READ IT!!
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.
Let's not forget that jeffy produced "nothing" in the way of verifiable facts. His ramblings are not proof of anything.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 27, 2020, 01:57:20 PM
Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.


Reply #806. READ IT!!

He said, ""If Biden wins, he's promised to scrap the space program."

That reply (which was just your personal opinion that you speculate Biden will cut funds to NASA), and no reply in this thread or elsewhere, demonstrates Biden making any such promise. Unless you're claiming you are Biden?

You know this, I know this, we all know this. He was lying when he wrote that, and you are trying to distract from the fact he was lying when he wrote that. He was not saying Biden would treat NASA like a redheaded stepchild. He said he made a promise to scrap it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 27, 2020, 02:00:17 PM
Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.


Reply #806. READ IT!!
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.

Apparently YOU don't care. The post he is referencing is his personal opinion of what he thinks Biden could do. In response to a claim Biden promised to scrap NASA. If you had read that post, I can't see you making the reply you just made.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on November 27, 2020, 07:58:56 PM
Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.


Reply #806. READ IT!!
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.

Ah but STEM discriminates against art professors when it comes to grant money.  It is now STEAM.  Get with the times bro.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 27, 2020, 10:03:40 PM
Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.


Reply #806. READ IT!!
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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on November 28, 2020, 12:02:34 AM
Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.


Reply #806. READ IT!!
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.

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:
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 28, 2020, 12:05:45 PM
Mistwell, you lying dissembling fucknugget, the proof of NASA being a redheaded stepchild for Biden is in reply #806.


Reply #806. READ IT!!
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.

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:
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.

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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 28, 2020, 12:46:31 PM
Cute. NONE of that shows Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected.

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
Need help moving those goalposts around, Misty?

'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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: The Spaniard on November 28, 2020, 01:45:53 PM
Cute. NONE of that shows Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected.

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
Need help moving those goalposts around, Misty?

'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:

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 28, 2020, 03:36:35 PM
Agreed.  We can expect more of this bullshit started by Obama's former NASA chief Charlie Bolden:

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.
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 28, 2020, 09:17:09 PM
Cute. NONE of that shows Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected.

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
Need help moving those goalposts around, Misty?

'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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on November 29, 2020, 08:06:19 AM
Let's not forget that jeffy produced "nothing" in the way of verifiable facts. His ramblings are not proof of anything.

"jeffy"

You have invoked the curse upon yourself.... ;D
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on November 29, 2020, 08:09:54 AM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 29, 2020, 08:40:23 AM
Cute. NONE of that shows Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected.

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
Need help moving those goalposts around, Misty?

'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?
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on November 29, 2020, 03:07:01 PM
Following up on an earlier comment to me:

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.

In rhetorical battles, emotional appeals are important - but using emotional appeals isn't the same thing as being insane. There are sane and truthful emotional appeals.

The analogy to physical battles is just an analogy - but it's one that I feel is useful. I think insane crowds tearing into each other is worse for *both* sides compared to organized conflict. We can disagree on things and discuss those disagreements without tossing out reason and sanity.

You're concerned about the rhetoric of our having to materially atone for sins of the father. I would say that shame and pride in one's ancestors goes hand in hand -- and they have always been clashing rhetoric. Conservatives tend to take pride in the virtues of their ancestors and have a positive view of their past. (Though what is seen as conservative changes from age to age.) Liberals tend to criticize the past and push to right the wrongs that have been done by their ancestors. I don't think that conservatives will ever be willing to put aside pride in their ancestors. In turn, liberals aren't willing to put aside their rhetoric of wrongs. But we can still have some balance and discussion, knowing that there are both virtues and sins in our ancestors.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on November 29, 2020, 06:09:10 PM
Of course one should never put aside pride in their ancestors.  Everyone should take pride in their ancestors.  And lay off other peoples' ancestors.  Don't talk about mine, and I don't talk about yours.  They're dead.  It's just polite.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on November 29, 2020, 07:19:02 PM
What if I'm descended from lowlife scumbags?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on November 29, 2020, 07:43:10 PM
If a man feels their own ancestry has absolutely nothing worth celebrating then voluntary castration is the only honorable option
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on November 29, 2020, 08:50:17 PM
What if I'm descended from lowlife scumbags?

Then you are in good company.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on November 29, 2020, 08:55:24 PM
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'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.

Quote
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.

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on November 30, 2020, 05:58:27 AM
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'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.

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 30, 2020, 08:33:42 AM
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'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.

Quote
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.

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.
Not that I disagree with you, but... unless someone goes in and cleans out the infection, that's not gonna happen.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on November 30, 2020, 07:30:50 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 30, 2020, 09:58:58 PM
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 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.
The best solution might be to establish a private certification board, something like Underwriters' Laboratories, for spacecraft and spaceflight.

Unfortunately, the chances of that are pretty damn slim.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 01, 2020, 01:40:05 AM
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.

Jeff, can you show me where Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected?

It's the same goalpost. Same exact words used since my first post about it. Not one step away from it. Still waiting.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 01, 2020, 01:43:14 AM
Cute. NONE of that shows Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected.

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
Need help moving those goalposts around, Misty?

'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?
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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 01, 2020, 08:03:21 AM
Cute. NONE of that shows Biden promised to scrap NASA if elected.

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
Need help moving those goalposts around, Misty?

'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?
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.

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?
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.

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spike on December 01, 2020, 09:58:05 AM

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?

Quote
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.

I see. You intend to DISPROVE your own thesis statement. Bold Move, Cotton.


Quote
But 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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 01, 2020, 11:22:47 AM

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?

Quote
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.

I see. You intend to DISPROVE your own thesis statement. Bold Move, Cotton.


Quote
But 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?
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.

Central planning in general is just not good at handling market shifts. This is why decentralization works.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 01, 2020, 11:56:31 AM

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: shuddemell on December 01, 2020, 03:23:43 PM

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.

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.

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. Typically, they increase in size when they fail, and very rarely do poor performers get fired from government institutions for gross incompetence. Whereas private institutions are usually directed either by a board, shareholders or owners that demand profit and therefore some basic levels of competence. The consequences are usually loss of of revenue, loss of jobs, and in some cases complete failure of the company. 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 01, 2020, 06:44:42 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on December 01, 2020, 08:01:08 PM
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.

Quote
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.

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: shuddemell
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 01, 2020, 08:22:46 PM
And back to the COVID.

Looks like those of us in the Land of Enchantment will be locked down well into 2021:
https://www.krqe.com/health/coronavirus-new-mexico/mayor-keller-officials-to-provide-update-on-citys-response-to-covid-19/

And another douche-nozzle lectures the hoi polloi on following COVID restrictions and then breaks them. He should have invited Gavin Newsome, Lori Lightfoot, and Neil Ferguson to party with him.
https://summit.news/2020/11/25/doctor-who-demanded-mandatory-mask-law-pictured-partying-maskless-on-boat-surrounded-by-bikini-clad-women/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on December 02, 2020, 01:53:36 AM
Covid-19's threat, currently, is as real as this: https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/time_travel/project_lookingglass.htm
(Notice, I'm NOT saying it's fake...)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: shuddemell on December 02, 2020, 09:55:25 AM
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.

Yeah, I didn't want to be hyperbolic in case I missed an industry not overly burdened by regulations, but honestly I couldn't think of one. Otherwise, well put.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: shuddemell on December 02, 2020, 09:59:29 AM
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.

Quote
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.

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: shuddemell
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 02, 2020, 10:31:14 AM

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.
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.

OK, not ALL of them. But enough that it's a serious problem.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 02, 2020, 10:56:36 AM

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.
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.

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:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: shuddemell on December 02, 2020, 11:19:58 AM

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.
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.

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:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/

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."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 02, 2020, 11:28:52 AM

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: shuddemell on December 02, 2020, 11:36:20 AM

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.

Yes, he's a classical liberal by any reasonable interpretation, but the real issue is he stood up to their inane and insane pronouncements in response to Canadian bill c16. Primarily because he rightly understood that it actually compelled speech which is in contradiction to freedom of speech and British common law going back centuries. He refused publicly to do so, and was labeled transphobic as a result (the bill sought to force people to use "preferred" pronouns under penalty of law). Interestingly, even his colleagues and peers at the University he was teaching at tried to force him to accede to the demands. Fortunately due to his character and obstinate nature, he refused and rightly so. The left cannot tolerate dissent, free speech, free thought and anything else they cannot control. At the root, it is their desire to mold you in their image (because they believe themselves both the moral and intellectual superiors of everyone) and their inchoate confusion and self righteous rage at being defied. It's gone so far for them to disingenuously label him alt-right and a nazi, which is laughable in the extreme.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on December 02, 2020, 12:59:29 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: shuddemell on December 02, 2020, 01:23:54 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 02, 2020, 01:27:10 PM
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 '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'.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: shuddemell on December 02, 2020, 01:29:46 PM
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 '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'.

Ignorance is far more dangerous than any idea... Exposing bad ideas to the light of day and scrutiny is the only way they don't fester and recrudesce into something far more malignant, and worse suppressing them magnifies that malignancy 100 fold.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 02, 2020, 02:23:24 PM
Quote from: shuddemell
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.

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.

Bringing this a little back to government-vs-private... I'm not that trained in economics - but to Kyle's point, I'm well-informed on child-rearing, education, and role-playing games.

I totally agree that growth stems from adversity, and am anti-helicopter-parenting. I've tried my best to raise my son to be independent and learn from his own failures.

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.

Lots of my liberal friends complain the exact same way about helicopter parents and spoiled, over-privileged kids. While some things like pronoun usage are partisan, the broader issue of adversity is not. While conservatives complain about liberal tech billionaires and the elite with their spoiled children -- liberals complain just as much about conservative billionaires and the top 1% with their spoiled children.

It's a generational issue. There have been broad changes across both conservatives and liberals over the last two generations. Lots of them might even agree in principle that adversity is good, but if their *own* child fails, then it's clearly the fault of the goddamn school administrators or the like, not their child, who's a Good Kid.

People need to be allowed to fail, to be held accountable for their failures, for them to learn and grow.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: shuddemell on December 02, 2020, 02:53:31 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 02, 2020, 05:50:18 PM
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.

You're classifying it as an "extreme leftist view", but it sounds like you're agreeing that it's a view that goes through both public and private schools, and both Democrats and Republicans, right?

I don't agree about the label, but it's just a label. I agree that helicopter parenting is a problem, and it requires a cultural change to fix.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 02, 2020, 06:20:50 PM
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.

I still believe that COVID is a real health issue (but not the end of the world), but I have lost my trust in another player in the central Florida healthcare system. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't have minded the money for the gig so long as I felt we were doing the right thing, but that's not what I was seeing there and my tolerance for bullshit just wasn't having it today.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 02, 2020, 06:32:49 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 02, 2020, 06:54:52 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 02, 2020, 07:11:44 PM
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.
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.

Central planners at work.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 02, 2020, 07:18:52 PM
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.
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.

Central planners at work.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on December 02, 2020, 08:35:22 PM
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.

We've a website called MySchools (https://myschool.edu.au) which lets you look up and compare schools. There are three key numbers we can look at,

NAPLAN results. These are nationally-standardised tests. There are some issues with them, not everyone agrees with them - but they're what we have for comparing academic performance across schools.

Per student spending
- that's from both public and private sources, the numbers are all there

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.

When you're paying for a private school, what you're really paying for is their peers - high ICSEA students. It's a way to ensure that your kids spend time with kids whose families are well-off and well-educated. Obviously if you want your kid to be a High Court judge some day then you're also paying for the networking etc - there's a pic floating around in Australia right now showing the Commonwealth Chief Medical Officer, the Attorney General and a couple of others drunk at uni together.

But aside from that, you're paying for peers. That $30k cheque you write each year is a filter - "we're keeping out the riff-raff!" Are your peers people whose parents push them towards excellence, or parents who don't expect much of them?

Of course, even the private schools are regulated by government, so people might blame their relative non-performance on that. That's possible, I suppose, but peers do matter a lot.



Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on December 03, 2020, 05:26:04 AM
Greetings!

Here, Salty Cracker goes off against the cock-sucking Marxist Democrats! Discusses the digital and information war against the Communists, the President's speech to America, and more.

Salty Cracker also discusses how James O'Keefe with Project Veritas has leaked conference calls involving the head of CNN and their executives. CNN has been fucking destroyed! A CNN executive discusses how *Cubans* love bullies, and the terrible Cubans in Florida are supporting President Trump. CNN's total cock-sucking for the Democrats is on full, public display. Some E-THOT chick said on Twitter that O'Keefe was a convicted felon. *Laughing* O'Keefe's lawyers got a hold of this bitch, and rekt her! She publicly apologized and admitted she was a lying cunt, deletted all of her damning, slanderous tweets against Project Veritas, and then evidently deleted her entire account. O'Keefe told her this was the most attention she was likely to ever get in her life, and she was done. She would be known as the woman that lied and claimed O'Keefe was a felon!

Salty Cracker discusses the Mac's Public House Bar resisting Governor Cuomo's tyranny in New York, and more resistance growing in New York by the day. In addition, a video is shown of Chris Cuomo, Nancy Pelosi, Governor Newsome, Mayor Lightfoot, and more going to dinners and events without wearing masks, and little or no "social distancing"--demonstrating that the people screaming for draconian lockdowns for the China virus know that it is all a fucking fraud and a sham, primarily designed to promote their government tyranny, control, and fear over a cowed and compliant population.

So much good discussion from Salty Cracker here, of course laced with truck loads of humour.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 03, 2020, 09:07:28 AM
A modest proposal here: https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/sensible-compassionate-anti-covid-strategy/

I await people screaming about how this will kill us all.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 03, 2020, 11:13:42 AM
A modest proposal here: https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/sensible-compassionate-anti-covid-strategy/

I await people screaming about how this will kill us all.
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 do disagree about stopping working from home. When feasible, working from home should still be encouraged. However, each business needs to consider what is feasible. This can also come up with meetings. Many senior positions are held by persons in higher risk age groups, and extended face-to-face time in multi-person meetings can pose risks. Many such meetings were held remotely even before COVID to cut down on expenses, so there's no reason this shouldn't continue.

I would also recommend businesses selling essentials (like grocers, hardware stores, etc.) have limited access hours, say the first two hours of their day, focused on serving the vulnerable that might not be able to utilize delivery services. During these hours, control the number of shoppers, encourage/enforce (depending on local regulations) mask use, sanitize things, etc. Sure, those vulnerable going there are still taking a risk, but steps can be taken to minimize it while still allowing the businesses to return to normal operations for the majority of their operating hours.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 03, 2020, 01:51:43 PM
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.

I don't know the Australian education data very well, but I do know the U.S. very well and have also studied combined international data.

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.

This is conflating *individual* performance with the effect of *peers*. Rich kids with well-educated parents perform better than poor kids, and that's true regardless of what school they go to, and also regardless of who their peers are. That effect alone will cause rich schools to have higher averages.

For me personally, my older sisters went to K-12 public schools (as my parents were still struggling to repay medical school) - while as the youngest I went to a posh private school. My sisters still scored well and went to Yale and UPenn for undergrad, while I scored well and went to University of Chicago.

In order to look at the peer effect, you have to separate out the statistics to look at only the rich kids within Broadmeadows, or only the poor kids within Kew. In the U.S., they don't separate out statistics this way as well - but there are some limited-case studies that let us look into that. Notably, some states have randomly given certain public school students paid scholarships to private schools. There are some instances of gains - but they're mixed and small.

In other places where they separated out socio-economic class, individual performance has been shown to be a far greater effect than any peer effect. And in some cases, there is a *negative* peer effect. For example, take a poor struggling student - and supposedly "lift him up" by putting him in with a bunch of genius kids as peers -- but that just makes the struggling student fail more.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 03, 2020, 08:39:49 PM

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.

Quote
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.

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").
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on December 03, 2020, 11:11:27 PM

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.

Quote
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.

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").
https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/jwtwvm/sorry_steve_carrell_biden_pressured_to_scrap/
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!)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 04, 2020, 06:21:03 PM

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.

Quote
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.

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").
https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/jwtwvm/sorry_steve_carrell_biden_pressured_to_scrap/
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.

I wonder if it's dawned on him that it's the results I give a shit about, not the declarations or intentions.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 04, 2020, 06:24:35 PM

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.

Quote
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.

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").
https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/jwtwvm/sorry_steve_carrell_biden_pressured_to_scrap/
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on December 04, 2020, 11:29:00 PM
Biden needs to figure out how to play with his dog without sustaining multiple fractures before he can give too much bandwidth to NASA I think.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 05, 2020, 01:18:38 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 05, 2020, 04:40:45 PM
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.

There's a lot of -plans-, and budgetary fun. But how many launches? How many new footprints, how many new satellites and probes?

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.

Meanwhile, SpaceX keeps chugging away.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on December 05, 2020, 06:35:41 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on December 05, 2020, 08:42:55 PM
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.

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.
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 06, 2020, 04:40:49 PM

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.

Quote
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.

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").
https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/jwtwvm/sorry_steve_carrell_biden_pressured_to_scrap/
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!)

Space Force is not NASA. Like not figuratively. It's literally not NASA.

SHOW ME WHERE BIDEN PROMISED TO SCRAP NASA IF ELECTED.

Nothing incoherent about that. Noting ranty. He lied, and you guys are lying to try and deflect from him being held accountable for his lie. Which has ramifications for the rest of your political posts - because now we know you will lie to protect your tribe.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 06, 2020, 04:45:12 PM

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.

Quote
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.

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").
https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/jwtwvm/sorry_steve_carrell_biden_pressured_to_scrap/
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.

I wonder if it's dawned on him that it's the results I give a shit about, not the declarations or intentions.

What "narrow"? I've never said or implied, from the very first time the claim was made, anything other than repeating the clam and demanding you guys provide proof to back up the claim. You guys keep posting bullshit which isn't about Biden promising to scrap NASA if elected, I keep pointing out you're posting shit that isn't that, and you keep pretending like the claim was somehow more broad than what was said.

Maybe you wish he had said something different than what he said? Maybe you wish he said "Biden will reduce NASA's budget" or wish he had said "Biden will change NASA's priorities" but that's not what he said. That's just you guys hoping to broaden his claim as if we didn't all see what he said.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on December 06, 2020, 06:28:49 PM
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. 
And the only reason they wore them was NOT because of viruses, but because bodily fluids frequently splatter about.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 06, 2020, 08:00:53 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 06, 2020, 09:01:54 PM
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.

Which is very typical for leftists.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 06, 2020, 09:07:18 PM
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.

Which is very typical for leftists.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on December 06, 2020, 09:43:28 PM
You guys are missing the bigger picture...

After Biden is done grinding whatever is left of the economy to the ground with a hundred more days of was mask-wearing suffocation and society reverts to the Dark Ages he won’t need to scrap NASA because the country will be so incapable of funding a space program, the problem will sort itself out.  ;D
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 07, 2020, 01:39:59 AM
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.

There's a lot of -plans-, and budgetary fun. But how many launches? How many new footprints, how many new satellites and probes?

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.

But number of launches has much the same problem, it seems to me. Just launching a bunch of stupid shit doesn't make any difference. What one really wants to measure is the amount of good science and engineering, but that's a subjective judgement - not an easily-compared metric.

There is one reason why budget might be considered a good proxy. While there is a politically-appointed head, there is a low turnover rate at NASA (under 4% annually). So most of the people actually doing stuff have been the same. Whether that's a good or bad thing depends on the view.

I'm hesitant to make much opinions about NASA under either administration, because nowadays, the work is very specialized. It's not just about the race to achieve a given metric, like landing on the Moon. It's about building infrastructure and doing research. Most of the public won't understand the significance of a lot of that work. It seems to me that Obama's strategy for NASA has been well-received by Elon Musk, and people seem well impressed by SpaceX's work. I also note that George W. Bush's head of NASA had praise for NASA under Obama. In 2015, he wrote:

Quote
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.

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.
Source: https://www.al.com/opinion/2015/06/former_top_nasa_administrators.html

At the same time, there has also been praise for NASA under Trump, like this:

https://www.space.com/39055-trump-space-policy-moon-return-reactions.html

In short, it's hard to tell which is better - but that suggests to me that the difference hasn't been that big.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 07, 2020, 06:44:16 AM
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.

Which is very typical for leftists.
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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 07, 2020, 07:32:44 AM
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.

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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 07, 2020, 08:55:25 AM
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.

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.
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.

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.
Really? So because I point out an inconvenient truth, this is me being 'dishonest'?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 07, 2020, 09:08:42 AM
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.

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.
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.

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.
Really? So because I point out an inconvenient truth, this is me being 'dishonest'?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 07, 2020, 01:59:37 PM
Stay in your homes, proles (https://dailycaller.com/2020/12/03/los-angeles-mayor-eric-garcetti-covid-restrictions-ban-walking-traveling/).

Meanwhile, Garcetti goes out of his way to wreck the local economy while letting his Hollywood buddies play all they want (https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1335077635127435264?s=20).

As much as I want to grind these LA idiots' noses in their own poop (they elected this piece of trash), I can't help but feel some sympathy here.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 07, 2020, 02:40:39 PM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 07, 2020, 03:21:56 PM
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!
I guess Happy hasn't noticed yet that I put his sorry ass on ignore.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 07, 2020, 03:29:17 PM
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!
I guess Happy hasn't noticed yet that I put his sorry ass on ignore.
Makes no difference to me.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on December 07, 2020, 03:40:06 PM
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!
I guess Happy hasn't noticed yet that I put his sorry ass on ignore.
Makes no difference to me.

Joke's on YOU Ghostmaker, HappyDaze was only pretending to be retarded.  ;)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 07, 2020, 03:49:51 PM
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!
I guess Happy hasn't noticed yet that I put his sorry ass on ignore.
Makes no difference to me.

Joke's on YOU Ghostmaker, HappyDaze was only pretending to be retarded.  ;)

 ;D
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 07, 2020, 05:55:14 PM
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.

But hey, it's the intentions that count, right?

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 07, 2020, 07:59:45 PM
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.

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. From three weeks ago:

Quote
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.

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.
Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-18/sweden-says-covid-resurgence-will-hurt-economy-in-months-ahead

And after seeing a huge spike in deaths, Sweden is now finally looking to implement lockdowns to keep rates under control.

Source: https://www.wsj.com/articles/long-a-holdout-from-covid-19-restrictions-sweden-ends-its-pandemic-experiment-11607261658


Critics are saying "Just ignore it and don't wear a mask and the economy will be fine" -- which simply doesn't match what I'm see in the wider picture.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 07, 2020, 08:14:01 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 07, 2020, 08:46:05 PM
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).

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.

Also, mask wearing has been at high levels in the West for more than half a year, but the mandates weren't associated with drops in the infection rate (except when infection rates were already dropping), and we're seeing another big surge. There's now a massive amount of evidence that masks have little effect.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on December 07, 2020, 09:45:14 PM
Greetings!

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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on December 07, 2020, 11:58:03 PM
Greetings!

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
BE QUIET!
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on December 08, 2020, 01:47:03 AM
Greetings!

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
BE QUIET!
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)

Greetings!

*Laughing* Yep, Consolcwby! That's right. All of these pussy sheep in our society. They all love getting on their fucking knees and being fed the fucking Communist jello. Cases are going up! Oh, whaa, whaa, whaa! Stop being a bunch of hysterical bitches!

The China virus *ISN'T* the fucking BLACK PLAGUE!! If you had people ding left and right, 25%, 40%, 50% deathrates, well, then you'd have something to be locked the fuck down for.

But 1/10th of 1%? Or a half of percent? 1%? Give me a fucking break. The hysterical reaction to this virus is so fucking pathetic. Nut the fuck up, Geesus. Our ancestors went through cholera, small pox, and all kinds of terrible shit that often killed 25% to 50% or more of the population. We have a fucking 1% or less deathrate with the China virus, and all these people lose their fucking minds.

While demanding absolute obedience and conformity to whatever the tyrants dictate.

Small business owners like one of the guys that owns Mac's Public House in Staten Island is being oppressed bythe fucking goons of De Blasio and Cuomo in New York. For opening his fucking bar and restaurant. Meanwhile, hundreds, thousands of people can go to fucking BLM riots, as well as Walmart and Costco every fucking day, and no problems with that!

But your independent, small businesses? Oh, no, you need to shut the fuck down, and go bankrupt. If you try and open up to survive, well, we will just charge you and fuck you with the boot of tyranny.

And some of these goddamned jello-filled fucking morons think this is America?

Geesus that Tree of Liberty needs to be watered good! I can think of many fine trees that should be well decorated for the holiday season! All in nice, neat rows down the street.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 08, 2020, 06:42:17 AM
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?
I'll leave that to the left. They've been calling us Nazis ever since Dubya.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on December 08, 2020, 08:55:23 AM
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 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 08, 2020, 09:17:48 AM
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?
I'll leave that to the left. They've been calling us Nazis ever since Dubya.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 08, 2020, 09:23:04 AM
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
shitstain, you ignorant bastard...

Oh, it looks like we can agree on some things after all. Carry on then. ;)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 08, 2020, 09:26:17 AM
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?
I'll leave that to the left. They've been calling us Nazis ever since Dubya.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 08, 2020, 09:37:03 AM
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 ignore the inevitable destruction of lives and livelihoods that Covid restrictions bring. The UN has concerns about relief efforts being impacted by the lockdowns.

https://unglobalcompact.org/take-action/20th-anniversary-campaign/covid-related%20hunger-could-kill-more-people-than-the-virus
https://www.wfp.org/news/wfp-chief-warns-grave-dangers-economic-impact-coronavirus-millions-are-pushed-further-hunger

And, as you point out, the restrictions are often arbitrary and nonsensical.



How about all the governors and politicans telling people to stay at home while travelling and attending large gatherings themselves? Getting their paychecks while people are being fired and laid off. Are these supposed to be our role models in how to act?

We as a society are going to have to make those cold calculations, whether you're comfortable with them or not.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on December 08, 2020, 10:03:42 AM
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

  My children are 10 and 13.  This lockdown and school from home has hurt them.  It has hurt a whole lot of kids.  I also have parents in their late 60's (wife's are 70's).  Guess who I see rolling around the town and doing as they please more in our family?  The people in their late 60's and 70's.  Two have already had COVID and beaten it (both in their 70's with health issues).  Making a decision is not so cold and calculated as you make it out to be.  I also feel asking older people what they think.  My wife's father for instance (he had it) though he masks and takes some precaution, also does not care to stay locked up at his house.  He said to her, he does not know how long he has left to live, no one does, but people in their 70' rather spend what time they have left as they choose (seeing relatives, still traveling, etc) than spend the last few years they have in the house.  So I think your terms as to who you regard acting as a sociopath are over reaching.  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. 

    There can be concessions for those who are vulnerable to the infection, regarding unemployment, programs to ease isolation, etc, and still have the rest of the nation function fairly.  Because now, policies that have grown Amazon and Walmart exponentially, while destroying small businesses seem either engineered, or just more proof politicians are empty suits and heads who know how to win popularity contests.  In the end, liberty is the ability make decisions for yourself and your family.  It is also the ability to screw up.  The whole line of argument that people with different goals and life choices are just sociopaths ends poorly, and we can decide LOTS of things are dangerous/bad for society that need to go.  From gun ownership to being able to drink those sodas, that slippery slope will get steep very fast.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 08, 2020, 10:10:44 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on December 08, 2020, 10:20:36 AM
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?
I'll leave that to the left. They've been calling us Nazis ever since Dubya.
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.

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"?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RandyB on December 08, 2020, 10:50:48 AM
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?
I'll leave that to the left. They've been calling us Nazis ever since Dubya.
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.

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"?

This is no accident. It is by design.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on December 08, 2020, 06:21:14 PM
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.

I am not completely unsympathetic to business owners. Only to those who tried to follow the rules the rest not all. Did they think that magical clicking their ruby red shoes together and pack the bars and restaurants and other similar places that they would be doing the favors in trying to keep the virus under control. in my neck of the woods the figure are very high. Some business owners did nothing to help reduce that. Short term thinking vs long term now they have to live with it.

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.

Covid-19 sucks yet doing nothing is not going to make it go away. In any case I don't expect the posters here to change their minds nor will they change mind .
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 08, 2020, 06:45:44 PM
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.

And for kids, young adults, and most of the working age population, covid-19 is far less dangerous than the seasonal flu. That means it's just another background risk in the panoply of background risks we deal with every day. We shouldn't be shutting down businesses, because throwing sand in the gears of the economic engine kills people. And we damn hell sure shouldn't be shutting down schools, because if we've learned anything from this grand experiment in expanding governmental powers, it's that remote learning simply doesn't work. We're failing an entire generation of kids.

The people who are at high risk are easy to identify -- the elderly, specifically those above 60 or 65, and people with various cardiovasculatory and respiratory risk factors. But the correct way to deal with a vulnerable population isn't to lock down the entire world. It's to protect the vulnerable population. Something public officials generally seem to have no interest in doing.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 08, 2020, 08:42:18 PM
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.

Just wanted to say congratulations on the up coming wedding!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on December 08, 2020, 11:36:20 PM
The COVID-19 strawman BURNED today: https://www.startribune.com/johnson-touts-alternative-covid-19-treatments-at-hearing/573337141/
It is amazing, because I watched this. The pleading by this one doctor, with tears in his eyes, begging Congress to hurry the FDA on older medicines to SAVE LIVES just BURNED THIS MOTHERF#CKING PSYOP DOWN!

It won't matter though. Big Pharma wants MOAR DETHS!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: The Spaniard on December 09, 2020, 08:04:42 AM
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.


Endangering how?  Not living their lives in fear, and ignoring bogus mask mandates?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on December 09, 2020, 08:30:48 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on December 09, 2020, 08:31:37 AM
People below 60 y/o have a survival rate of more than 99.9% and even old people have over a 90% survival rate. 80% of people who have it are asymptomatic. There's almost ZERO endangerment of other people for having the audacity of simply living your life rather than cover in fear indefinitely over the sniffles. You have a higher chance of running over someone with your car than passing over this flu to someone else and ultimately killing them with it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on December 09, 2020, 08:39:13 AM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 09, 2020, 09:06:43 AM
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.

It's as if people should make their own decisions based on their own circumstances. There's a notion.

If you're afraid of Covid, then do what you think is correct to protect yourself. But you can't herd the cats that are the general public.
Masks help and social distancing helps, but viruses never sleep, never get bored, never slack off. They just float around until they get in a cell and start making copies of themselves. The most sucessful ones make lots of copies of themselves. They're like little Terminators.

And yes, there is a lot of pushback because the virus has been politicized by both parties. Some feel the risk assesments have been overblown in order to push policies that are flawed and sometimes downright nonsensical and hypocritical.
Meanwhile, somebody has got to make the masks and gloves and hamburgers and push papers and do inventories. I was all for "two weeks to slow the spread", but that turned into six goddamn months, and the rent needs to get paid. We can't live on printed money and no one working forever.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on December 09, 2020, 09:17:43 AM
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.

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.
  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. 

    My point, is the restrictions have done little to slow anything because they are largely for thee and not me.  If the politicians asking for these restrictions shut EVERYTHING down for 2 weeks there may have been a positive effect.  But if a governor calls for harsh restrictions on restaurants, then goes out to a huge dinner party eating and drinking all night in a crowd at a politically connected restaurant that is seemingly allowed to operate as they wish... Well it starts to seem the good governor and those like him is the actual sociopath and the rest of the population takes notice and decides if he can do as he wishes, why can't everyone?  I have gone along with these bullshit rules.  I vent my concerns over them, but I also have reached my limit.  I had a business deleted by the restrictions and took my ass back to school to #learntocode.  I am very resilient and adaptable, and it has been a mental strain to adapt to this.  I am pretty sure there plenty of business owners who are looking to suck start a shotgun or already have in light of how things are looking.  I get the perspective of people who can work from home, get paid to keep working because they are "ESSENTIAL" (most poorly described word in modern history) as "what is the big deal".  I also very clearly understand the other point of view.  The bar owner is operating on an edge in the good times.  You MUST have crowds a few days a week in any restaurant or bar to stay afloat, much less profit.   Had we not saved money over the years and my wife not have the job she has, I would be righteously fucked right now.   
    As for violence, well I think right leaning people have no ability to 'cancel' people for the most part.  But if leftist groups or organizations 'cancel' someone over a point of view, is that not essentially killing them?  It is just a means to kill someone passive aggressively, where the high minded can feel good about "not using violence".  Well when you use a tool the other side does not have, you may eventually convince them to use a tool they do have.  Personally I have been around violence my entire life (my father was shot when I was in the 1st grade, a guy he worked with was murdered when I was in the third grade, I have been in numerous scuffles several that were knock down drag out, etc) and I understand when we get into a violent situation, EVERYONE gets hurt.  So I am for avoiding it at every opportunity.  I also know what can push to the point that people like me decide the opportunity is lost and the only language we can communicate in now is bullets, blades and blood.   I used to laugh at the idea, and there have always been way fringe people on the internet since forums and discussions were a thing.  But now a days I see ideas that were very fringe 25 years ago on the internet being pushed on mainstream television.  The ideas are still fringe to the majority of the population, but normalization and pushing to tolerate or accept an idea starts this way, with constant droning propaganda.  So I guess expect violence.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 09, 2020, 09:58:33 AM

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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 09, 2020, 03:02:47 PM
Sureshot, are you sure that you want to join the side that calls you shitstain?

I mean, it is up to you and on the other hand we are cold uncaring social retarded gamers so what do I know.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 09, 2020, 04:37:17 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 09, 2020, 05:01:24 PM
No, too dangerous.

Better to stay home and wait for death in safety.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 09, 2020, 05:36:37 PM
I was just wondering when the party of science is going to recommend we start the fat shaming?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 09, 2020, 05:43:45 PM
I was just wondering when the party of science is going to recommend we start the fat shaming?

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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on December 09, 2020, 06:26:25 PM
I was just wondering when the party of science is going to recommend we start the fat shaming?

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 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.

  I do not think being fat was a huge issue in middle ages settings.  That is a first world malady.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 09, 2020, 06:28:23 PM
I was just wondering when the party of science is going to recommend we start the fat shaming?

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 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.

  I do not think being fat was a huge issue in middle ages settings.  That is a first world malady.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 09, 2020, 06:40:29 PM
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.

Bring back the random disease and infestation table, then you will not have to worry about your fat.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on December 09, 2020, 06:48:53 PM
I was just wondering when the party of science is going to recommend we start the fat shaming?

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 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.

  I do not think being fat was a huge issue in middle ages settings.  That is a first world malady.
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.
You realize your retort eliminates tooth decay right?  T
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 09, 2020, 07:06:24 PM
I was just wondering when the party of science is going to recommend we start the fat shaming?

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 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.

  I do not think being fat was a huge issue in middle ages settings.  That is a first world malady.
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.
You realize your retort eliminates tooth decay right?  T
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on December 09, 2020, 11:49:24 PM
I wonder how many of you here are going to go out this Christmas and LARP yourselves into killing the dreaded...
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on December 10, 2020, 02:11:54 AM
I wonder how many of you here are going to go out this Christmas and LARP yourselves into killing the dreaded...
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!
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 10, 2020, 08:07:33 AM
I wonder how many of you here are going to go out this Christmas and LARP yourselves into killing the dreaded...
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'll just quote Doc Holliday in Tombstone: "I'm your huckleberry."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on December 10, 2020, 08:55:51 AM
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.

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.

HappyDaze I ca't say we will agree on everything just call me whatever you want.

Shasarak I should not have made a blanket statement about the posters on this site yet many come off as being socially retarded gamers with mental health issues. If it's not caring about anyone else but themselves it's wanting to murder, shot or hang their ideological opponents. Again it's not a very welcoming environment imo and might just be their Internet persona vs the real thing. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 10, 2020, 09:05:21 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 10, 2020, 10:22:14 AM
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.

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.
Your entire post is one big wall of ignorance and fear.

It's not about restaurant owners. They're estimating that one third of all businesses of any kind have closed their doors in NJ, and will never reopen. That's not just a few delis or coffee houses, or a few people wanting to eat out, that's literally one in three shops on main street. For the workers, it's their jobs, maybe their careers. For the the owners, it's their livelihoods. And more than that, it's their lives. Because when you put people out of work, when you deplete their life savings, when you destroy their hopes and dreams, then you kill them. Suicide and domestic abuse have gotten a lot of attention, but that's only the tip of the iceberg. Reduced lifetime incomes means lowered health outcomes, and poorer educational opportunities for their children, so it becomes generational. They talk a lot about the lives lost in hospital beds, but ignore the far greater number of lives that will be lost because of the shutdowns. Just because those losses are harder to see doesn't mean they don't matter.

It's not about wearing a mask. All the evidence suggests that masks have little or no effect, and even if they did, compliance rates are high across the US and Europe. If masks had a significant effect overall, and only 10% of people wore a mask, there would be a lot of room for improvement. But since compliance rates are 85% or higher, bumping that to 90% or 95% would only be a minor incremental improvement.

And bars and restaurants aren't the hot spots where the virus is spreading, anyway. Nor is it groceries and other large box stores, or schools. It seems to mostly be private social gatherings.

You could make a point about social distancing, or more properly, physical distancing. Compliance rates seem to have dropped. Which is actually another argument against masks, because a lot of people seem to have become convinced that wearing a mask makes them immune, so they no longer bother keeping their distance.

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.

It is about privilege. Your privilege. It's the highly educated, highly technological, white collar workers who can isolate themselves at home. They have jobs that can be done remotely, large homes with plenty of space, the income to convert rooms into workspaces, to stockpile supplies, and the other resources to pull it off. That's not the case with the working classes, or the poor, who have to work because they live paycheck to paycheck, and whose work requires being around other people. It's even worse around the world, where extreme poverty is skyrocketing and people are starving.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on December 10, 2020, 10:49:41 AM
Well said Pat.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 10, 2020, 12:09:22 PM
Indeed. Pat and I haven't gotten along much here, but this is absolutely on target.

People were told 'it'll only be for a short time' and 'just to flatten the curve'. Two weeks turned into three turned into a month turned into three months turned into... well, we're now in fucking December. And the refrain is 'well, not enough people are complying so we have to get tougher!'.

Which is disturbingly similar to a common refrain for government programs. 'Well, this didn't work, so we need to pour MORE money into it!'.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 10, 2020, 01:06:12 PM
It is about privilege. Your privilege.
These words always start conversations off on the right track.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 10, 2020, 03:39:00 PM
It is about privilege. Your privilege.
These words always start conversations off on the right track.

Not always. I was priviliged to have a work from home job when the lockdowns hit. I worked from home for four months while other less fourtunate people were laid off or fired. That's a direct and tangible privilige, not some etheral privilige-ness that sometimes gets bandied around on other topics.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 10, 2020, 05:52:47 PM
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.

Here you're saying the virus will spread no matter what, and thus arguing against wearing masks, contact tracing, and lockdowns. 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.

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.

[img width="700"]http://darkshire.net/jhkim/opinions/covid/covid-death-rate-vs-gdp-growth.png[/img]

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/q2-gdp-growth-vs-confirmed-deaths-due-to-covid-19-per-million-people?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute&minPopulationFilter=1000000&country=&region=World


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.

So you'll believe that not talking prevents the spread of droplets makes a huge difference - but masks make no difference in spread of droplets? Mask-wearing is included of the cultural differences you're talking about - along with others like not shaking hands and talking less in crowds. The theory of other disease spreads has no evidence right now, and there's no explanation for why it would be restricted to Asia when other coronaviruses have spread around elsewhere.

I agree that we don't have absolute proof about why some countries are doing better than others -- because it's a new virus, and it's not something we can ethically experiment with much. But it seems to me that we should be paying close attention to both the culture and the government measures in countries that have been successful.


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.

This is mixing up cause and effect. What we see is that high rates of infection and death cause *both* (a) lockdowns; and (b) economic harm. Countries that have successfully taken other measures to deal with the virus don't have to lockdown. Conversely, countries with high death rates turn to lockdowns as a last-ditch effort. It's not an independent variable.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on December 10, 2020, 06:38:54 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 10, 2020, 07:30:50 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 10, 2020, 07:48:00 PM
You are more likely to die by Drunk Walking then you are by Drunk Driving so why no laws against Drunk Walking?

https://freakonomics.com/2011/12/28/the-perils-of-drunk-walking/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on December 10, 2020, 07:58:18 PM

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.

So you do oppose seat belt laws because the person refusing is only endangering themselves?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 10, 2020, 08:20:05 PM
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.

I'm saying that masks don't have a significant effect. There was a lack of studies at the start of the pandemic, but the theory that masks block airflow and large droplets seemed sound (sneeze and the tissue gets wet), and early studies like the hamster one seemed to indicate masks had some effect. But with newer evidence, that seems to be wrong. The disease is highly aerosolized, and thus masks have little effect. This is backed up by literally dozens of population studies, showing no significant correlation between mask mandates and infection rates.

I'm saying in countries where there is widespread community transmission, contract tracing is a joke. That's because tracing a single case requires a lot of work. You have trace back all their contacts, to figure out where they caught the disease, then reach out to everyone who had significant contact with them during the period when they were potentially infectious. Then you have to monitor everyone up and down the transmission chain, and react the same way to any new case that crops up. This is like cutting off the head of a hydra, only to have two new heads grow back in. It can be done, but it has to be killed quickly, or you end up with more heads than you can handle. And once you've passed that point, i.e. once you've move beyond a small handful of cases with readily attributable origins, like a cruise ship, or a superspreader event, or a few cases trickling in over the borders, it becomes impossible to kill the beast. This is not disputed; look at any of the literature. Once you have widespread community transmission, or cases you can't trace back to a known origin, contact tracing is pointless.

Not only that, but COVID-19 is uniquely difficult to trace. Diseases like ebola or tuberculosis are only contagious when the person is displaying a clear set of symptoms. But with sars2, there appears to be presymptomatic and asymptomatic transmission. This is further complicated by an unusually lengthy incubation period, and people who never develop symptoms at all. Not to mention the high false positive rates in the early tests, or how it can be easily dismissed as some other minor case of the sniffles because the symptoms almost completely overlap with the symptoms of seasonal diseases that people get every year, like the common cold or the flu. As a result, the chain of contacts that need to be traced is greatly extended, and it's much harder to identify if someone has the disease. The recent evidence that COVID-19 was widespread in the US and Italy in December of last year, without anyone knowing, shows how invisible webs of infection can spread without even being noticed.

On the economic lockdowns, remember 15 days to slow the spread? It's been 7 or 8 months. Yet there seem to be little or no correlation between economic lockdowns, and lower transmission rates. You can make an argument that certain measures, like shutting down large gatherings such as concerts provides a real benefit, but closing all non-essential businesses? No, that doesn't seem to help. And it's caused horrendous damage, far beyond any conceivable upside. And the people who are most affected aren't the rich. Jeff Bezos had a spectacular year, and now the stock market is booming again. Big businesses are growing, and the 1% are doing great. But family businesses are vanishing at appalling rates, working people are suffering, and around the world the number of people being pushed into extreme poverty is throwing out all the progress we've made in the last 50 years.

So I'm saying that the evidence shows that masks don't seem to have any significant effect, that once we've reached widespread community transmission contract tracing becomes pointless even with diseases that are less stealthy than sars2, and that the economic lockdowns also seem to have little effect on the disease while having devastating effects on people, particularly the most vulnerable. The conclusion, not the starting point, is that we don't have any way to stop the spread of the virus.

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.

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.
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.

Indonesia is similar, but there might be a different cause. While temperature doesn't seem correlated with the infection rate, high humidity does seem to correlate very strongly with lower transmission rates. And much of SE Asia tends to be very wet.

But even that doesn't explain places like Africa. The reporting is poor from that continent, so they could be missing cases. But even after trying to compensate, the infection rate seems ridiculously low. Maybe two orders of magnitude lower than in the West. Why? No idea. It's not masks or economic shutdowns, though.

"Fighting off" doesn't seem correlated to anything. The US states and EU nations that took extreme measures often suffered the worst, and infection rates seem to go up and down, regardless of the lockdowns.

The countries that are doing well, economically, are those that crippled their own economies the least. The US, for instance, is doing far better than Spain. NJ is doing worse than Florida.

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.

But there is value in not overwhelming the hospitals. We know masks are mostly ineffective, and economic lockdowns are devastating. But those aren't the only measures that can be taken. Hygiene remains important, and we should be doing more than just telling people to wash their hands and clean commonly used surfaces. Physical distancing (not social) may also help. We should be building on these, and talking about how the disease spreads. There's nothing magical about 6 ft or 2 m; pretending it's a talisman that wards of evil and not an off-the-cuff guideline is bad.

Ventilation also hasn't been discussed enough. With aerosolization, it's all about airflow. Open windows. Huge open areas are much safer than tightly packed, enclosed areas. Talk about viral loads. The risk of severe symptoms and death rises dramatically, if you get a heavy dose, because your system can be overwhelmed before your natural defenses kick in. That's why some hospital workers who caught the disease had bad results, because they were in an environment where the virus was everywhere. But the same applies at home; if your husband catches the disease, and you keep sleeping in the same bed with him, you're a lot more likely to end up on a ventilator. Keep to separate rooms, and separate bathrooms if possible. Talk about bubbles. Figure out ways to physically isolate the elderly, without socially isolating them. Informal measures, like appeals to stay home, can also help.

Targeted restrictions in specific communities might also make sense. That's because hospitals don't serve the nation, or a state; they serve specific communities. The national news screaming that the "hospital system is overwhelmed" and that we need to shut down everything doesn't help, because many hospitals will be empty. In fact, it hurts. We should all know by now that hospitals were furloughing and laying off workers, when the first wave hit, because they weren't in NYC or one of the other hard hit areas. Imposing curfews in specific communities might even make sense, for short periods. But not indefinite state or national lockdowns of all non-essential businesses.

Not all these are equal. We know most spread occurs at contained social gatherings. I.e. places where there's little ventilation, and people are in close quarters for extended periods of time doing things like talking to each other. It's much less likely outdoors, when you're in brief contact, or where people aren't engaging each other. There's almost no chance you'll catch it from a surface.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on December 10, 2020, 08:36:37 PM
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.

Fire code laws aren't controversial - you didn't have a lot of people saying they would rather take their chances.
Drug laws weren't controversial - the vast majority of people wanted them. 
Speeding laws were deemed an overreach and 55 was repealed - no one wanted 55 beyond a fringe of Karens.  In that way its similar. (edit - also note that the pro-55 fear-mongering statisticians warnings of carnage on US highways didn't happen)
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.  But instead that was considered to impinge on the freedoms of those wishing to indulge.  The desire to keep risky forms of non-reproductive sex free of any and all stigma has gone so far as to make it so that it is not a crime to fail to inform a potential partner you're HIV-positive.  And even though it's a blood-borne disease, we decided we didn't want to refuse them the freedom to donate blood.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on December 10, 2020, 11:21:25 PM
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.

https://twitter.com/JuliaLMarcus
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/05/quarantine-fatigue-real-and-shaming-people-wont-help/611482/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 11, 2020, 01:25:15 AM
Looks like COVID-19 cases are spiking in many of the Asian countries that are considered success stories, including Hong Kong, Vietnam, South Korea, Malaysia, and Japan. It's still far less than the rates in the West, but they're running into shortages -- for instance, South Korea has mobilized the military and is using shipping containers to deal with a shortage of hospital beds. Responses range from suspending inbound air travel, to limits on movie theaters and restaurants, gym and karaoke bar closures, and so on. The cause is ascribed to pandemic fatigue, family gatherings, and asymptomatic transmission by younger people.

Interesting quote from the head of the Korean Society of Epidemiology, Kim Dong-hyun: "This time even the contract tracing capacity is reaching its limits because infections are appearing at so many different locations at once".
https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-19-surge-hits-parts-of-asia-seen-as-pandemic-success-stories-11607523625
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on December 11, 2020, 11:11:00 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 11, 2020, 02:07:56 PM
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 was/is the gay disease. That earns them big oppression points to counter the concerns about public health hazards.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on December 11, 2020, 02:52:00 PM
  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.

Hardly surprising from jhkim...time and time again he has shown his tendency toward bigotry.

How often has he claimed it is perfectly ok to discriminate against someone if they are not a legally protected class?

I can see an argument for 'discrimination is ok by reason of the freedom of association' or the other end where 'it is wrong to discriminate against anyone'

...but how does he defend 'it is acceptable to discriminate against someone when they don't have some special status under the law.'

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.  He keeps aligning himself with people who feel a two-tier justice system is perfectly acceptable.

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??
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 11, 2020, 04:18:20 PM
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.

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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on December 11, 2020, 05:23:36 PM
---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 Pat.  At worst the data was intentionally misused for political reasons...
Mistakes are one thing, intentional misuse is an entirely different kettle of fish...

Take the HCQ stuff...state Governor's were threatening doctors and pharmacies if they gave it to people because Trump said it had possibilities in a press conference.

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.  :) )

All of the 'quick' studies that were touted as showing it as bad, did not address use in recommended quantities in the early stages as a part of a 'cocktail' which was the anecdotal evidence.  They all used testing to arrive at their planned 'doesn't work' conclusion until they were forced to retract it because they couldn't lie about the numbers anymore.

Once you manipulate or hide data or deny someone a possible medical treatment for political reasons, you are no longer performing either science or medicine.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 11, 2020, 05:52:11 PM
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...
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 11, 2020, 06:03:08 PM
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.

Thanks, Pat, about honesty. I'm already spending more time on this forum than I really should, and most of my attention has been on the election thread. I'll get back to the covid stuff maybe in a few days.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on December 11, 2020, 07:13:01 PM
[
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.  :) )
In the show, it came from WUHAN CHINA! Am I right? What did I win??
You see, when it comes to those in the upper echelons, they TELL YOU what they are going to do and by people doing NOTHING to stop them, they accept that apathy as a form of CONSENT. Then you have their soldiers out there, when confronted with the truth, they then ATTACK the messenger and call the message A CONSPIRACY THEORY. When, in fact, there is a conspiracy happening all around!

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 11, 2020, 08:13:59 PM
So this is what we have come too:

(https://cnet2.cbsistatic.com/img/U7dcd17GvX2Q3rT7VT-Kq4eZK8s=/1200x675/2020/12/10/659b35c5-92db-4ba1-8741-9db428c3153c/days.jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on December 11, 2020, 08:22:26 PM
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...
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.

It was political as soon as the WHO helped China suppress information and everybody attacked Trump for shutting down travel from Wuhan.

And the scientists became complicit as soon as they did not come forward to refute the political narrative...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Larsdangly on December 12, 2020, 10:44:33 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Catulle on December 12, 2020, 03:09:52 PM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on December 12, 2020, 04:45:35 PM
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.

You'll note that all I said was 'refuse to refute the political narrative'.  Saying that you don't have enough information yet is acceptable.  Too bad they chose not to do that.

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...

I wouldn't know what the experts on Twitter say since I don't have an account.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on December 12, 2020, 05:11:23 PM
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...

What about this expert on Twitter?

https://twitter.com/robinmonotti/status/1336923426259349504?s=20
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on December 12, 2020, 09:23:20 PM
An important message about Bravery in the face of a pandemic.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on December 13, 2020, 01:37:58 AM
So this is what we have come too:
--snipp--
Here's a much more interesting one:
(https://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/DeadliestPandemics-Infographic-87.jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 17, 2020, 06:46:07 PM
Well, here in Los Angeles, we're out of ICU beds. We have 2 people per hour dying of Covid-19 in my county right now, on average.  Daily deaths from COVID-19 in the county have spiked up 267% since Nov. 9.  4,656 COVID-19 patients currently admitted to the hospital. It's at least the second day in a row that number has risen by about 200. About 21% of those patients, or approximately 978, are being treated in intensive-care units. Hospitals now are averaging about 600 coronavirus admissions per day, up from around 500 last week.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on December 17, 2020, 06:57:57 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on December 17, 2020, 07:21:19 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 18, 2020, 02:13:49 PM
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.html
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.”

Yes, this is a quote from an "expert" and not a direct statement 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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on December 18, 2020, 03:04:07 PM
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.html
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.”

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.

This is my surprised face.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 18, 2020, 03:33:17 PM
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.

I signed and mailed in the recall form.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 18, 2020, 03:41:06 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 18, 2020, 04:36:07 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 18, 2020, 04:44:10 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on December 18, 2020, 04:54:27 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 18, 2020, 06:45:25 PM
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 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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 18, 2020, 06:46:44 PM
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.
Like I said folks, fools here be in denial, like the whiny bitch VisionStorm here shows.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 18, 2020, 06:52:14 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 18, 2020, 06:54:23 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 18, 2020, 06:57:39 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 18, 2020, 07:34:00 PM
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 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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on December 18, 2020, 07:34:21 PM
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?

The real question is, how have the lockdowns resulted in less usage of ICU beds? Cuz it's been 9 fucking months already, and the only result I've seen is the destruction of the middle class and the economy, while massive corporations like Walmart, Costco and Amazon make record profits.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 18, 2020, 07:39:09 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 18, 2020, 08:17:22 PM
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 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.

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:
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/)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 18, 2020, 08:39:18 PM
So your answer is a non-answer. Moving to Texas would probably not be all that helpful in any event:

From your link:

Quote
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.

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.

Quote
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/)

(https://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/5eb71c4f250000dc15eb129e.jpeg?ops=1200_630)


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 18, 2020, 09:22:08 PM
So your answer is a non-answer. Moving to Texas would probably not be all that helpful in any event:

From your link:

Quote
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.

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.

Quote
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/)

(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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 18, 2020, 10:23:47 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 18, 2020, 11:16:20 PM
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.

I think trying to read safety based on news headlines is not very accurate. Overall, Texas has been doing about average as far as covid deaths among U.S. states: 25,300 deaths out of a population of 29 million - or a death rate of 92 out of 100K. California has had fewer covid deaths: 22,400 -- and it has a much higher population of 39 million. So that's a much lower death rate of 59 out of 100K, one of the better states to be in.

That said, California is experiencing a higher rate right over the last week. So the overall comparison could change with time, but long-term track record is where the rubber meets the road.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on December 18, 2020, 11:30:57 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 18, 2020, 11:45:55 PM
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.

From what I read, the rates among homeless people appear to be lower than once feared.

https://apnews.com/article/ap-top-news-san-francisco-understanding-the-outbreak-health-public-health-595410c64aff65fd0e053e9657e7f928

At a guess, this might be because homeless people have less extended social circles. Also, they may be spending less time indoors with multiple people.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 19, 2020, 12:05:57 AM
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.
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.

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. Lockdowns do probably have an effect, but it doesn't seem to the driving factor. Humidity, cultural mores, genetics, cross-immunity, and so on all may be much more important. And lockdowns also have numerous negative effects. People lose jobs, lose insurance, have to move in with relatives, and so on. The supply chain breaks, impacting essential supplies for everything from individuals to labs. Education suffers, domestic abuse increases, suicides rise. And people get tired of not being able to go out and being cut off from human contact, start ignoring the guidelines, and any benefit from the lockdowns starts to be lost. Or worse, inverts, because they start slacking on the other precautions, like physical distancing or hygiene.

Lockdowns are political theater, to make it look like the politicians are doing something so they can claim credit for any eventual downturn. That's why there are highly destructive blanket lockdowns instead of targeted ones, or targeted ones that completely miss the target. Look at NYC, where Cuomo is proposing closing down restaurants again. Which will kill them, at least the ones that haven't been killed off already. And why? Cuomo's own contract tracers say that restaurants are responsible for 1.4% of the spread. It ignores that 74% of the cases have been traced back to social gatherings in homes.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 19, 2020, 12:11:31 AM
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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on December 19, 2020, 12:25:58 AM
There are a couple of issues with lockdowns and their effectiveness.

The first is that lockdowns restrict large parts of the population, but not all of it. You still need your healthcare workers, people producing and transporting food, people making the electricity and water go, rubbish disposal and so on. About 20% of adults will keep moving around and being in some contact, and those people tend to contact a lot of other people. A healthcare worker or supermarket staff sees more people in a day than does an accountant, for example. So those 20% of people make up much more than 20% of the interactions - probably 50%.

The second is that those 20% who keep moving around also tend to be the more vulnerable ones. Apart from the doctors and nurses, those essential workers are more likely to be working class, more likely to be obese, and more likely to live in poor housing with large families. So they get infected and then infect their large families.

A corollary to these two points is that essential workers know other essential workers. For example, here in Victoria the second wave was sparked by a single family in hotel quarantine. After a couple of weeks locked inside a hotel room, their kid went mental and smeared his shit on the walls, the hotel night manager came along to clean it up and got unknowingly infected, went and had lunch with 7 security guards in the lunchroom and infected 5 of them, one of them went home and infected their housemate who worked in aged care, who then went and infected other aged care staff and residents.

Security guards tend not to share homes with doctors and accountants and lawyers, they share homes with other working class people. So you have one group of people who move around a lot and encounter a lot of other people, who live and socialise with other people who move around a lot and encounter a lot of other people. And those people are mostly working part-time casually - they don't want to take time off work, they still have to pay rent and buy food. So the virus spreads among minimum wage workers really, really well.

Thus, lockdowns don't suppress the infection as much as you might expect. If the lockdown is strict and long enough, it will actually work, as we've demonstrated here in Victoria. Though obviously the lockdown has other effects, many of them bad, and so some of us might not think they're worth it - but putting the entire state under house arrest can and will eventually bring down infection numbers greatly, if not reduce it to zero.

Of course, this supposes that you bring no fresh sources of infection into that state or country. This is one of the reasons island nations have been able to control things - Australia, NZ, Taiwan, Japan and South Korea (RoK's sole land border with DPRK is covered by minefields, drones and armed guards). But countries with large land borders like the US and EU have found it much more difficult, especially when some neighbours had strict rules and some didn't. It's a bit pointless (for example) the Czech Republic locking down strictly if they still have free travel from Slovakia, and Slovakia doesn't lock down at all.

As we have had to explain to people here in Victoria, there is not really any question that putting an entire state or country under house arrest will eventually drop infection numbers, and thus deaths. The question is whether it's worth it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 19, 2020, 12:43:51 AM
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.


No really, it was not. A spike was and is predicted. By definition, a spike then falls. You can have another after that of course. But, it was not modeled or predicted to have a spike and then another before the last one really fell. That did not happen with the Spanish flu either, and it's not happening in most places in the World right now. It's not completely unique to Los Angeles, but it's still pretty rare.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 19, 2020, 12:46:36 AM
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.

The best theory I have seen for this is that vitamin D appears to play a meaningful role in resisting the worst impacts of the disease.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 19, 2020, 12:52:14 AM
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.


Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 19, 2020, 07:59:45 AM
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.
Let's look at the data:
http://publichealth.lacounty.gov/media/Coronavirus/data/index.htm#

There's a double spike, but only in the number of tests. Deaths and hospitalizations have just been sloping up. Even if there were a double spike, so what? We expect regional variation, and the idea that a surge would die down a bit and then spring back up isn't that novel. There are tons of possible reasons.

Quote
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.
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. If it's occurring mostly in private gatherings, like it appears to be doing in NYC, then maybe put a limit on that. Though that's tricky, because restrictions on private gatherings can't be justified under the commerce clause, and are protected under the 1st amendment, so it might not pass constitutional muster. And it's almost impossible to enforce anyway. What they really should have done is build up trust in public in health by being honest and upfront, instead of pissing it away by politicizing everything, and then use that trust to talk to the public and persuade them to take measures that seem to work. Like limiting private gatherings, or other general techniques like improving ventilation, hygiene, or physical distancing.

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. Those cause immense damage, and mostly hurt the people who are most vulnerable. They also have a limited shelf life. People get tired of not having a life, and losing all social contact, and eventually start ignoring the rules. Thus, they need to targeted, and used sparingly. Note I never said that lockdowns should never be used; I simply agree with the WHO, that they should be a last resort, and need to be limited both in geographical scope and duration.

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 19, 2020, 12:51:51 PM
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.

Quote
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.

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."


Quote
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.

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!"

Quote
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.

It was. We did. It's not physical capacity, it's personnel.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 19, 2020, 01:44:20 PM
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.
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.

Quote
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.

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."
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.
https://nextstrain.org/ncov/global

We've had community spread from the start. Recent evidence suggests sars2 was widespread in the US in December 2019, but while that pushes back the date, we knew community transmission was happening in February (or thereabouts; don't remember the exact date). That's why I've been saying contact tracing is a joke. Because once you have community spread, which is defined as cases that can't be traced to back to a new arrival or a previously known outbreak, then there's no way to contain the disease, despite what the contact tracing proponents have been saying. Once a disease is spreading in invisible networks throughout the wider community, all you can hope for is suppression. The WHO agrees, because in a 2019 study they said contact tracing was "[n]ot recommended under any circumstances". (https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/329438/9789241516839-eng.pdf#page=9) However, while I'm highly critical of the idea that contact tracing will somehow stop the disease, it's still effective as a diagnostic tool, because it provides insight into how the disease is spreading. That's why you talk to the people who are doing the contact tracing, because they can tell you how it's spreading. That allows us to target remedies.

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?

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.
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.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on December 19, 2020, 11:22:26 PM
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.
Then, there are the big commercial banks and mega corporations who carry out their will, via their controlled CEOs, who all serve on each others’ interlocking Boards of Directorates. Below that, are all of their blackmailed politicians and military officers. And then, there are their Anointed Ones, who drop in to strategically throw money and publicity at their special projects, like Michael Bloomberg, George Soros and of course, Bill Gates.

As criminal and civil charges are starting to be filed against the WHO and as Governors are having their lockdown mandates overturned by their state supreme courts, perpetrators higher-up are beginning to backpedal on enforcing their scamdemic.

In a 180º turn from the WHO’s pronouncements last March, a few months past, the WHO’s COVID-19 special envoy David Nabarro announced, “We in the World Health Organization do not advocate lockdowns as a primary means of control of this virus.”
The CDC / FDA is admitting, “no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available.":
https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/making-sense-of-the-madness-globalist-revelations/

Interesting hypothesis, isn't it?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on December 20, 2020, 01:53:44 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 20, 2020, 04:14:35 PM
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 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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 20, 2020, 04:48:39 PM
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 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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 20, 2020, 05:32:24 PM
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"
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 20, 2020, 06:12:16 PM
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"
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 21, 2020, 08:58:33 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 21, 2020, 11:41:10 AM
If anyone's interested in the new variant that Mistwell mentioned:
https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4857

That's the British Medical Journal. It's just a briefing not a peer-reviewed article, but it's more authoritative than the popular press. Short version: Is it deadlier? No, doesn't seem to be. Is it more transmissible? It's correlated with areas with rapid spread, so probably. Has it been detected outside the UK? Not yet. How widespread? More than 1100 detected cases. Most are in SE England, but it's spread across the UK. Will this affect the efficacy of the vaccines? Probably not. What's the mutation? There are 17 mutations, the most significant of which is a change in one of the spike proteins, which could affect transmissibility.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 21, 2020, 12:00:07 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 21, 2020, 12:23:03 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 21, 2020, 02:12:20 PM
Here's all the social distancing you'll ever need.

https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2020/12/21/no-masks-no-social-distancing-how-come-saturday-night-live-continues-to-be-an-essential-business-in-nyc/

Meanwhile, NYC restaurants forced to sit diners out in the weather.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nyc-covid-outdoor-dining-requirements-restroom/

Fuck the lockdowns. More two faced lying bullshit.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 21, 2020, 02:15:04 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on December 21, 2020, 02:19:26 PM
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.

I can relate. I'm not as assiduous with the hand sanitizer as I used to be either. Now it helps that I live in a place where Covid has been kept under control, certainly compared to most everywhere else in North America, and yeah, when you get success and the threat recedes,  you get complacent.

WRT masks, at some level, like you, I wear one when and where I "have to." For the most part my work is either outdoors or from the home, and I can certainly imagine if I had to wear one hours on end, I'd be wanting to claw the thing off my face. But I don't have to do that, for me a mask is an occasional inconvenience. So for me it's not such an onerous burden. Yes I'm fortunate, but personally, I'm not at that level of fatigue.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 21, 2020, 02:30:10 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 21, 2020, 02:30:32 PM
In the "for thee, not me" category:
https://apnews.com/article/travel-pandemics-only-on-ap-delaware-thanksgiving-52810c22488fff7e6bb70746bdc9bc61

The Response Coordinator for the Coronavirus Task Force traveled across state borders to celebrate Thanksgiving with 3 (4) generations of her family, a clear violation of her own guidelines for the rest of us. And then lied about it, saying they were part of her immediate household, when they live in 2 (3) different houses.

Why aren't people fired and barred from ever working for the government again for things like this?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 21, 2020, 02:39:23 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 21, 2020, 02:43:22 PM
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.

Agreed. But what is the alternative?

I'll tell you what's stunning. Our socialist horrid Government out here in California and Los Angeles ISN'T locking things down, despite the horror the hospitals are reporting. Almost everything is still open, just at reduced capacity, and nobody is enforcing the reduced capacity.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on December 21, 2020, 02:44:48 PM
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.

I think its supposed to be the Rothschilds, but I'm not sure.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 21, 2020, 02:46:09 PM
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.

If you're talking other types of gloves, I'd agree. Continuous wear is worse than useless.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on December 21, 2020, 06:26:45 PM
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"

Are you just an idiot or what?

Generally a hospital wants to be at 80-85% capacity especially in ICU. This gives leeway for unexpected influx of patients outside of normal modelling such as a major fire or something like that. Flu season in the UK and other countries tends to push that as budgets are constrained.

This leads us to ask what a bed actually is. A bed isn't just somewhere for somebody to lie down. It's a place where the patient can be safe, comfortable and there is enough staff and equipment for it. This is very important in ICU where every bed needs a dedicated nurse who has the appropriate training. A hospital can contain more patients than beds but so can a warehouse. Can you see how having more patients than beds might be a problem though?

A hospital running at more than 100% capacity may have physical beds but it doesn't have what all those beds need so people can't be treated and they may die. In extreme circumstances it looks like what happened in Italy but plenty people can die without corridors full of people. There's then ongoing effects that trickle through because of lack of beds for therapy followed by a lack of social care.

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.

Is that enough?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 21, 2020, 06:45:28 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on December 21, 2020, 06:49:01 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 21, 2020, 09:09:16 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on December 21, 2020, 11:53:56 PM
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.
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!
You may have noticed I stated: I'll play THE DEVIL IN THE DETAILS
Meaning: Devil's Advocate crossed with the term 'The Devil's In The Details'
I do not believe it, however, I am inclined towards the improbable possibilities, meaning I RULE NOTHING OUT. Even the fringe has some interesting speculations and I was taking the article to it's obvious conclusions. IS there even a virus? Is there any other reason for the lockdowns? You of all people should be more sensitive to what is going on - comparing those being disagreed with to rats which need to be exterminated - than most. Therefore, currently, there is a great NEED for people to bring into conversation that which is forbidden by those in power who are repeating the same mistakes in history as before. Unless you plan on being the 21st century's new KAPO. Please read Primo Levi’s Survival in Auschwitz for more information regarding current trends.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on December 22, 2020, 04:44:38 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Catulle on December 22, 2020, 09:39:57 PM
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on December 22, 2020, 10:40:43 PM
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!

Also, all that money for PPP? Yep! It can be used to fix the DAMAGE CAUSED BY RIOTERS!
https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/ppp-loans-can-now-be-used-fix-riot-damagem-pay-defense-against-looters
Huh. Interesting info, at least to me...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Catulle on December 22, 2020, 11:05:15 PM
*transparent shilling*

*fap* *fap* *fap*

Is that the right degree of discourse?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on December 22, 2020, 11:05:48 PM
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).

Greetings!

Oh, geesus. The dreaded, "Hu White Supremes" now! *Laughing*

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 22, 2020, 11:27:21 PM
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.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Catulle on December 22, 2020, 11:54:29 PM
So sales tax isn't a tax... because..?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on December 23, 2020, 01:27:05 AM
So sales tax isn't a tax... because..?

local/state taxes

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.)

federal taxes and stimulus bill



To quote Capt. Braddock from Blue Thunder...

"You're supposed to be stupid, son. Don't abuse the privilege."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on December 23, 2020, 05:37:22 AM
Is that the right degree of discourse?

Apparently, it's all you're capable of achieving.

But keep trying.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on December 23, 2020, 05:40:46 AM
Do MASK MANDATES WORK?

Of course not...unless your goal was to break the will of a nation.

Then in that case, the mandates worked quite well.

There's certainly no such thing as the "land of the free / home of the brave" anymore.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on December 23, 2020, 05:45:43 AM
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).

Oh noes! The hu-white supremacists are running around unchecked!

"Unchecked"...wow. What a nice word for "censored".

Sorry kiddo, no censoring on theRPGsite. It's a free speech forum.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on December 23, 2020, 05:53:45 AM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: shuddemell on December 23, 2020, 12:29:21 PM
Something interesting beginning on the legal end of the COVID panic...

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/coronavirus-death-certificates-minnesota-inflated?fbclid=IwAR0U9C2VLyHncgdGhPa0ozOEi2-t8B_y4ZsmT3JtTRqdUoOj4fjAfnvcrtc

The directives MN doctors receieved, according to this article, pretty much shows exactly how the system was being exploited for political reasons. Doctors that did this should lose their licenses.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on December 23, 2020, 11:15:22 PM
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.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 24, 2020, 12:03:49 AM
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?

Calling this either a stimulus or a disaster relief bill is a joke. It's pork, with a minor bribe attached.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on December 24, 2020, 01:16:13 AM
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.)

Oh. It's the republican's fault. I should've guessed at that. Maybe Christian and Jews should stfu and let the CDC ISOLATE THEM INTO GHETTOS? As planned.
ATLANTA, GA – In a move that is sure to spark controversy and protest, the CDC released Proposition 23.4 yesterday which grants state governments the right to quarantine unvaccinated families.  According to the proposal, state governments will “have the right to erect closed communities” in order to isolate unvaccinated families from the public. CDC headquaters“We’re losing the battle on convincing people to get vaccines through science and facts.  The next best approach is to quarantine disease vectors,” said CDC spokesman Dr. Tina Krysinski.  “In this case the vectors are unvaccinated humans.”

The quarantine will only be enacted for people and families who have not been vaccinated due to bogus philosophical or religious reasons, as to not punish individuals who have true allergies or medical reasons not to receive vaccines. “Toxins,” autism, “I don’t want to,” and celebrity posts will not be legitimate reasons accepted by state governments. The plan calls for building enclosed communities with walls around living spaces with a one-mile safety buffer around the community.  Each community will have their own water supply and gluten-free food sources to ensure maximal containment.

“Proposition 23.4 addresses two immense problems,” said Krysinski.  “First, it will protect those humans who cannot get vaccines either due to a young age, immunodeficiency, or other real contraindication to vaccines.  Secondly, it will protect the innocent children of parents who chose not to vaccinate from acquiring disease since they will be in a closed environment.  Those poor kids… they have to deal with their crazy parents.  They don’t even stand a chance at being normal themselves in the future.”

“Proposition 23.4 could be the second greatest advance in medicine, behind vaccinations,” said Krysinski.  “This might be our last fighting chance to contain measles, pertussis, meningitis and a whole host of other diseases.” Anti-vaxxers can either chose to get vaccinated or move themselves and families to the quarantined areas.  According to pediatrician, Dr. Steven Willis, anti-vaxxers are best treated like toddlers.

“I have found that patients that are against vaccines are more manageable when presented with a choice,” said Willis.  “Just like toddlers, just offer them a choice and they will be more likely to take one instead of throwing a tantrum.  Don’t ask them if they want to be vaccinated, but rather just say, ‘Mr. Johnny, vaccine or quarantine, you pick.'”

With the recent measles outbreak, Texas and California are already pushing the proposal through state legislation and hope to have enough signatures by the start of next school year.  Huge land areas in the Angeles National Park are future spots for the hundreds of celebrities in L.A. who will need to be quarantined.

Wow. What a fucking piece of shit you are! Congrats! You've just become a fucking nazi!
https://gomerblog.com/2014/05/quarantine/
The Evidence:
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/disease/cdc-is-a-private-organization-not-government/
https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/healthcare/301432-the-cdc-is-being-being-influenced-by-corporate-and-political
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/07/hiring-liberals-policy-cdc-employees-made-8000-political-contributions-pacs-since-2015-5-republican-causes/
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2020/07/19/fec-reports-provide-insights-into-which-politicians-and-pacs-cdc-employees-donated-to-n2572728
https://www.forbes.com/sites/steveforbes/2020/03/14/cdc-and-covid-19-scandal-and-incompetence/?sh=731d66ed2e7a
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on December 24, 2020, 10:54:47 AM
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?

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:

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: Politifact
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
From http://www.crfb.org/blogs/whats-final-covid-relief-deal-2020 which has more detail of each category. They total it to $920 billion; I get 917, but there may be accumulated rounding errors.

Other tax cuts includes as the second largest item "Reinstate 100% Business Meals Deduction for 2021 and 2022", which is pretty stupid (encouraging people to take business lunches seems to aid the coronavirus, not the people who might be affected by it; I expect somebody rationalized it as keeping restaurant workers employed). But it's "only" $6 billion.

The transportation part is not clearly aimed at coronavirus relief, beyond payroll support for airline workers, but "state highway funding" is the closest it seems to have to aiding state governments which mostly can't run deficits and are suffering from decreasing revenue.

I'm not sure what the education portion includes; it could be state and local aid in a specific area, it could be mitigating the expenses of operating schools safely in a pandemic, it could be unrelated spending to get the necessary votes.

It's not surprising if a large bill contains various pork spending, but it doesn't appear to be that much given a 5,593 page bill with no time to read it. Put the blame on Republicans; Democrats passed a second relief package in the House in May and have been shut down in negotiations by Senate Republicans since.

That website also lists $560 billion in "offsets" (reductions in previous budget authority); it is unclear to me whether that amount was already going to add to the national debt or not, so your "calculation" may have had an incorrect numerator as well.

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".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 24, 2020, 12:46:31 PM
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?

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:
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.

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.

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: Politifact
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
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on December 24, 2020, 08:02:05 PM
I thought you are neutral Pat.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 24, 2020, 08:07:10 PM
I thought you are neutral Pat.
Believing that everyone here is an idiot is the neutral position.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on December 25, 2020, 03:22:45 PM
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?

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:
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.

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.

Quote
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.

Ask for clarification. If you really don't want to respond, don't; but if you do, you should address what is said and not make stuff up or deflect. If you want to talk about something else, don't make it a reply.

Quote
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.

It's a common right-wing tactic to create debt unequally with tax breaks to the wealthy and then pretend the debt thus created applies equally to everyone.

Quote
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.

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.

Quote
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: Politifact
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
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.

But it is intensely dishonest (in a typically right-wing way) to pretend that foreign aid and other spending in the omnibus spending bill are for coronavirus relief. Every aspect of coronavirus relief could have been considered separately and more carefully if Republicans had responded to the coronavirus relief package that Democrats in the House passed back in May. (Fair criticism that neither party wanted exposure on spending measures before the election, preferring to repeatedly do short-term fixes; but in my view Republicans are usually more to blame because they're the party of "government doesn't work" and they try to demonstrate it by making government not work.) If you were honestly conflating the two, you wouldn't pretend that the bill is for $900 billion, since the omnibus spending bill (needed to keep the government from shutting down for a third time in Donald Trump's presidency) costs $1.4 trillion and that's where your examples come from.

Quote
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.

Yes, you could argue that the two parts are separate or that it's all one thing, but pretending that the other stuff is part of the $900 billion as you did is Right-wing Dishonesty 101.

Quote
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.

It is true that unrelated items are often put in the same bill, either as a "poison pill" to block the bill in Congress or to prevent a presidential veto (since there's no line item veto). In this case, Donald Trump lacks any incentive to do his job and may shut down the government with a veto because he wants $2000 checks and a number of small things that were mostly in his own budget request. If your intent was simply to criticize Congress for combining unrelated ideas into one bill, that would be fair; but don't place the non-coronavirus-relief stuff into the $900 billion of coronavirus relief.

Quote
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.

What were the "false digs against certain members of the uniparty"? I expect that Republicans pushed for the "three martini lunch" tax break, but I didn't even say that. My criticism of Republicans after the analysis was for their delay in considering coronavirus relief in the Senate for many months after Democrats in the House passed a bill; the result would always be a compromise from that bill but it should have been arrived at much sooner than this.

Still no concession that your "analysis" of the $900 billion included things that were not part of the $900 billion.

Quote
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.

That stupid right-wingers don't think you're right-wing enough (meaning that you're less right-wing than them) is not really any indication of anything; I've never claimed you were more right-wing than the idiots here who aren't worth talking to.

It's really not hard; stop making right-wing arguments if you're not right-wing.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 25, 2020, 04:01:44 PM
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?

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:
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.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on December 25, 2020, 05:45:34 PM
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?)

Quote
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.

Quote
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.

Quote
[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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 25, 2020, 06:57:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on December 25, 2020, 08:21:00 PM
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.

It is rawma's fault for making that bed.  Now let him lay in it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on December 25, 2020, 09:34:48 PM
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??
fnord.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 25, 2020, 10:12:18 PM
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??
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.



Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on December 25, 2020, 10:19:55 PM
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??
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.
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!)
(https://www.defendevropa.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/B025A3AA-98DB-4DD9-8509-D66EAE81FF94.jpeg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 25, 2020, 11:53:22 PM
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?)
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.

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 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.
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".)

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 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.

This is a perfect reasonable illustration of the real costs. It's clear and easy to understand to anyone who doesn't read crazy things into every step, like you.

[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'm not neutral. Snowman said that, not me.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 26, 2020, 12:23:36 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on December 26, 2020, 12:41:20 AM
Greetings!

Indeed, Pat, there's plenty of room for nuance in people. For myself, I don't like many Republican politicians, and I have disagreed with many of the things they have supported, and how they behave, and their attitudes.

I also support a Capitalist, free-market economy, and a smaller government, in general--though I also support some particular government regulation and supervision of various industries--some more than others--such as Big Tech and Pharmaceutical companies.

I have never considered you a Leftist, Pat. It's fine that you hold some different positions on various things.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on December 26, 2020, 01:08:00 AM
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 have never complained about Trump wanting coronavirus relief; I have complained about his erratic demands in pursuing it, and I have complained about specific bad ideas he wanted in it, like a payroll tax holiday (which only benefits people who still have jobs).

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-calling-off-pandemic-stimulus-talks-election/story?id=73457680
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on December 26, 2020, 01:11:43 AM
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? That it costs the government $600 (and some administrative costs) to send someone $600? You wanted to pretend that the recipients would get no benefit from it, as if they were simultaneously presented with a bill for that $600 check and other things in the same bill.

Quote
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?

While arguing with you does bear resemblance to arguing with a wall, the answer is no.

Quote
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".)

I provided multiple links rebutting your conflating of two things. And I called it the coronavirus relief package then; you're the one who keeps switching, talking about a $900 billion bill and then dragging in things that are not part of that $900 billion.
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: Politifact
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

Quote
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?

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.

Quote
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.

As you agreed, there are other sources of federal revenue.

As I have explained, some of the costs incurred in difficult times may not actually be paid back in the lives of the taxpayers of that time; the economy grows to make the debt less relevant. I specifically gave the example of World War II debt.

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. The rest of the $900 billion is spent on other things, which may or may not be things that you want, but are not the cost of the $600 check.

Quote
[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'm not neutral. Snowman said that, not me.

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.

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.

Quote
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.

I keep relying on things you said, which you keep claiming meant something else, or running away from completely.

You said that foreign aid was in the $900 billion coronavirus relief ("Trumpbux Mark 2.0"). Maybe you meant passed in the same bill, but then you should have quoted the higher remaining price and maybe recognized that the whole bill was not about "helping those were more negatively affected" [sic].

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on December 26, 2020, 01:25:11 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on December 26, 2020, 01:36:29 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 26, 2020, 01:44:57 AM
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.

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.
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.

I've never used an ignore list, I think they're contrary to the idea of free discussions. I think engaging people shows a basic level of respect. I also think discussing the mechanisms of how we interact, which is a lot of what this has devolved into, is worthwhile. I'm also fairly patient.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on December 26, 2020, 02:01:02 AM
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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 26, 2020, 02:11:41 AM
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.

i think the two party system isn't so much a manifestation of duality, as a proximate cause. Tribalism is a self-reinforcing loop. When groups segregate on ideology, they don't default to the average beliefs of the members in each group. Instead, they shift further and further to the extremes. This has happened to both sides; the Blue Dog Democrats are also effectively dead, and studies show the moderate middle has largely vanished and the average of both parties have diverged. In the political realm, there are some concrete reasons why this happened, including the scandal that led Congresscritters to fly home every weekend, leading to fewer chances to build social bonds with members of the other party; rules changes in Congress that enforced party loyalty under threat of funding or plum committee posts, starting with Gingrich's Contract with America but accelerating since; and external forces like clickbait journalism and the rise of social media that have fragmented information sources and allowed people to self-select into homogeneous groups.

Regarding McConnell, Obama and Pelosi were just as obstructionist, if not more so. The term itself has become a political weapon, thrown by people using the same tactics as the ones they decry. And while 2020 has led to the right flipping out over real or perceived perfidy on the left, that follows 4 years of the left flipping out over Trump, even when he did the exact same thing as his predecessor, not to mention the riots of more recent months. The only people who think it's one-sided are partisans.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 26, 2020, 02:39:59 AM
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?
The rest of the bill. You know this, it's what we've been talking about. This is deliberate obfuscation on your part.

Quote
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?

While arguing with you does bear resemblance to arguing with a wall, the answer is no.
Mirror, meet wall.

Quote from: Politifact
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
You can't debunk a fact. All you can do is cite people who make casual, uninformed statements.

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.

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.

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on December 26, 2020, 03:25:30 AM
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.

I never expected a decade ago that I would be on the same side as Bill Kristol, Charlie Sykes, George Will and a host of others, yet here we are. But the changes were going on for decades before Trump; the Republicans embraced more and more their coalition of Southern Strategy, Moral Majority and the rich. Moderate Northern Republicans are a distant memory; their Congressional delegation has gone from Contract with America to Tea Party to Qanon. They've gone from wedge issues to gerrymandering to voter suppression to challenging the honesty of elections run by other Republicans. Republicans in Congress told Richard Nixon to give it up; now they want Trump to steal the election.

I expect Republicans to resist Democrats, but they do so with extreme dishonesty: dogwhistles, birthers, trashing John Kerry's war service, claiming Joe Biden is senile (but nevertheless a wily debater!), Willie Horton, deliberate alteration or misrepresentation of quotes and images. Can you really find an equivalent of "ratfucker" Roger Stone or Karl Rove on the left? Not the fever swamp fantasies about Clintons killing anyone, or undetectable election theft in 2020, but real political operatives reveling in the dirty tricks they've done on behalf of Democrats? Anyone you name is not going to have the same prominence.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on December 26, 2020, 04:06:56 AM
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?
The rest of the bill. You know this, it's what we've been talking about. This is deliberate obfuscation on your part.

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.

Quote
Quote from: Politifact
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
You can't debunk a fact. All you can do is cite people who make casual, uninformed statements.

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.)

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. And you were wrong when you said that the foreign aid was part of the $900 billion coronavirus relief.

Quote
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,

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. 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?

Quote
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.

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.

Quote
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.

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. Or care about how you were wrong about the foreign aid being part of the $900 billion for coronavirus relief.

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. That's just insane garbage from someone who incorrectly stated that the foreign aid was part of the $900 billion for coronavirus relief.

Quote
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.

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.

Quote
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 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. You are wrong, just like you were wrong on the foreign aid being part of the $900 billion for coronavirus relief.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 26, 2020, 10:16:06 AM
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.

Not to mention this is Civics 101. They used to teach this in Saturday morning commercials.


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.
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.

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.

Completely unrelated, but have you accepted the fact that H.R. 133 is a single bill as your Lord and Savior?

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?

Of course not. People understand it's an illustration to make it easier to grasp.

You're pretending to not understand the concept in an attempt to obfuscate the issue.

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?

The point again. Which you're deliberately missing.

Quote
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.

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.
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.

But that's only one of several possible standards, because the law about starting the transition only defines the term in a narrow context, and the Constitution is silent on the matter. So there's some ambiguity, though there's no ambiguity when it comes to the Associated Press. They have nothing to do with the process.

It also doesn't strengthen your argument when you have to lie about what I said. In the previous conversation, I specifically said that the media were mistaken, not deliberately lying, during previous elections, and explained why.

Quote
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 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.
Neptune isn't somewhere between Milwaukee and Duluth, Rawma. If I believed I was a centrist, I would have analogized myself to Eu Claire.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on December 26, 2020, 04:42:14 PM
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.

I've heard it's a bit expensive likesay if you don't have the insurance. If you say it's all good I'm convinced though.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on December 26, 2020, 06:41:15 PM
Ah! I think I see why Trump wants to kill this bill:
Sec. 1003. Rescissions.
Rescinds the unobligated amounts appropriated under section 4027 of the CARES Act that were deposited in
the Exchange Stabilization Fund (ESF) for direct loans by the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) and
emergency lending programs and facilities established by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System (Federal Reserve or Fed). There is an immediate rescission of $429 billion from unobligated balances,
and a subsequent rescission on January 9, 2021 of any remaining unobligated balances. Certain administrative
expenses are exempted from the recessions.
Sec. 1004. Emergency Relief and Taxpayer Protections.
Clarifies that proceeds from investments should be deposited as described in section 4003(e) of the CARES
Act.
Sec. 1005. Termination of Authority.
Sets December 31, 2020 as the date for termination of the Federal Reserve’s authority to make new loans, asset
purchases, or modifications through the existing CARES Act facilities. As the ESF funds provided through the
CARES Act are rescinded, this section clarifies the Secretary of the Treasury retains authority to use other ESF
funds to backstop future Federal Reserve emergency lending programs and facilities under section 13(3) of the
Federal Reserve Act. This section also clarifies that while those other ESF funds may not be used to establish
Federal Reserve emergency lending programs and facilities that are the “same as” (i.e. identical to) current
Federal Reserve programs and facilities that received CARES Act funding support (except the Term AssetBacked Securities Loan Facility, or TALF), it permits substantially similar Federal Reserve emergency lending
programs and facilities, including those designed to support small businesses and non-profit organizations, as
well as state, territory, and local governments, to be established with ESF funds in the future.
Sec. 1006. Rule of Construction.
Clarifies that the Federal Reserve fully retains the authority it had prior to the enactment of the CARES Act to
establish programs and facilities under section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on December 27, 2020, 12:32:24 PM
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, 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.

Let's see:
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.

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.

Neptune isn't somewhere between Milwaukee and Duluth, Rawma. If I believed I was a centrist, I would have analogized myself to Eu Claire.

Neptune? No, you are clearly very, very deep in Uranus.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 27, 2020, 12:52:16 PM
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.
But let's get to the important question: Is it one bill, or two?

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.

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.
They learned the correct answer, and decided to go with the false one. That's lying.

One bill or two?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on December 27, 2020, 01:59:20 PM
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.
But let's get to the important question:

Liars often think that their lying is unimportant.

Quote
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.

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.
They learned the correct answer, and decided to go with the false one. That's lying.

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.

But Pat is lying about what he said in this thread.

Quote
One 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.

Why would Pat separate out the $900 billion for coronavirus relief rather than using the entire cost of $2.3 trillion? Well, that Pat is a deliberate liar is a sufficient explanation, of course, but why wouldn't Pat divide the entire cost of the bill when that would make a stronger point against the $600 checks as costing more than twice as much? Could it be that Pat was thinking of them as separate bills and may not even have known they were one bill? Well, we can never know, since the only source for that information would be Pat, who is a deliberate liar.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on December 27, 2020, 09:27:52 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 27, 2020, 10:55:11 PM
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.

But Pat is lying about what he said in this thread.
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.

Quote
One 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.
Obvious reply: It's not one bill under certain circumstances. It's one bill, period. Under all circumstances.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on December 28, 2020, 01:22:00 AM
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.

But Pat is lying about what he said in this thread.
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.

Quote
One 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.
Obvious reply: It's not one bill under certain circumstances. It's one bill, period. Under all circumstances.

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.

Greetings!

Well said, Pat. I very much agree.

Your point about "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' part of the $900 billion or part of the greater $2+trillion isn't terribly important." *Laughing* This is *exactly* what was going through my head!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 28, 2020, 08:07:06 AM
Are people buying the "mutant strain" bullshit, that coincidentally allows the UK government to prolong the utterly unnecessary restrictions?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on December 28, 2020, 09:00:28 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 28, 2020, 10:11:51 AM
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.
South Africa.

There are dozens of strains of COVID-19. They can track them, and trace their phylogeny (family tree). They've clustered them in 6 general groups. This is normal, viruses mutate constantly. But most of the variants are the result of one or two mutations. The version first identified in Kent has 17 significant mutations, an abnormally large number. Some of the mutations affect the proteins on the spikes, which may be why it's more infectious. None of the mutations should make the vaccines ineffective. All the vaccines are targeting a wide number of areas, and relatively stable ones, so it's unlikely, at least in the short term, that they'll stop working.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 28, 2020, 03:10:58 PM
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.

Do you have a source on this? The big spending bill was HR 133. From what I see here:

https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2020250?Page=1

There were 41 Democratic Nay votes and 43 Republican Nay votes, and AOC was one of the Nay votes. So it was passed by a majority of both parties, but with roughly equal opposition.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on December 28, 2020, 03:53:22 PM
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.

But Pat is lying about what he said in this thread.
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.

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.

Quote
Quote
One 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.
Obvious reply: It's not one bill under certain circumstances. It's one bill, period. Under all circumstances.

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 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".

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.

Quote
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.

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.

Quote
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. 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.

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 28, 2020, 03:55:23 PM
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.

It was two.

He signed the Covid Relief bill, and vetoed the Defense bill.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 28, 2020, 03:56:37 PM


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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 28, 2020, 10:16:52 PM
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.

But Pat is lying about what he said in this thread.
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.

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.
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.

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.

Quote
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. 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.
That quite literally supports my position.

Quote
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.

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.
You pointed out one error, I pointed out many of yours. And I literally referred to items from the omnibus. You have no case.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on December 29, 2020, 01:43:16 AM
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.

But Pat is lying about what he said in this thread.
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.

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.
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.

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?

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.

Quote
You're trying to be pedantic, but you're not very good at it.

I could never hope to approach your level of pedantry.

Quote
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.

You are confused; you were arguing that it is one bill (as passed by Congress, giving the President only the option of vetoing the entire thing or signing the entire thing, although the timing and a pocket veto could affect the exact outcome for that one bill); you have criticized me for referencing the coronavirus relief and the omnibus spending as if separate, even though it has no bearing on the correctness of my post, since the foreign aid was not intended as relief or stimulus.

Quote
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.

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?

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.

Quote
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.

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.

Quote
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.

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.

Quote
Quote
The part about the foreign aid not being part of the $900 intended for coronavirus relief? You're right, and I was wrong.

This appears to have been inadvertently left in, but I'll take it as repeating your concession.

Quote
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.
That quite literally supports my position.

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.

Quote
Quote
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.

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.
You pointed out one error, I pointed out many of yours. And I literally referred to items from the omnibus. You have no case.

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.

Quote
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.

I made no demands, only pointed out what I would do in response to what you might do.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on December 29, 2020, 02:51:57 AM
Greetings!

Well, I do agree with Pat's assessment. The funding of this bill--filled with a trainload of bullshit, with a "lollypop" of $600 attached within to mollify the masses--is ridiculous and terrible. Beyond that, I also don't care about how the bill is diced up; one bill for 900 billion; two bills for 2.4 trillion--or any other charlatanry that the slug politicians present it as--whatever. It's all terrible and pathetic, greedy, sniveling bullshit. I am not an expert in economics--and do not pretend to be. Everything I have read about it sounds mind-bogglingly corrupt and smarmy.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 29, 2020, 05:08:07 AM
You can look back through the thread for Shasarak and consolcwby who were critical of me and not of you.

Just say something that I could agree with and not the stuff that you find when you look back through the thread.

I have disagreed with Pat plenty of times.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 29, 2020, 05:35:34 AM
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.

They'll be useless because they're completely unnecessary and as pointless as the flu "vaccine".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 29, 2020, 08:06:20 AM
In other Covid news, Andrew 'Killer' Cuomo gets his hand slapped again (https://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/610ee1d9-b473-4399-86a7-4ba3f909ee56/1/doc/20-3572%2020-3590_opn.pdf) for First Amendment violations.

He needs to quit while he's ahead.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on December 29, 2020, 07:01:08 PM
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!!!

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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 29, 2020, 08:13:51 PM
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).

(https://drive.google.com/uc?id=1Vkso3it0PxQt0G2BcBAgdzt2qXSmXeJ1)
Source: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#compare-trends_newdeathsper100k

There is a spike in the end for California where we are roughly even with Texas, but overall, we have had a lower death rate over the past 10 months. With tens of thousands of lives being lost in each state, I think that's where the rubber meets the road.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 29, 2020, 09:33:09 PM
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).

Its because California did not lock down and have a mask wearing policy.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 29, 2020, 10:51:39 PM
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!!!

1. That's not the measure of total cases in the U.S.. The CDC every year gets a random small sample to test which is used for predictions and statistical analysis every year. They had 100 in 2019 December for example. The flu is down this year by quite a bit, but it's not THAT low.

2. The masks and social distancing and sanitizing work for the flu as well as Covid-19. And because Covid-19 is so much more contagious than the flu, it makes sense it's down this year.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 30, 2020, 12:16:38 AM
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on December 30, 2020, 01:18:40 AM
Greetings!

*Sigh* It is so stupid, tragic, and monstrous that the fucking corrupt politicians--and the often equally corrupt and greedy officials and members of the medical community--just seem to love grabbing hold of the reins of tyranny and control as a response to the China virus. The hysteria drummed up by the jello-filled Media is also guilty and absolutely disgusting.

The only reason why this whole stupid virus and various responses and efforts to deal with it or avoid it have become political, is precisely because of the attitudes and behavior of the politicians, the medical officials, and the media.

Let people be free, and deal with the fucking virus how they want to deal with it. As individual citizens, and as individual communities.

It is just a fucking virus. Get over it. There is a tiny chance if someone gets it, that they will die from it. Otherwise, move the fuck on and live. It doesn't help that there are different strains of the virus, with each individual having a different physiological response to the virus. For some people, they get the virus, and a week later, they are in the hospital. A few days or a week later after that, and they are dead. Tragic, really, but also part of life. Pneumonia can kill you as well. Most people, however, do not die from Pneumonia, or the Flu--or the China virus. Many people get the China virus, experience the sniffles for a week, and are fine. This stupid virus is not the fucking Black Plague, but a trainload of people in this country certainly want to act like it is.

And--yeah, I know what the fuck I'm talking about. I'm not some cold, heartless monster. I haven't gotten the fucking China virus, yet--and I certainly don't want to get it, either. But I refuse to run around being fearful and fucking hysterical about this. And yes, it is also quite personal to me. I have a friend that had the virus, experienced the sniffles for a week, and was just fine. Something not much different than the goddamned Flu. Then, I know someone else that got the virus, and while they survived, have been wiped out for six weeks, experiencing coughing, severe and constant fatigue, loss of taste and smell, all of it. She seems to be over the worst of it, but even now still suffers from near-constant fatigue, which is still lingering on her from the virus. So, geesus, the virus isn't a fucking joke, but again, t also isn't the Black Plague. The whole society doesn't need to be locked down, and all the petty tyrants in our society get to wag their fingers and make demands on everyone, and violate people's rights, and cause millions of lives to be ruined.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 30, 2020, 04:33:15 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on December 30, 2020, 08:11:16 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 30, 2020, 08:21:58 AM
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").
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 30, 2020, 08:24:17 AM
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.
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."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on December 30, 2020, 09:00:24 AM
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").

Greetings!

Well, I don't think the China virus is a fucking "Public Health Crisis". Fuck your health crisis tyranny. Less than 1% of people that get the fucking virus die from it. Such a low fatality rate does not constitute a fucking "crisis"--and whether you or anyone else believes that it is more serious and more of a concern than that, does not justify closing the whole society and economy down, closing businesses, ruining the economy, ruining MILLIONS of people's lives because you want to live in fear and bow down to the fucking tyranny.

In the beginning, I supported a brief shutdown of society, to FLATTEN THE CURVE, so that hospitals wouldn't be overwhelmed.

Months later, and there's nothing but more, more tyrannical, fear mongering hysterical bullshit.

Fuck that.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 30, 2020, 10:25:07 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on December 30, 2020, 10:44:37 AM
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.

I don't give a fuck if it's me. I'm not gonna live in hysterical fear and promote the devastation of our ENTIRE society--the greatest civilization to EVER exist in the entire span of human history--out of fear of the off chance that I could possibly, MAAAAYBE, be one of these oddball cases of people that croak for no discernible reason.

I was always gonna die eventually anyways. I DON'T GIVE A FUCK!!!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on December 30, 2020, 10:55:20 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 30, 2020, 11:13:05 AM
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.

Jowls and a middle age spread - and who knows how old that photo is.

You've got another anecdote for me. Wonderful. That's not data.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 30, 2020, 12:12:41 PM
Mike Yeadon, an actual respiratory specialist, not a mathematician: https://twitter.com/MichaelYeadon3/status/1343485688088588289

Lockdowns achieved fuck all. The only things that have ever mattered are age and obesity.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 30, 2020, 01:52:29 PM
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.

The UN and various charities have expressed concerns about the financial affects of the lockdowns and economy on humanitarian efforts. Though looking at the latest Omnibus bill, apparently America still has money to fund Gender Studies in Pakistan. :/

Yeah, we're running up our debt to ludicrous levels, and devaluing the currency, and this stuff is going to hit all of us down the road. These measures have a cost, and we will pay it, and it will cost some human lives. Whether it's more devastating than the virus, well I guess we get to find out eventually.

I have the strong impression that the next generation is going to look at the extended lockdowns and arbitrary restrictions as a big 'WTF where they thinking?' moment.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 30, 2020, 02:07:16 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Novastar on December 30, 2020, 05:18:18 PM
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?"
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 30, 2020, 05:20:54 PM
If it were just "wear a mask, wash your hands", I don't think anyone would be complaining.

I promise you, Spinachcat would be complaining about how he's not going to wear a face diaper.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 30, 2020, 05:26:27 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on December 30, 2020, 05:57:27 PM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on December 30, 2020, 06:16:36 PM
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?"

When people are living in Bidenvilles throughout the country because Biden will have free trade with China and raise minimum wage to fifteen dollars.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on December 30, 2020, 06:21:13 PM
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!

Check the stats on deaths based on accidents.  I tell you they need a lock down on those.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 30, 2020, 06:46:03 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 30, 2020, 06:56:22 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on December 30, 2020, 06:59:12 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 30, 2020, 07:11:10 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 30, 2020, 07:48:13 PM
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.
It's not sand, it's kitty litter. Used kitty litter.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 30, 2020, 08:06:40 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 30, 2020, 09:51:54 PM
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...

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 30, 2020, 10:39:00 PM
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.

How can you be this deep in denial about what's happening in front of your eyes? Again, name the state and we can pull objective data on hospitalization numbers.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 30, 2020, 10:57:28 PM
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...

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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 30, 2020, 11:08:57 PM
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...

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).
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 31, 2020, 06:36:04 AM
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.

Go you, accessorising the symbols of your oppression! Like the slave who thinks they're better than the others because their chains are made of gold. ::)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 31, 2020, 06:39:47 AM
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.

In the UK we've had more than six months of our healthcare system being on holiday, doing pretty much fuck all so they could "be ready" for a surge in coronavirus cases that never happened.

Everything that wasn't coronavirus was shelved, lots of people missing critical diagnoses and treatments, and now winter has come, it's the usual bollocks about how they can't cope. With the same pattern of demand that happens every fucking year, that they are utterly incapable of preparing for. Not helped by the number of their staff who are "isolating" or "shielding" or otherwise taking the piss, while on full pay.

Keep clapping for our wonderful NHS! Envy of the world, except never replicated anywhere else...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on December 31, 2020, 07:29:14 AM
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.

I was mostly just messing around, piggybacking Shasarak's sarcasm, and didn't even do the math cuz it was just a joke. Not that I necessarily trust official death estimates, given how politicized this whole thing has become, how inconsistent and contradictory reporting has been from the onset, how much censorship has been going on against dissenting voices, even within the medical field, and much incentive hospitals have to go along with the narrative to secure more funding for their "overwhelmed" systems. This has all been pushed by decree from on top with an air of official infallibility that cannot be questioned, while the guy in charge of this in the US is telling us to wear masks even while having sex. Cuz sticking your dick or your hand (or your tongue) in someone and exchanging bodily fluids won't get you sick, but not wearing a mask while doing it can. It's all fucking bullshit and they're just figuratively fucking with us.

 
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.

I live in Puerto Rico (not a state, but still...) and my dad frequently has to take my brother to the hospital, cuz he was run over by a motorcycle around a year ago and had to have multiple surgeries on a broken leg, and he tells me that the hospitals (he's been to more than one) are ALWAYS empty, with people just dicking around not being helpful while he's waiting for my brother to get whatever procedures done. He's constantly complaining about it, and how this whole planedemic is just bullshit.

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.

And everyone who died in 2020 has died of covid. Even the ones who committed suicide or got run over by motor vehicles.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on December 31, 2020, 10:55:46 AM
Damn Vision.  I hope your brother gets well and fully recover from that if he can.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 31, 2020, 12:19:52 PM
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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 31, 2020, 12:49:11 PM
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?

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.
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.

And that wasn't what I said, anyway. As I pointed out in that thread, I can see the argument for the GSA administrator's certification, but it's not a strong one. It's a fairly minor federal law that defines the term solely in the context of that specific law. It's hard to go from that to any kind of generalization. If you or they wanted to make that argument, you could have. But you didn't.

"A" third party? Really? You fail at pedantry, because that's not even logical.

And I did not continue to say the same thing, after it turned out to be wrong. You kept harping on it because you were grasping desperately for a single, thin victory, and I kept changing the subject to your mistake, in attempt to show you how poor your own behavior was. That's you, blatantly 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.

And why didn't you follow your own advice about your own mistake?

I gave you multiple gracious ways to exit the argument, without making any demands of you or requiring you to concede anything. If you consider that a characteristic of someone who seems to "want to continue to attack me", you have a very distorted view of reality.

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.

But I get it, you feel put upon. Welcome to my world, where people on both the left and right insist I'm on the other team in the polarity olympics, and keep trying to prove to me, by cherry picking tiny slivers of my own quotes, that I don't really believe what I believe, because they apparently know better than I do what I think. Hey, you're one of those people! And you just mentioned another!

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.

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.
No, it literally supports my position. That even more spending had shit and nothing to do with a coronvirus stimulus only strengthens my argument.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: spon on December 31, 2020, 01:09:32 PM
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.

(tongue in cheek)
So, you're saying that Death has just got X% more efficient! I feel a gaming scenario coming on.
 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 31, 2020, 01:21:07 PM
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.


Did they find anything good to buy? Those places are all full of cheap nicknacks.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on December 31, 2020, 01:30:56 PM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 31, 2020, 02:00:06 PM
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.

Co-morbitities doesn't mean you're expected to die soon. For example, I have high blood pressure, which is a co-morbitity. My life expectancy is still roughly another 25-30 years. If I die next week from Covid-19  you will claim I had co-morbitities so it was "aligned with natural causes" except I will have lost 25-30 years of my natural life expectancy with this co-morbidity.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 31, 2020, 02:45:23 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 31, 2020, 02:50:45 PM
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.

And I find it odd that people are willing to toss aside science and reason in their fear of getting Covid. You can see it in the crazy people crossing the street to get within 6 feet of someone without a mask so they can yell at them about wearing masks. Or the continual shifting narrative about the efficacy of masks and even the reason to wear them in the first place. Anyone who brings up the hardships that lockdowns bring or question the impact of Covid compared to other maladies and causes of death are dismissed as kooks.
It all strikes me as similar to the Satanic Panic of the 80's. People are scared and desperate for a fix of some kind, and their critical thought goes out the window.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 31, 2020, 03:04:16 PM
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

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on December 31, 2020, 03:47:37 PM
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.

Quote
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.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 31, 2020, 05:17:48 PM
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.
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.

Quote
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.

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.
That's false on multiple levels. The sad part is, I don't think you even realize what you're doing.

I pointed out the media falsely called Biden the president-elect when he didn't meet the conditions, and then pointed out the error had gotten widespread coverage, so they had ample time to learn of their mistake and correct it. But they did not. That's not time dependent. It doesn't matter whether I posted it on November 5, 2020, today, or November 5, 3020. Historical facts remain historical facts. Nor is it dependent on whether enough states ultimately certified for Biden, who the electors chose, or any of the other possible standards for determining the president-elect, including the very weak one you favor (the GSA admin's blessing). They were were wrong to call him the president-elect instead of something like the presumptive president-elect from election night up through the date of whichever standard you prefer, and they will remain wrong for doing that until the end of time.

This was a great opportunity for the media to educate the public on how the electoral process works. They should have posted a mea culpa, and then used that as an opportunity to talk about the false assumptions they made, how those assumptions broke down in this election, the ambiguity of the term, the various ways it can be interpreted, and the various steps that are taken between election night and the inauguration. Highlighting the arcane details would edify the people on the strengths and weaknesses of the system, and could have been a unifying moment. Instead we got a divisive, hyper-politicized nightmare, and partisans like you who are so fixated on their candidate winning that they don't trust or even care about the process. Way to go, "objective" journalism.

It's rather telling how often blind faith in the media is combined with personal attacks instead of arguments.

For the rest, I will just repeat the evidence. Anyone interested in details can track the thread back.

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.
Thanks for supporting my argument.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 31, 2020, 05:34:54 PM
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.

But you're still incorrect about the mortality profile. The way it mimics the natural mortality profile is the key reason it's been called a "strange" pandemic. It's remarkable, compared to other diseases. For instance, the 1918 flu killed the relatively young.
https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3259

Your claim that sars2 is reducing lifespans by a "meaningful amount" is correct, but your initial claim that the novel coronavirus was "massively reducing life expectancy" was not. The fatality rate is roughly equivalent to the Hong Kong flu, and lower than the 1918 flu. And the deaths are extremely heavily biased toward the higher age categories, where the expected number of years of life is lower. This is not like a war, or car crashes, or anything else that selectively or at least indiscriminately kills the young and healthy. I don't have a cite handy, but the estimates I've seen of the impact of covid-19 on overall life expectancies are a small fraction of a year. It's certainly meaningful, because it is killing large numbers of people. But it's still a small percentage of the population, and the population it kills tends to have much less life to lose, so the overall numbers don't budge all that much.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on December 31, 2020, 06:01:25 PM
British police arrest woman going to hospital, filming it as mostly empty (contradicting official information)

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/12/31/british-woman-arrested-after-filming-empty-hospital-wards-while-health-officials-push-covid-panic/#more-206651
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 31, 2020, 06:21:07 PM
I was mostly just messing around, piggybacking Shasarak's sarcasm

Hey get your own sarcasm!

I work hard for mine, dont be piggybacking off of it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 31, 2020, 06:40:03 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EqhsMLKUUAIeqae?format=jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on December 31, 2020, 07:01:31 PM
Damn Vision.  I hope your brother gets well and fully recover from that if he can.

Thanks!

All the surgeries are hopefully done now, but after a year of not walking, I'm guessing its gonna be another year till he fully heals and goes through physical therapy to start walking on that leg again.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 31, 2020, 07:02:23 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on December 31, 2020, 08:01:39 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 31, 2020, 08:20:35 PM
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.

So according to the article, he underwent an operation for covid-19 and died as a result. In ordinary times, if someone dies from a risky operation to remove a cancer tumor, for example - then people will say they died from cancer. The surgery was required to save their life because of the cancer.

I'll buy that the numbers can vary some based on definitions. But for the whole thing to be a sham requires that almost every country in the world be cooperating in a massive conspiracy -- including countries directly opposed to each other.

In the U.S., there is no pattern of Democratic-controlled states and Republican-controlled states in terms of their covid-19 death rate. The top death rates include North Dakota, South Dakota, and Louisiana -- but also New Jersey, New York, and Massachusetts.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 31, 2020, 08:49:05 PM
Exactly how is surgery used to treat a viral respiratory infection?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 31, 2020, 09:05:57 PM
Exactly how is surgery used to treat a viral respiratory infection?

He was in surgery for a blood clot, which are apparently common with severe cases of covid-19. Here's an article on the causes for it:

https://labblog.uofmhealth.org/lab-report/new-cause-of-covid-19-blood-clots-identified
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 31, 2020, 09:08:12 PM
Exactly how is surgery used to treat a viral respiratory infection?

The virus can cause organ failure. Surgery can, sometimes, relieve or address organ failure. The virus can also cause blood clots, which can be removed or addressed using surgery.

This is, by the way, why the naval medical ships can be helpful. They can do those kinds of surgeries.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on December 31, 2020, 10:43:52 PM
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!
However, supposed complications may require surgery, but the above sentence is more "ME", I think.
Also,

Jeffery Epstein didn't kill himself.
BECAUSE HE'S STILL ALIVE!

Beat THAT one, Alex Jones!  :P
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on December 31, 2020, 11:02:17 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 01, 2021, 12:05:54 AM
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.
While I'm pretty sure youre just talking shit, whiich "predictions" have I made that you question? Please, be specific.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on January 01, 2021, 12:11:57 AM
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.
While I'm pretty sure youre just talking shit, whiich "predictions" have I made that you question? Please, be specific.
That Pathfinder 2e was going to be awesome?...
Oh, wait. You weren't talking to me, were you?
nevermind.   :-X
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 01, 2021, 07:02:23 AM
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.
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.

Except being wrong.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on January 01, 2021, 10:50:03 AM
Don't forget...

The 'new' strain from the UK showed up in Colorado in someone who hadn't traveled abroad.
Herr Fauci recommends the lockdowns should continue until morale improves.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 01, 2021, 01:46:43 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 01, 2021, 01:58:19 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 01, 2021, 02:05:40 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 01, 2021, 02:08:51 PM
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.

This is a reply to the discussion we were having about whether Biden was the president-elect. Where you had degenerated into personal attacks. Is bringing up something completely unrelated the only response you have?

I guess so.

But now you want to blame other people.
Oh look, another personal attack.

(I don't blame other people.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 01, 2021, 03:08:18 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 01, 2021, 03:09:04 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on January 01, 2021, 03:14:28 PM
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'.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 01, 2021, 03:21:52 PM
The exact opposite of how public health messaging should work:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/24/health/herd-immunity-covid-coronavirus.html
(Fauci admits he lied to the public about the threshold for herd immunity, and then gradually raised it based on his "gut feeling that the country is finally ready to hear what he really thinks". Note it was dropped Christmas Eve, possibly the least read news day of the year.)

How public health messaging should work: Don't lie to the public. You completely destroy all your credibility, and if you're the public face of something, you destroy trust in that, too. Fauci should have learned this, from his earlier lie about masks. We need more public officials with integrity and fewer patronizing, elitist assholes.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on January 01, 2021, 03:38:37 PM
Jimmy Dore rips Dr. Faux Shit--erm, I mean Fauci a new one. Even leftists see through his bullshit!

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 01, 2021, 03:50:46 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 01, 2021, 04:14:32 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 01, 2021, 04:32:20 PM
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.

https://www.defense.gov/Explore/Spotlight/Coronavirus/DOD-Response-Timeline/
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/memorandum-providing-federal-support-governors-use-national-guard-respond-covid-19/
https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/2129077/usns-mercy-arrives-in-los-angeles-to-aid-covid-19-response/
https://www.army.mil/article/234197/army_hospitals_ready_in_new_york_and_seattle

I remember WA state because I live here and it was local news. Looks like it was also in NY and CA.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 01, 2021, 05:04:44 PM
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.
While I'm pretty sure youre just talking shit, whiich "predictions" have I made that you question? Please, be specific.

All your talk about ICus was what?  Pearl clutching?  Oh no, 98% capacity!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 01, 2021, 05:09:44 PM
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.

How busy is a Hospitals Elective Surgery going to be when patients dont have insurance because they have been fired and or dont have any income because the government has shut down their business?

And how much Elective Surgery is an extra $600 going to buy?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 01, 2021, 05:17:46 PM
Meanwhile in England:

Women Arrested for Filming Empty Hospital


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 01, 2021, 05:24:58 PM
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.
While I'm pretty sure youre just talking shit, whiich "predictions" have I made that you question? Please, be specific.

All your talk about ICus was what?  Pearl clutching?  Oh no, 98% capacity!
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 01, 2021, 06:14:44 PM
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 01, 2021, 06:25:13 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 01, 2021, 07:08:26 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 01, 2021, 07:14:45 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 01, 2021, 07:54:59 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 01, 2021, 07:58:36 PM
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.

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".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 01, 2021, 08:03:35 PM
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).

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 01, 2021, 08:05:09 PM
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.

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".
You know so little that if you had any self awareness you'd be embarrassed.

But it's funny watching a low life grifter like you pretend to be interested in others' welfare.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 01, 2021, 08:15:01 PM
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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 01, 2021, 08:37:12 PM
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.

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".

Leftisim is using the wedge of caring for others in order to seize power. It starts with a minor inconvenience, or a minor concession, and then society dogpiles on a young woman for saying the n-word five years ago.

https://nypost.com/2020/12/29/white-teen-kicked-out-of-college-after-n-word-video-resurfaces/

We can only hope that the lesson of the 21st century is how compassion can be weaponized.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 01, 2021, 09:05:20 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Joey2k on January 01, 2021, 09:19:10 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 01, 2021, 09:26:54 PM
Let's talk about 'safety codes' in light of this.

https://nyassembly.gov/leg/?default_fld=&leg_video=&bn=A00416&term=&Summary=Y&Text=Y

Take a good hard look.

Money shots:
Quote
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.

Quote
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…

Quote
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.

(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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 01, 2021, 09:48:18 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 01, 2021, 09:49:56 PM
Let's talk about 'safety codes' in light of this.

https://nyassembly.gov/leg/?default_fld=&leg_video=&bn=A00416&term=&Summary=Y&Text=Y

Take a good hard look.

Money shots:
Quote
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.

Quote
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…

Quote
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.

(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.
Due process exists for any crimes they may be charged with. This is not about charging someone for a crime. Apples and hubcaps.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Joey2k on January 01, 2021, 09:56:39 PM
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?

In order to own a gun? Absolutely I do
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 01, 2021, 10:01:15 PM
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.

I support safety codes, in general. But they have to make sense. I do not support blanket mask mandates for a virus that we were told everyone would eventually get, and we should slow the spread so medical facilities could be prepared.

That shit got swept under the rug right quick. Now it's perpetual lockdowns and everyone wear masks or we're all gonna die!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on January 01, 2021, 10:10:12 PM
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.

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.

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).

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'm diabetic...BFD.  Where was all the hand-wringing while the riots were going on?

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.

Since leftists seem to believe "speech is violence" then I would say that they equate the two.  As for conservatives, I don't know...but I seem to remember them suppressing books, music, and movies because they were dangerous.  But then what do I know, apparently my anti-authoritarian views put my in the 'far-right' now.  When I was growing up I was considered leftist because of them.

As for 'conservatives' like you...why have you never bothered to counter my arguments about the way China is treating its religious minorities.  Is it ok, because it is better for you financially to have slave labor providing products or is it ok because they aren't part of whatever you consider your 'community'.  Kind of like endless conflict in the ME is ok among the neocons because they are just some 'brown' people on the other side of the world from here...

Before you respond to me, little boy, do yourself a favor.  Do a little bit of soul-searching and ask yourself something.  How would the relatives you reference in this post:

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.

feel about the way your great business ally, China, is treating the Uighurs?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on January 01, 2021, 10:18:28 PM
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?

It isn't a required part of health and safety education in school??? It was when I grew up.

I agree with Joey2K on this.  Not mandatory for purchasing, owning a firearm is a right as a human being.

But then I am one of those wackos that think felons should be able to have their firearms back once they are out of jail.  Why would you continue to deny them their rights once they have completed their debt to society???
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on January 01, 2021, 10:24:08 PM
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 01, 2021, 10:34:43 PM
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!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!
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on January 01, 2021, 11:14:59 PM
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!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!
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.
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....
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 02, 2021, 12:05:52 AM
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.

When Spinachcat tells others here he won't wear a face diaper because they are stupid, that is not a statement about state mandates, it's a statement that he wouldn't ever consider voluntarily wearing one to protect others. And when nobody say shit to him about it and just nods and accepts that's perfectly fine, that's you saying not to wear one voluntarily as well. Which isn't a conservative value. It's a selfish one. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 02, 2021, 12:07:09 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 02, 2021, 12:55:40 AM
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/

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-12-29/l-a-county-hospitals-at-the-breaking-point-turn-away-ambulances

https://ktla.com/news/local-news/l-a-county-hospitals-reach-the-breaking-point-turn-away-ambulances/

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/coronavirus/southern-california-coronavirus/officials-suspend-911-ambulance-divergence-as-orange-county-hospitals-packed-to-the-brim-with-covid-19-patients/2487262/

https://laist.com/latest/post/20201220/ambulance-emergency-room-capacity-los-angeles-coronavirus

https://abc7.com/oc-hospitals-ambulances-covid-surge-vaccine-icu-coronavirus/8846599/

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/531943-packed-los-angeles-hospitals-placing-patients-in-gift-shops-report

https://abc7.com/coronavirus-in-la-county-cases-california-covid/9178752/

https://www.theeastsiderla.com/news/coronavirus_news/ambulances-wait-up-to-eight-hours-to-drop-off-patients-as-covid-19-overwhelms-l/article_ac7ca4e0-4bc3-11eb-82eb-7397eac4f9b6.html

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 02, 2021, 01:15:00 AM
Let's talk about 'safety codes' in light of this.

https://nyassembly.gov/leg/?default_fld=&leg_video=&bn=A00416&term=&Summary=Y&Text=Y

Take a good hard look.

Money shots:
Quote
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.

Quote
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…

Quote
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.

(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.
Due process exists for any crimes they may be charged with. This is not about charging someone for a crime. Apples and hubcaps.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 02, 2021, 01:40:37 AM
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?
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 02, 2021, 01:59:37 AM
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!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!
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.
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....
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 02, 2021, 02:06:13 AM
Let's talk about 'safety codes' in light of this.

https://nyassembly.gov/leg/?default_fld=&leg_video=&bn=A00416&term=&Summary=Y&Text=Y

Take a good hard look.

Money shots:
Quote
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.

Quote
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…

Quote
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.

(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.
Due process exists for any crimes they may be charged with. This is not about charging someone for a crime. Apples and hubcaps.
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 02, 2021, 02:30:57 AM
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?
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.
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.

Thanks for that. Interesting stuff. Happy to hear something hopeful about less chance of long term effects.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on January 02, 2021, 03:01:17 AM
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?

Getting the virus is a possibility. The government mandating that so many small businesses be closed is absolutely ruining people's lives, many of which will never recover. Millions of Americans are being financially ruined, and doomed to crushing poverty--not to mention illness, divorce, addictions, and death as well. THAT is a certainty.

All of this trauma, poverty, misery, and destruction, all for what? For mindless hysteria, driven by the media, smug and condescending, wanna-be tyrant government officials--and immensely profitable to the giant corporations like Amazon, Walmart, Costco, oh, and of course, a variety of medical corporations. Wear a fucking mask if you want to--social distance, wrap yourself in bubble wrap and a fucking cacoon if you want--but the rest of society needs to get on with working and living. This whole hysteria and the social control by the government bureaucrats and the snot-nosed KARENS of society, sobbing and wiping their noses in shrill panic, and the ever-tightening grip of the government crushing people's rights and freedoms is fucking bullshit and simply must stop. The fat, smug fucking people fortunate enough to be in a cushy job where they still get to collect a fucking paycheck don't get to tell everyone else what to do.

The good thing is, more and more people are rising up, everywhere, and resisting, and saying too fucking bad. No masks, no lockdowns, no tyranny. You don't like it, get fucked. The smug fucking government, the smug fucking "healthcare elites"--the smug fucking business elites sitting at home in their fucking pajamas while they all collect a paycheck--everyone I starting to tell them all to go get fucked. Look around at the open rallies, and the defiant people in huge crowds, from California to New York, and everywhere in between. The businesses, the restaurants, the hair salons, the other various businesses, more and more are screaming they are opening up, they aren't shutting the fuck down and they aren't going to shut the fuck up, either.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 02, 2021, 04:37:52 AM
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?

How dare you talk about people surviving on welfare when they should be spending their check on elective surgery!

Dont you have a heart?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 02, 2021, 05:47:15 AM
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.

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?

Flu can do exactly the same thing, if the virus gets into the heart muscle. That's not new. Influenza myocarditis occurs in about 10% of cases.

So-called "long covid" is nothing more than already known post-viral fatigue syndrome. Which occurs with flu, pneumonia and other viral infections. There is nothing novel or new about covid.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 02, 2021, 11:13:36 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 02, 2021, 11:16:48 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 02, 2021, 12:11:16 PM
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.
You are also obligated to follow laws, fucktard.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 02, 2021, 12:11:27 PM
Jaw-Dropping New CDC Figures Suggest True U.S. Coronavirus Death Toll Approaching Half a Million (https://www.mediaite.com/news/jaw-dropping-new-cdc-figures-suggest-true-u-s-coronavirus-death-toll-approaching-half-a-million/)


"CDC tracks the number of deaths reported in excess of the average number of expected deaths based on prior years, and the latest figures show that since the pandemic began, 431,792 more people than expected have died.

But those figures only measure excess deaths through the week ending December 19, when the official confirmed death toll was at 316,000. Since then, another 31,000 lost souls have been added to the official count. Excess deaths during the pandemic have hovered around twenty percent, meaning that in the past two weeks, it’s likely that an additional 6,000 deaths have been undercounted — meaning the current number of excess deaths is likely around 470,000."



______________


My comments: Some of that excess deaths is from the lockdowns themselves. And some of that excess deaths is from Covid-19. We can argue about the exact percentages but all the evidence suggests the majority of that half a million excess deaths is from the virus. This is not "just like the flu." It spreads easier and faster than the flu, and kills more than the flu, and hospitalizes more than the flu, and requires the ICU more than the flu, and seems to have longer term negative effects on health than the flu.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 02, 2021, 01:26:59 PM
This is a reply to the discussion we were having about

The Pat Pivot, as usual.  ::)

Quote
Oh 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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 02, 2021, 02:11:22 PM
This is a reply to the discussion we were having about

The Pat Pivot, as usual.  ::)
No, by bringing in something completely unrelated, you were the one who was trying to pivot. I just pointed out what you did.

Accusing people of things you just did is becoming a favorite tactic of yours.

Quote
Oh 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.
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."

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.

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.
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.

But are you a 4 year old? Because you're acting like one.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on January 02, 2021, 02:24:59 PM
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.
You are also obligated to follow laws, fucktard.

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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on January 02, 2021, 03:15:03 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 02, 2021, 04:08:18 PM
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.
You are also obligated to follow laws, fucktard.

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
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 02, 2021, 04:15:26 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on January 02, 2021, 05:13:31 PM
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.

It really isn’t though. 

There is a faction unto itself, which boils down to controlling others through pressure, usually combined with a lack of any self-control.

This faction must be in the cockpit of whatever is socially ascendant.  It maintains nodes in all ideologies, buying and selling the megaphones. 

If the cultural zeitgeist changes, the social conservatism that comes out of it will be the same as the version previously.  The people now preaching the deconstruction of all tradition would flock back to church, become elders, deacons, and reverends, preaching to hate the sinner and control the tempted for everyone’s benefit.

Even now, the rhetoric of the opposition is sculpted to maximize the despising of the foot soldiers/pawns.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 02, 2021, 05:14:07 PM
Someone pointed out that the justifications used to confine Covid sufferers could apply to other people as well.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 02, 2021, 06:14:49 PM
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?

What do you care if some one lives on their feet rather then on their knees hiding in their basement?

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 02, 2021, 06:56:35 PM
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.
You are also obligated to follow laws, fucktard.

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

No, that's not how laws work. The Founders of the nation were all around during actual lockdowns and mass quarantines and did not feel in any way it violated the Constitution they wrote.

Every state has a legislature which has, at some point, authorized emergency authority in some body (often the Governor), and similarly many larger cities have had their representatives rest emergency authority in their mayors, to declare such things as lockdowns, mask wearing, distancing, sanitizing, etc..

This is absolutely Constitutional. You do not have the unfettered right to be free from wearing a mask in public in the Constitution and  it absolutely is within legal authority of the state to mandate the wearing of a mask in public for health and safety reasons.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 02, 2021, 07:01:56 PM
The death panels have begun here in Los Angeles.

New LA County Directive about transporting cardiac arrest patients due to rationing of health services from Covid-19 (http://file.lacounty.gov/SDSInter/dhs/1100458_Directive_6revTransportofTraumaticandNontraumaticCardiacArrest.pdf)

But you know, it's just like the flu, right?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on January 02, 2021, 10:10:57 PM
Someone pointed out that the justifications used to confine Covid sufferers could apply to other people as well.

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.
It's called Common Core, and the same methodology was also used to count votes!
ZING!
(http://sites.psu.edu/heroldcivic/wp-content/uploads/sites/38558/2016/03/Common-Core.jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 02, 2021, 11:16:44 PM
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.

And the Pat Pivot is followed closely by the Pat Projection!

I could never, ever match you on these things, Pat.

Quote
Oh 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.
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."

Ha, that was funny. Pity you lack a sense of humor or the maturity to laugh at your own pomposity.

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 observed that your talking points (casting doubt on Biden's clear victory, that the media are all deliberately lying because they don't agree with Pat's opinion that coincidentally mimics hordes of right-wingers) were right-wing fodder. You replied with personal attacks. If you think being called right-wing is a personal attack, then, as I've suggested before, stop posting right-wing talking points.

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.
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

No, you mentioned your sources in the very same post.
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.

Ending on the Pat Projection! LOL.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 02, 2021, 11:24:41 PM
Quote
But 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 03, 2021, 12:00:37 AM

Huh. No response to proof of you lying about when you mentioned your sources.

Quote
But 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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 03, 2021, 01:29:07 AM

Huh. No response to proof of you lying about when you mentioned your sources.

Quote
But 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.

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.
Didn't lie about anything, and I supported all my positions.

You on the other hand haven't stopped lying, and continue to behave like a spoiled child.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 03, 2021, 08:28:05 AM
You are also obligated to follow laws, fucktard.

Some of which I can quite happily ignore. As I have done since the start of this "pandemic", I don't comply with the authoritarian bullshit coming from our Coronavirus Act 2020, or the Health Protection Regulations which it spawned.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on January 03, 2021, 09:19:42 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on January 03, 2021, 10:30:57 AM
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.

Greetings!

Have you heard of the UN?

If you have, you may find it enlightening to learn about Agenda 21, Agenda 2030, and the Kalergi Plan. The "Great Reset" is also tied into this--again, also embraced by the UN and numerous international corporations and Globalists. Hopefully, you will find reading about these agendas, policies, and programs enlightening and worthwhile.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on January 03, 2021, 10:38:16 AM
A non-binding UN thing regarding sustainability? Okay.

The Kalergi Plan seems to be right into the nut job conspiracy theory side of things.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 03, 2021, 10:59:18 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on January 03, 2021, 11:10:59 AM
Greetings!

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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 03, 2021, 11:14:59 AM
Greetings!

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
Did Santa bring you some new tinfoil hats for Christmas this year?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on January 03, 2021, 11:26:26 AM
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!

Well, our society is full of deluded, jello-filled morons, ripe for the coming slaughter, or plough fucked into a globalist, state slavery, led by Marxist, Globalist elites. These smooth-brained cattle are oblivious to the things revealed and discussed by Yuri Bezhmenov, a KGB officer that defected from the Soviet Union to America in the early 1970's. Yuri discusses precisely how the Marxists have infiltrated Western societies, and the methods and apparatus they use to extend control, corrupt and divide society, and gain more power and control.

Furthermore, I am a veteran of the military, of the United States Marine Corps, where I was extensively educated and trained to resist and fight against the Communists, as well as being trained in the knowledge of Communism, their methods, goals, and operations. But that's right. I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about.

Keep sleeping the pacified sleep of the deluded, blind moron. The compliant cattle that blindly and eagerly gets on their knees for their Marxist masters.

I have discussed many aspects and details of the Marxist threat to our society, and Western Civilization in general, because I care about our American history, our heritage, and our freedom--and I want all of those good things preserved, and protected.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on January 03, 2021, 11:37:15 AM
Wait a minute. Surely the Globalist Elite must be the billionaires who control vast amounts of resources at the expense of the plebs. They seem to be capitalists.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 03, 2021, 11:45:01 AM
But that's right. I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about.
Every so often, SHARK glimpses the truth.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 03, 2021, 11:51:59 AM
California funeral homes run out of space as COVID-19 rages (http://California funeral homes run out of space as COVID-19 rages)

But you know, it's just like the flu, right? This happens every year, right?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 03, 2021, 11:59:21 AM

Huh. No response to proof of you lying about when you mentioned your sources.

Get over yourself already.
Didn't lie about anything, and I supported all my positions.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 03, 2021, 12:04:28 PM

Huh. No response to proof of you lying about when you mentioned your sources.

Get over yourself already.
Didn't lie about anything, and I supported all my positions.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 03, 2021, 01:32:16 PM

Huh. No response to proof of you lying about when you mentioned your sources.

Get over yourself already.
Didn't lie about anything, and I supported all my positions.

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.

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.

Quote
You'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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 03, 2021, 01:35:38 PM

Huh. No response to proof of you lying about when you mentioned your sources.

Get over yourself already.
Didn't lie about anything, and I supported all my positions.

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.

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.

Quote
You'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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 03, 2021, 02:38:48 PM

Huh. No response to proof of you lying about when you mentioned your sources.

Get over yourself already.
Didn't lie about anything, and I supported all my positions.

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.

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.

Quote
You'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).

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 03, 2021, 03:05:28 PM

Huh. No response to proof of you lying about when you mentioned your sources.

Get over yourself already.
Didn't lie about anything, and I supported all my positions.

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.

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.

Quote
You'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).

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.
Except I didn't lie. And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 03, 2021, 03:46:22 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 03, 2021, 04:06:00 PM
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.

Maybe that'll be true for Rawma, at some point in the future.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 03, 2021, 04:33:03 PM
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.
Except I didn't lie. And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 03, 2021, 04:39:26 PM
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.

I am just applying the Pat standard; when he maintains a mistaken position in the face of contrary evidence, then he is deliberately lying. That's what he said about all the media who acknowledged President-elect Biden.

Since he insists I'm lying, maybe you should make a judgement on that.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 03, 2021, 04:57:51 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 03, 2021, 05:50:06 PM
And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.
Nobody on these boards is worth any serious investment of time.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 03, 2021, 05:50:43 PM
I'm investing a small amount of time mocking and laughing at you.
That's the spirit!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 03, 2021, 05:57:41 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on January 03, 2021, 06:13:11 PM
And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.
Nobody on these boards is worth any serious investment of time.

That's really not fair. Pat is using his intimate knowledge of hypocrisy to take people down with the power of hypocrisy. He totally schooled me on calling Keiro iero bad names whilst ignoring Keiros awful name calling of anybody who doesn't go by his meticulously high standards.

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.

I have no idea what's going on with Sharkboy. Internet street art?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: VisionStorm on January 03, 2021, 06:27:16 PM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 03, 2021, 06:43:22 PM
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.
Except I didn't lie. And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.

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.
No, I didn't.

I appreciate that you can laugh while the world is laughing at you.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 03, 2021, 07:05:40 PM
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!
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.

And it's not really California's fault. Newsom seems to be a trainwreck of entitlement and stupid, but California did manage to avoid the worst of the last wave. Though I wouldn't give them any particular credit for that either, because covid-19 seems to spread how it wants to spread, with only a few things like border closings making a real difference. But while it's hard to tell, because it's hard to isolate all the variables and distinguish causation instead of just making correlations, the severity of the second wave may be because their last wave was light. The second surge is peaking highest in areas that weren't hit as badly last time. This may have to do with antibody levels in the population. One things the NYT and Fauci never got around to mentioning is the evidence that there is already significant cross-immunity around the world from exposure to other coronaviruses (some are one of the causes of the common cold), and that we're still not sure of the number of asyptomatics. Not to mention historical pandemics tend to follow a two-wave pattern over about 18 months, and then go away. We'll have to see.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 03, 2021, 08:24:54 PM
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.

The Flu vaccine works 45% of the time.

So yeah Flu vaccine works.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 03, 2021, 09:52:52 PM
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.

Coincidentally, this is also Shasarak's principle for CNN. So I guess I'm doing just fine, criticized mostly for lacking the political bias that is popular here.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on January 04, 2021, 12:50:34 AM
I KEEP WARNING, WILL IT GO UNHEEDED?
--------------------------------------------------------------
New York's plan for ROUND-UPS and DEATHCAMPS:
https://twitter.com/drdavidsamadi/status/1345346921616044032

"Section 1. S 2120-A:
Removal and detention of cases, contacts and carriers who are or may be a danger to public health; other orders.
1. The provisions of this section shall be utilized in the event that the governor declares a state of health emergency due to an epidemic of any communicable disease.
2. 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 that, in the opinion of the governor, after consultation with the commissioner, may pose an imminent and significant threat to the public health resulting in severe morbidity or high mortality, 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 a group of such persons by issuing a single order, indentifying such persons either by name or by a reasonably specific description of the individuals or group being detained. 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 and complying with subdivision five of this section."
..,
I warn because I love you all!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 04, 2021, 07:12:00 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 04, 2021, 07:25:44 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on January 04, 2021, 07:47:53 AM
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.
Reasonable people disagree.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on January 04, 2021, 08:35:06 AM
Greetings!

The Irishman at the Computing Forever program discusses aspects of Covid-19 and the globalist UN agenda. Very interesting program from across the pond over there in Ireland. Everything seems to be right on schedule!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 04, 2021, 08:37:09 AM
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.
Except I didn't lie. And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.

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.
No, I didn't.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 04, 2021, 08:51:28 AM
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.
Except I didn't lie. And you have demonstrated you aren't worth any serious investment of time.

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.
No, I didn't.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 04, 2021, 11:21:00 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 04, 2021, 11:31:26 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 04, 2021, 11:35:55 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 04, 2021, 11:37:21 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 04, 2021, 12:38:30 PM
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.

That's nice. I've never had the flu jab, rarely ever get flu, and on the occasions I have, it never puts me out for long. A week at most and I've never been bedridden by it.

My immune system works perfectly fine, I don't need a barely-functioning "vaccine" that doesn't even convey immunity.

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.

I've never been hospitalised by any infection, and we don't pay for it in this country. Unfortunately, I don't get a refund for not making use of the services I fund.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on January 04, 2021, 02:06:11 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 04, 2021, 03:38:12 PM
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.

How do you know what reasonable people do?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 04, 2021, 04:28:09 PM
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.

How do you know what reasonable people do?
If you have to ask, then you spend too much of your time here.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 04, 2021, 05:03:59 PM
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.

How do you know what reasonable people do?
If you have to ask, then you spend too much of your time here.

I mean that seriously.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 04, 2021, 05:19:09 PM
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.

How do you know what reasonable people do?
If you have to ask, then you spend too much of your time here.

I mean that seriously.
Good one. That made me laugh.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 04, 2021, 05:31:57 PM
Another lockdown, even though they don't work, and hardly anyone is dying. Truly we live in fucking clownworld.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 04, 2021, 06:44:32 PM
hardly anyone is dying
Are you speaking qualitatively or quantitatively? I just like to know what kind of monster I'm hunting.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on January 04, 2021, 08:09:43 PM
FREEDOM IS NOT GIVEN, BUT TAKEN:
https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1345842164840984576
There were six people in a house in Gatineau, Canada. A neighbour snitched. Police went in, Gestapo style. Assaulting citizens. So, yeah. Every lockdown politician and apologist who made this monstrous world and then tries to sneak away to Florida or Hawaii? Fuck you.

BRAVELY BORIS:
https://dailycaller.com/2021/01/04/boris-johnson-united-kingdom-announces-national-coronavirus-lockdown/
Under the lockdown restrictions, gatherings with members of more than one household are prohibited and citizens are ordered to stay home except for essential activities, Business Insider reported. All shops except for essential businesses will be forced to close and schools will be closed to all children except for vulnerable populations and the children of essential workers, beginning Tuesday.

PROOF THE COVID DEATH-COUNT IS GETTING WORSE:
https://twitter.com/RealCandaceO/status/1346137454470901763

To those who accuse without proof, who want to round-up, torture, and murder millions of innocents,
WE SHALL NEVER GIVE UP!
WE SHALL NEVER FORGET!
THE CONTROLLERS WILL BECOME THE CONTROLLED,
PATRIOTS EVERYWHERE!
FOR GOD & COUNTRY!
SKY FORTRESS IS ENGAGED!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 04, 2021, 10:46:01 PM
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.

I have no opinion on how California is run, but some of its current difficulties are no doubt due to having more Trump voters than any other state. And Trump supporters seem determined to make the pandemic worse for purely political reasons.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 05, 2021, 04:44:00 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Abraxus on January 05, 2021, 08:36:07 AM
If the rules say no gatherings and one decides to break the rules I have zero sympathy for what happens to those who break them especially in a pandemic. They knew the rules wanted to play Russian roulette and failed. What do you think that people who followed the rules were going to be happy with those breaking them. 

Not to mention the Gatineau video also left out how they lied to the two the cops first saying they were only two inside then eventually started hitting the cops then we see the
aftermath of what happened. 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.

https://montreal.citynews.ca/video/2021/01/02/travellers-eligible-for-1000-financial-aid/ Even better lets reward the Coronaidiots who decide to travel to other countries during a raging pandemic. Due to heavy public backlash the government is thinking of removing the aid. I hope it does because why would they stop when they can get 1000$ to stay home for 14 days when they broke the rules. Nor do I care about their financial hardship because they don't give a fuck about anyone else.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 05, 2021, 09:11:42 AM
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?
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 05, 2021, 09:14:24 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 05, 2021, 10:31:13 AM
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

Coincidentally Morrus posted just yesterday that ENworld turned 20 a couple weeks ago!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 05, 2021, 10:34:23 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on January 05, 2021, 12:57:52 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 05, 2021, 01:10:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on January 05, 2021, 01:32:43 PM
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?
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 05, 2021, 01:43:31 PM
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?
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:
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 05, 2021, 01:58:35 PM
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?

You saying "nuh uh" is not a valid response. They show their math and "nuh uh, I don't like it so I will hold my fingers in my ears" is just a 6 year old's reaction.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 05, 2021, 01:59:44 PM
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.

That's not how you calculate years lost however. If the average is 82.4 (which it is not in the US by the way) but 5% (as a hypothetical) are age 15, then those years lost count as well. You don't take the average age, you take all the actual ages and count all the actual years lost as best you can. "People under the age of 65, Elledge estimates, account for 45 percent of the total unlived years."

(https://cdn.theatlantic.com/thumbor/Vqy5ligFoF90UB5XsQzQj19z2Wk=/672x456/filters:format(png)/media/img/posts/2021/01/Joe_Graphs_03_1/original.png)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 05, 2021, 02:31:22 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on January 05, 2021, 02:34:40 PM
Bothering to debate studies only establishes you have a price, and invites non-stop negotiations to determine where your clearing point may be.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 05, 2021, 02:35:21 PM
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.
Eats you up that we pity you, doesn't it? Oh well, maybe you'll get better at being human.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 05, 2021, 02:52:54 PM
Oh well, maybe you'll get better at being human.

There is no reasonable person that would say this.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on January 05, 2021, 04:03:10 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 05, 2021, 04:38:18 PM
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 05, 2021, 05:11:12 PM
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)

Yes of course I do.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on January 05, 2021, 06:39:47 PM
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.
Hm... FOR THOSE OF YOU PLAYING AT HOME, THE SECRET PASSWORD FOR TODAY IS ~
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on January 05, 2021, 08:09:34 PM
I'LL SEE YOUR "PANDEMIC" AND RAISE YOU TWO BIDENS!
https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/fda-admits-pcr-tests-give-false-results-prepares-ground-biden-virus-rescue-miracle
"The FDA today joined The WHO and Dr.Fauci in admitting there is a notable risk of false results from the standard PCR-Test used to define whether an individual is a COVID “Case” or not. This matters significantly as it fits perfectly with the ‘fake rescue’ plan we have previously described would occur once the Biden admin took office. But before we get to that ‘conspiracy’, we need a little background on how the world got here…

As a reminder, “cycle thresholds” (Ct) are the level at which widely used polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test can detect a sample of the COVID-19 virus. The higher the number of cycles, the lower the amount of viral load in the sample; the lower the cycles, the more prevalent the virus was in the original sample. So, in summary, with regard to our current “casedemic”, positive tests as they are counted today do not indicate a “case” of anything. They indicate that viral RNA was found in a nasal swab.  not sufficient replication of the virus to make anyone else sick.  the media  reports… and is used to fearmonger mask mandates and lockdowns nationwide…"
Why is this being brought up now? The Fake Rescue:

Biden will issue national standards, like the plexiglass barriers in restaurants he spoke about during the debate, and pressure governors to implement mask mandates using the federal government’s financial leverage (NOTE: his 100-day mask-wearing ‘mandate’ is already in play). Some hack at the CDC or FDA will issue new guidance lowering the Ct the labs use, and cases will magically start to fall.  the change will only eliminate false positives, but most Americans won’t know that.

IF YOU DO NOT OBEY, IT IS A DEATH SENTENCE!
https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1346308783325253633
https://twitter.com/tr00p3RR/status/1346314780135587842
https://twitter.com/chiIIum/status/1346491000613728257
https://twitter.com/MajorPatriot/status/1346481056355008514

Oooh! The leftists here must be so wet thinking about the coming MURDER, RAEP, VANDALISM, BURNINGS, AND UNMASKED HATRED they are so known for!
Their DESPAIR is exciting us to no end! Pu-pu-pu-pu-pu-pu!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 05, 2021, 11:03:22 PM
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.

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 05, 2021, 11:35:59 PM
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.

Quote
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.

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. 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.

The fact that this concept is so alien and incomprehensible to you that it hasn't sunk in yet after so many repetitions just shows how insecure you are and your complete lack of a moral compass.

And I've pointed out your errors in almost every single post. Yes, like the one/two bill. 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. You're just trying to weasel by saying it's not an error because it's not important. But that's nonsense. It's still an error. Which you made. And as I've pointed out endlessly, my error actually strengthens the point I was making. It doesn't undercut it in the slightest, as you're claiming. That one could just be a complete failure of comprehension on your part, but that's stretching the bounds of credulity since it's so plainly obvious. So let's call it what it is: Another lie.

You lie and lie and lie. You're the most dishonest poster I've had the misfortune to run across on this board.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 06, 2021, 01:22:00 AM
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.

Quote
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.

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.

Here's Pat being nice after I pointed out his error with documentation and links:
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

What motivated this? I pointed out that Pat was wrong and called him right-wing, which he later said he didn't care about:
And I don't care whether people think I'm right-wing or not, either.

So, I could be equally nice to Pat: "Pat, you're a stupid lying clown who desperately tries to hide his political bias to give himself credibility that his dull-witted recycling of incorrect right-wing talking points fails to give him." But I'll refrain.  ;D

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.

What bothers you is being called right-wing and having errors pointed out.

And I've pointed out your errors in almost every single post. Yes, like the one/two bill.

Excluded, as I've already rebutted it in the very post you are replying to. I graciously offered you this much:
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.
But you wouldn't or couldn't let it go.
Acting condescending
Apparently 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?

Also excluded; as previously stated, I stand by my opinion of you and your posts, based on observation of what you write.

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.

List a statement you think is an error that isn't one of the two I excluded. Document it. Rebut it with actual evidence, not unfounded accusations or name-calling. If there are so many blatant errors, surely one would not fall within the two categories I excluded.

And as I've pointed out endlessly, my error actually strengthens the point I was making.

Your point was that foreign aid and the Springfield race riot study in the $900 billion bill were not coronavirus relief or stimulus, which was nonsense because they weren't part of the coronavirus relief; nobody but your right-wing sources were claiming they were. Saying nonsense doesn't strengthen your point. That an omnibus bill contains spending you don't like is barely even a point, but not getting facts right doesn't strengthen it.

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? I keep replying to you because you keep attacking me, but I am also here generally to rebut false posts.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 06, 2021, 07:28:45 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 06, 2021, 02:19:25 PM
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.

Since you won't bring the evidence, I guess I will. No editing, since Pat will insist it's lying.

You appear to be referring to one of my posts to which you replied like this, quoted here in its entirety:
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.

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 making up fantasies about me.

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.

Here's how that post was referenced in the current thread:
This is a reply to the discussion we were having about

The Pat Pivot, as usual.  ::)
No, by bringing in something completely unrelated, you were the one who was trying to pivot. I just pointed out what you did.

Accusing people of things you just did is becoming a favorite tactic of yours.

Quote
Oh 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.
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."

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.

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.
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.

But are you a 4 year old? Because you're acting like one.

I'm not going to quote the original post about the President elect, but it's linked in the first quote above. You misrepresent my comments: the only things that assigned politics to you were "PR you're desperately trying to spin", "I understand that you're disappointed with the result,", "Kool-aid overdose (sour grape flavor)." (in response to you accusing the media of all deliberately lying by saying Presdient elect) and suggesting that you file lawsuits to address your complaints.

You insisted that Biden should not be called President elect in December, when the practice for over a century has been to call the winner that when the election results (second Tuesday in November) are clear. The only time that's gone longer than December 2nd was in 2000, where there was legitimate uncertainty about the result.

The media in particular are in love with their own importance, as I pointed out and you quoted me saying, and as I also pointed out they will not listen to Pat's opinion on whether they are correct. You and Trump (and other right-wingers) are the only people who seem to care about withholding the title, once the transition was given the funding and access that is its due.

Asserting that all of the media are deliberately lying when they are following their long practice is not ... whatever it is you claim you are; it's over the top conspiracy theorizing.

You are very quick to accuse people who disagree with you (the media, me) of lying.

Continuing to question the outcome of an election that resulted in 306 electoral votes, 4%/7 million popular vote margin is purely the province of people who want to undercut Biden as president. I will call anyone who does that right-wing.

Do you really not understand that suggesting you file a lawsuit is a joke? The only sensible response is to laugh it off, not a scorched earth accusation of insanity. That was really an immense overreaction, like violent road rage because another driver shook his head at you.

In the quoted post from this thread, you imply I've made multiple errors you haven't harangued me about (earlier than this post) but you still haven't actually produced one with any evidence.

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.

I guess this is Pat continuing to be nice. And not a liar. Your post is not aging well, Mistwell.

Quote
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.

I don't understand why you would continue to respond if this is something you find unpleasant, but especially why you would concede that I was correct on something that you had denied repeatedly. If you believe in telling the truth, why not tell it in the first place? If you only realized it was true because I kept pointing it out, then I obviously didn't lie as much as you claimed, and your accusations of lying end up sounding implausible. You could just escape the whole thing by not replying.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on January 06, 2021, 03:11:57 PM
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?
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:
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.

Yeah. I read the source piece.  That's why I was making fun of it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 06, 2021, 10:20:24 PM
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?


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 08, 2021, 12:29:42 AM
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.

Quote
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.

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.  ???

Quote
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 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.

And mostly kept a civil tone?  ::) The lying is all from you, Pat.

Quote
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?

As predicted, you have nothing, despite your expansive claims that I made so many errors. And you can't actually demonstrate any lies, only that I said things you found insulting but that represented my judgement of your posts. Nothing I've seen since has led me to believe otherwise. That you did not carry out an endless crusade against jeff37923 for calling you left-wing but will never relent because I called you right-wing seems to indicate that the latter hit too close to home. And still you will not give up and just walk away!  ;D
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on January 08, 2021, 05:19:18 AM
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.
Hm... FOR THOSE OF YOU PLAYING AT HOME, THE SECRET PASSWORD FOR TODAY IS ~
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 08, 2021, 08:02:54 AM
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.
Hm... FOR THOSE OF YOU PLAYING AT HOME, THE SECRET PASSWORD FOR TODAY IS ~
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.
Good thing too, as I'm not particularly fond of travelers.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 08, 2021, 08:35:11 AM
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.
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.

And you're trying to play the aggrieved victim?

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?

You're a hypocritical piece of shit.

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.

That's, incidentally, a perfect example of you deliberately misreading what other people say. In other words, lying like the liar you are.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 08, 2021, 07:34:28 PM
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.

Pat, if you're really such a snowflake, then you should not post in this forum which is obviously too rough for you. If you're just here to "play the aggrieved victim" as a troll, then I'll just keep pointing out what you are.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on January 08, 2021, 07:55:46 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on January 08, 2021, 08:58:23 PM
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.
Hm... FOR THOSE OF YOU PLAYING AT HOME, THE SECRET PASSWORD FOR TODAY IS ~
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.
Good thing too, as I'm not particularly fond of travelers.

That's your weird bigotry. I'm just pointing out a fact like I should have done about his spelling of Garry.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on January 08, 2021, 08:59:51 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 08, 2021, 09:51:56 PM
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

It's one thing to be a wanderer. It's another to be a thieving thug.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 08, 2021, 09:55:19 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 08, 2021, 10:49:30 PM
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.
You did nothing but misrepresent that post, many many others. It's one of the many things that makes you a liar.

And the funny one, of course. How could we forget that?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 08, 2021, 10:50:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 08, 2021, 10:59:27 PM
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.
You did nothing but misrepresent that post, many many others. It's one of the many things that makes you a liar.

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.

Both wrong, and still can't make your case. Getting to be a habit for you, Pat; you're not very good at this.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 08, 2021, 11:10:40 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 08, 2021, 11:47:29 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 09, 2021, 12:02:02 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on January 09, 2021, 01:48:10 AM
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.

Which is why I don't talk to him.  Your feeding the troll with attention he doesn't deserve.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 09, 2021, 12:26:04 PM
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.

There was one point of agreement between us: that Pat was wrong about the coronavirus relief containing unrelated spending. 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 bookmarked some posts earlier to respond to, so I'll take the opportunity for some separate commentary:

I bet you can predict what rawma thinks on any particular topic just by knowing that he is left wing.

(Leaving out the consolcwby trolling in between; you're welcome! Shasarak does echo consolcwby's incorrect assertion that I had opposed a coronavirus relief package because Trump wanted one.)

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.

This is of course not true (not that that would ever dissuade Shasarak). In the current election discussion, there are really only two sides: accept the Biden win or deny that result, which is effectively support of Trump. Trump was obviously unfit in 2016, and has only demonstrated that with greater certainty since. So, no surprise that I opposed and oppose Trump. But I am also quite confident that Shasarak could not correctly predict even my presidential votes in the period of 2000 to 2012. (Yes, secret ballot, anonymous poster, etc, so there's no way to prove it; but just based on significant and even unfortunate numbers of left-wing people voting for third party candidates, one probably wouldn't be able to tell in general just from "he is left wing".) I've deviated here on occasion from the usual left-wing line, like on birthright citizenship, and I have to agree with the rather conservative Joe Manchin that money for $2000 checks would be better spent on more unemployment aid.

The recent Consolidated Appropriations Act gives several examples of a greater problem, lame right-wing talking points: study of the 1908 Springfield race riot and gender programs in Pakistan and climate change in Tibet - oh no, race and gender and climate change! But the first is a study of the archeological site (https://www.nps.gov/articles/illinois-1908-springfield-race-riot-archaeological-site.htm) by the Department of Interior with respect to whether the site should be added to the National Parks system; the second is in the context of money for democracy programs and gender programs in Pakistan, and the gender programs seem constrained by the following reasonable policy:
Quote from: HR133
(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".

It's usually ridiculously easy to debunk the nonsense posted here, especially about the election, like claims of more than 100% turnout in Wisconsin or in Detroit. (Spoiler: Those claims are wrong.) I don't post talking points from anywhere; I apply the same debunking to things I want to believe as to things you want to believe, and since it's not hard to do and the quality of their posts here would be higher, one has to wonder why it's not done by the right-wingers.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 09, 2021, 05:56:02 PM
Study: 50% of new COVID-19 infections transmitted from patients with no symptoms (https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/jan/9/50-new-covid-19-infections-patients-no-symptoms/)

At least 50% of new coronavirus infections are spread from people without symptoms, according to a study published this week.

People who are asymptomatic or never experience symptoms made up about 24% of all transmissions, while presymptomatic individuals accounted for 35% for a total of 59%, researchers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found.

Jay Butler, CDC deputy director for infectious diseases and a lead author of the study, told Business Insider that the findings back up public health guidelines about social distancing and mask wearing.

“There was still some controversy over the value of community mitigation — face masks, social distancing, and hand hygiene — to limit spread,” Dr. Butler said. “This study demonstrates that while symptom screening may have some value, mitigation, as well as strategically planned testing of persons in some setting, will be a significant benefit.”
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 09, 2021, 06:21:48 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 09, 2021, 06:42:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 09, 2021, 08:45:28 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 09, 2021, 10:10:49 PM
This "nuh uh, you're the poopyhead not me!" back and forth is very productive. I feel informed and persuaded.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 09, 2021, 10:15:33 PM
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.

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.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 10, 2021, 01:33:17 AM
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.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 10, 2021, 11:11:57 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 10, 2021, 11:52:35 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 10, 2021, 12:50:40 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 10, 2021, 03:51:32 PM
No, you've claimed multiple errors but are never able to list them.
One/two ring a bell?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 10, 2021, 03:56:00 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 10, 2021, 04:11:35 PM
One/two ring a bell?

(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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 10, 2021, 04:14:00 PM
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.
You tacitly admitted you were wrong. Shame you don't have the integrity to come out and admit it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 10, 2021, 04:16:54 PM
(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.

You of all posters know that.
.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 10, 2021, 04:24:09 PM
Coronavirus Infects 176 Costco Employees in Washington State



We're locked down. We're wearing masks. We're spreading Coronavirus.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 10, 2021, 04:33:26 PM
Low investment makes it easy to continue forever.

You of all posters know that.
.

If it was at least amusing you may have a very very small point.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 10, 2021, 04:59:37 PM
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.
You tacitly admitted you were wrong. Shame you don't have the integrity to come out and admit it.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 10, 2021, 07:17:02 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 10, 2021, 07:17:44 PM
If it was at least amusing you may have a very very small point.
It's really tedious. That's almost like amusing, right?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 10, 2021, 07:21:50 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 10, 2021, 07:32:56 PM
bark bark BARK BARK bark bark bark
You implicitly admitted it. Get in the damn fursuit.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rawma on January 10, 2021, 07:54:01 PM
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.

Wrong again. You are looking to set the record for being wrong in one thread, aren't you?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 10, 2021, 08:24:07 PM
ARF ARF ARF I'M WRONG ABOUT EVERYTHING ARF ARF ARF ARF ARF
Could you repeat that in pekinense?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on January 10, 2021, 11:35:03 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on January 12, 2021, 09:21:38 PM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Trinculoisdead on January 14, 2021, 12:12:23 PM
This back-and-forth is so tedious that I can feel my brain attempting to revolt against reading any more of it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on January 18, 2021, 09:21:44 AM
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:

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 18, 2021, 01:49:36 PM
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:

Quote
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.

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.
Does it match these numbers?
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on January 18, 2021, 02:23:13 PM
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:

Quote
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.

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.
Does it match these numbers?
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 18, 2021, 04:03:06 PM
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:

Quote
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.

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.
Does it match these numbers?
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 18, 2021, 04:25:42 PM
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 think they should hate fuck and get it over with.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on January 18, 2021, 05:12:20 PM
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:

Quote
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.

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.
Does it match these numbers?
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.

Thanks. I was hoping you'd weigh in on this. You surely know more about it  than I do.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 18, 2021, 05:39:24 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 18, 2021, 06:16:38 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 18, 2021, 06:40:46 PM
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.

The ICUs still not over whelmed?

Any day now, I am sure.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 18, 2021, 07:15:37 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on January 18, 2021, 07:28:30 PM
The new strain of CoronaChan is gonna create so much...new TikTok dance videos.

The ICUs still not over whelmed?

Any day now, I am sure.

Lockdowns are the only way! Wear your face diaper! OBEY!!!

But hey, the shamdemic was never about the KungFlu.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Trond on January 18, 2021, 07:58:39 PM
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!

This time you make sense :D
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on January 19, 2021, 12:31:35 AM
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!

This time you make sense :D
Damn it! And I thought I was on a roll!  ;D
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deathknight4044 on January 19, 2021, 02:58:22 AM
 ;)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deathknight4044 on January 19, 2021, 03:10:16 AM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on January 19, 2021, 05:52:39 AM
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

Greetings!

Exactly, Deathknight. All of the stupid hypocrisy doesn't matter to Liberals. The important thing is to always make Trump look bad, and to defeat Trump--"By any means necessary." Liberals have said that. Our country is going to be wallowing in shit--but the cock-sucking Liberals will love it, because it is Biden and Kamala squatting over them, along with a cohort of black and brown people, like Ilhan Omar and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. Yay! The executive orders of Biden, the policy reversals, the money-printing--so much shit being poured down on this country that people are going to be choking on all of the shit.

Ah, well. There's also going to be returning to the Paris Accords, new environmental laws, gas prices are going to increase, and taxes, taxes, and more taxes. Gun confiscation, mandatory masking, mandatory vaccinations! Ram it the fuck down, baby!

This country is so fucked.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on January 19, 2021, 03:37:53 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 19, 2021, 03:47:44 PM
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.

Have you tried wearing masks?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on January 19, 2021, 04:15:25 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deathknight4044 on January 19, 2021, 04:21:07 PM
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?


That sounds like a response to an argument I didn't actually make. What I am saying is that it will cease to be weaponized politically, we will see less moralizing and accusations of killing grandma for not wanting the complete destruction of the economy, and leftists will now shamelessly champion positions they described as morally repugnant throughout 2020.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deathknight4044 on January 19, 2021, 04:35:41 PM
Quote
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

https://twitter.com/CharlieEmma85/status/1351507371386949639?s=19
Build back better?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on January 19, 2021, 06:13:42 PM

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 19, 2021, 07:13:17 PM

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.
Reasonable responses to Shasarak's obvious sarcasm (easily detected by his use of black type) are a waste of time.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 19, 2021, 07:24:17 PM

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on January 20, 2021, 03:40:45 PM

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 20, 2021, 04:18:06 PM

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on January 21, 2021, 10:22:47 AM

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?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 21, 2021, 10:38:06 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 21, 2021, 02:33:40 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on January 21, 2021, 02:48:30 PM
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.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 21, 2021, 02:55:23 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on January 24, 2021, 07:40:50 AM
https://torontosun.com/news/world/who-advisor-covid-19-pandemic-started-via-a-lab-leak (https://torontosun.com/news/world/who-advisor-covid-19-pandemic-started-via-a-lab-leak)

Looks like the official 'narrative' is about to change...

although I think my favorite quote was the humorous one at the end.

Quote
Biden will be tougher on China than President Trump because President Biden is very smart and strategic...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on January 26, 2021, 04:30:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 26, 2021, 04:48:16 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on January 26, 2021, 05:11:08 PM
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?
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?

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."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 26, 2021, 06:06:16 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 26, 2021, 06:09:48 PM
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?
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?

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."

You have a feeling that there is an over whelming wave of Chinese Wuhan virus crashing onto the healthcare of to be determined countries?

Well facts can not argue with feelings.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 26, 2021, 06:10:41 PM
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.


I never go outside without 3 masks and a full body wet suit.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on January 26, 2021, 06:41:59 PM
Interesting article from the American Journal of Medicine.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002934320306732 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002934320306732)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 26, 2021, 07:37:49 PM
Oh, that kidder, joking around with Matt McConaughey that he was "just a government employee on a government salary". Dr. Fauci makes $417,000 a year. That's more than the president. He's literally the highest paid of all 4 million federal employees.

Completely worth it. All those lies he told, like the ones about masks or herd immunity? He was just protecting us, because the people who are paying his salary weren't ready for the truth. We should give him a raise, with bonuses every time he has to keep the truth from the public!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9185497/Fauci-highest-paid-federal-government-official-417-000-year-salary.html
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on January 26, 2021, 08:54:08 PM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on January 26, 2021, 08:54:53 PM
3 masks each are 3X the benefit to apparel manufacturers making masks.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on January 26, 2021, 09:18:04 PM
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!

Some of us do.

In fact, early on the MSM was bringing that up for a brief instant.  Then it got memory-holed again when they realized Fauci would undermine Trump...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 27, 2021, 12:07:23 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 27, 2021, 08:21:35 AM
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?
I'm sorry you can't read, Misty.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 27, 2021, 09:04:25 AM
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?
I'm sorry you can't read, Misty.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 27, 2021, 10:57:29 AM
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?
I'm sorry you can't read, Misty.

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.
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.
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 27, 2021, 12:10:19 PM
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?
I'm sorry you can't read, Misty.

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.
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.
Except that prior to this, a single PCR test was all that was needed.

https://principia-scientific.com/who-finally-admits-covid19-pcr-test-has-a-problem/

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 27, 2021, 02:02:56 PM
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?
I'm sorry you can't read, Misty.

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 27, 2021, 03:02:32 PM
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?
I'm sorry you can't read, Misty.

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.


Someone's salty.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 27, 2021, 03:59:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on January 27, 2021, 05:17:09 PM
Does this guidance result in a significantly different CNN chyron for daily new cases.  I think that will be something to watch

It’s not what is real, but what you can make people think is real, that matters
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 27, 2021, 05:37:17 PM
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?
I'm sorry you can't read, Misty.

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.


Someone's salty.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 27, 2021, 06:34:24 PM
Does this guidance result in a significantly different CNN chyron for daily new cases.  I think that will be something to watch

Breaking news:

(https://media.babylonbee.com/articles/article-7826-1.jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 28, 2021, 08:18:00 AM
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?
I'm sorry you can't read, Misty.

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.


Someone's salty.

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.
I would care what you think, but that would require me to expend unnecessary energy.

Stay salty, Misty.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 28, 2021, 12:09:46 PM
Well, this is unsurprising.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/28/nyregion/nursing-home-deaths-cuomo.html?smtyp=cur&smid=tw-nytimes

Quote
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.

Guess Cuomo's a liability now, since they're giving him a metaphorical Trotsky treatment.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 29, 2021, 02:01:35 AM
In the everything is perfectly normal category, China is rolling out a new, more accurate coronavirus test, where the swab is inserted into a more sensitive area than the nose.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/anal-swab-china-coronavirus/2021/01/27/cc284f56-6054-11eb-a177-7765f29a9524_story.html
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-27/china-s-zero-tolerance-covid-approach-now-includes-anal-swabs
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/27/china-starts-using-anal-swabs-test-covid-high-infection-areas

Chinese social media is flipping out.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on January 29, 2021, 02:15:01 AM
Truly, we live in a simulation
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 29, 2021, 06:15:35 PM
People are starting to realize the lockdowns and economic impact have and are going to have a death toll.

https://fortune.com/2021/01/06/covid-pandemic-recession-unemployment-mortality-rate-increase/

How many people's lives will you trade to stop Covid? How do we decide who deserve more protection, and why? Are we going to count human lives like potatoes?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 30, 2021, 08:47:49 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 31, 2021, 01:47:29 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 31, 2021, 02:11:52 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on January 31, 2021, 05:54:35 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on January 31, 2021, 07:21:08 AM
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.

Assume government will do the opposite, and you probably won't be far wrong.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 31, 2021, 12:18:27 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 31, 2021, 12:20:14 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 31, 2021, 12:55:31 PM
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.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 31, 2021, 02:44:37 PM
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?

Read the fucking article before commenting, you doink.

Quote
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.

So the pandemic will continue. Which means the lockdowns will continue.

Quote
"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."

The pandemic will continue. Which means the lockdowns will continue until a "sufficient" number of people are vaccinated. How many will that be? It depends on the rates of infection and deaths, which the local governments are using as metrics to justify lockdowns.

Quote
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.

Restrictions such as border controls. That does not rule out other kinds of restrictions. And if the numbers don't hit certain targets, the lockdowns will continue.

Quote
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".

And there's the big takeaway. There is a real possibility that the vaccinations will create environments where new strains of the virus may evolve that are not affected by the current vaccinations. They can't control an entire population, and some joker could brings a variant strain of the Coof back and everything starts all over again.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 31, 2021, 02:52:31 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 31, 2021, 03:14:16 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 31, 2021, 03:21:16 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 31, 2021, 05:19:59 PM
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.

Of course, they've failed miserably at it. They've overstated things and even lied, pushed highly destructive measures with little or no evidence and without considering the trade offs, and stood by or even acted as cheerleaders as everything associated with the pandemic got heavily associated with one of the two highly adversarial sides, making it nearly impossible to have rational discussions. As a result, they've lost almost all credibility and ensured we're probably less ready for the next pandemic than we were in 2019 (and we were horribly unprepared in 2019).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on January 31, 2021, 05:39:26 PM
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.

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.

They've already said masking/social-distancing/lockdowns will continue, even with the vaccinations.  Here is one of Misty's 'legitimate paper's of record' talking about masking...

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2021/01/coronavirus-vaccine-masks-how-much-longer/617747/ (https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2021/01/coronavirus-vaccine-masks-how-much-longer/617747/)

...and obviously, if masking is still important then so is social distancing (according to Herr Fauci on CNBC)...

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/16/fauci-why-still-need-masks-social-distancing-after-covid-19-vaccine.html (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/16/fauci-why-still-need-masks-social-distancing-after-covid-19-vaccine.html)

...and here is CNN's medical expert Bill Gates telling us it won't be back to normal until at least late summer...

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/12/13/sotu-gates-full.cnn (https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/12/13/sotu-gates-full.cnn)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on January 31, 2021, 09:01:01 PM
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?

Yeah, I'm ready to give up the resentment the Empire causes, and be able to fly like normal people used to within my own lifetime.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 01, 2021, 02:31:31 PM


WA moving some areas to "Phase 2", which means some businesses can open up again.

Inslee's actions on Covid have been nonsensical and based on fear rather than data. Resteraunts closed but bars stay open. Places with high population are opening but places with low population remain in "Phase 1" lockdowns. etc.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 01, 2021, 02:46:16 PM
I wonder if the amazingly accurate new Chinese Coronavirus detection tests are going to catch on here.  I have a feeling some folks will gladly engage.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 01, 2021, 02:51:32 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 01, 2021, 03:13:17 PM
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.

https://www.newsweek.com/restaurants-bars-account-less-2-percent-new-covid-19-cases-new-york-1554206
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 01, 2021, 03:24:01 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 01, 2021, 03:25:07 PM
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.

https://www.newsweek.com/restaurants-bars-account-less-2-percent-new-covid-19-cases-new-york-1554206

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 01, 2021, 03:35:04 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 01, 2021, 03:47:55 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 01, 2021, 04:28:05 PM
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.

Yep, really. I don't know about all places, but the gaming pub I go to had that restriction. And then they made it so you have to eat outside. Eat outside in the rainy, cold season of western Washington. I simply stopped going.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on February 01, 2021, 04:53:18 PM
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.

Quote
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/

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 01, 2021, 05:25:19 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 01, 2021, 06:07:40 PM
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.

Quote
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/

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.

Were you replying to me or Pat? If me, then absolutely,  the data I was referring to are very much local, not general. WRT contact tracing, that has never been overwhelmed here and remains a (or the) strong first line of defense. If test-trace-isolate never gets overwhelmed, then hospitals need never get overwhelmed either. It's been pretty successful.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on February 01, 2021, 06:10:05 PM
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).
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.

I would summarise it as, the risk factors are,

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 01, 2021, 06:35:06 PM
Local gaming pub is going to remain locked down despite the change to Phase 2, citing the report of the UK variant in Snohomish county.
I would not be surprised if the UK variant became dominant and we returned to Phase 1 before the end of the month.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 01, 2021, 06:40:01 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 01, 2021, 06:53:07 PM
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.

Agree on superspreader events, but most of those seem to be related to things like weddings and conventions, which doesn't justify any of the shutdowns of businesses and schools. Even plane flights don't seem linked to superspreader events, and at least superficially being trapped shoulder to shoulder with many strangers for hours on end seems to be an ideal situation for it. (Note, planes are still transmission vectors that bring sick people into new areas where the disease can then spread exponentially, but at least once airlines started taking a few minimal precautions in the spring, there doesn't seem to have been a mass infection on an airline.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 01, 2021, 06:55:32 PM
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.

Edit: After looking them over, a few conclusions. (You touched on a few, but I'm adding some new details or emphasis.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on February 01, 2021, 07:46:56 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 02, 2021, 12:58:44 AM
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.  Or flee Cali for anywhere. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on February 02, 2021, 05:15:14 AM
There are reasons people flee NY and go to florida.
Are we talking about Trump again?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: TNMalt on February 02, 2021, 12:52:34 PM
Only reason to flee either place is due to the high cost of living or lake effect snow. Lake effect snow is satan's snow, it destroys the soul while it looks beautiful on the ground. Though if I was in LA, I'd leave for San Diego or the cheaper suburbs.  :P
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 02, 2021, 02:24:37 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 02, 2021, 02:55:02 PM
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.
  • 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
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).
  • 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.
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.

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

There are a lot of variables to work through in this post, and yeah, some are surely significant.

 Just to pick out a few,

Locally, we have had occasional supermarket alerts, but not "lots." And it's important to remember what those alerts are for. They are a "public" part of test-and-trace. Especially in a low-covid environment, people responding to them means transmission is quashed before it becomes a problem. It may look like those exposures don't turn into anything, but that's just because the alerts did what they are supposed to do.

WRT meat packing plants, I'll note that they have become much less of a problem. Not because they are suddenly warmer now, but because employees are now more widely spaced on the line, along with other protocols.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 02, 2021, 02:58:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 02, 2021, 03:29:18 PM
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.

Yeah, the data are shared, daily, they aren't hidden.  And they are acted on (e.g. hairdressers).

 But I agree, I can provide 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, can be frustrating and makes it very hard to compare much of anything
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 02, 2021, 03:41:07 PM
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.

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.

Agree with the rest, though I think it's a lot more important than fodder for web debates. One additional frustrating thing is they also present the wrong information. One we've discussed in this thread is hospital capacities. Capacity at the state level can be useful for judging trends, but it's a horrible measure for determining whether there's a critical shortfall, because 100% of hospitals at 75% capacity isn't an immediate concern, but 50% of hospitals at 100% capacity and 50% at 50% is a crisis, even through the average is the same. Generally, I see a lot of state-level data, and there are a few databases that show capacities at individual hospitals, but what's not being widely disseminated is the vital middle step. And that leads to a lot of unnecessary panic or unwarranted dismissals, because we can't really distinguish whether it's just LA that has a crisis, or if it's a widespread issue in many areas of the state or country, based on the news or what public health is saying.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 02, 2021, 04:57:13 PM

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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 02, 2021, 07:24:17 PM

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
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.

It's not related to the broader conversation, but there are some real issues with the presentation of the data -- there are some conflicting details between the header information, what's said in the table, and what the detail pages say. Note I'm not saying it's worthless or trying to dismiss the whole thing -- this is definitely a case where quickly getting a lot of information out is in conflict with being polished and fully consistent, and the former is far more important. I'm just bringing it up because in situations like this the perfect can be the enemy of the good, because there's a tendency for people jump on minor flaws, and people in public positions tend to be very sensitive to negative attention. Which often leads to sources of data like this being pulled, or never published in the first because, because of fear of negative attention. And that's not a good thing. That may be one of the reasons why so little data is available to the public, aside from more self-serving reasons.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on February 02, 2021, 10:27:15 PM
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.

Quote
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.

Quote
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.

As I understand it, when the West still worked on chemical and biological weapons, one of the issues they had was achieving aerosol dispersion - it's not use killing one guy 100 times and someone right next to him is fine. They wanted to spread the dangerous materials evenly through the air to maximise their number of victims. So when thinking of something like covid, think like an NBC warrior/war criminal - if you wanted to maximise the number of people affected, where would you hit them?

Then you think, well, large coolrooms are a good bet, so are places where people are confined together with aircon recycling the air, but outdoors in the sunshine spread out won't get you many victims.

Or as someone else put it, if you can smell their farts, they can give you covid.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 02, 2021, 11:19:32 PM
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.
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.

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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on February 02, 2021, 11:57:43 PM
It's an interesting fact that, even with the ~650 deaths in nursing homes in my state of Victoria, overall the country of Australia to end September had 1,000 less nursing home deaths than the same period the previous year.

The public attributed this to lockdowns, but the health department attributed this to improved vaccination (ordinary flu vax, which Australia pushed hard with in 2020 because deaths had been growing and they didn't want to face a double-pandemic) and infection control. Minor stuff like the workers wearing proper masks, gloving up when changing bed linen, that sort of thing. It didn't involve much more spending at all, really.

There's some basic shit that's not being done. But that's always the way.

What I just like to point out is that the environments where the government had complete control over what was happening is where we had the highest rate of infection and deaths. It's a bit uncomfortable for those advocating for greater government control over our lives.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on February 03, 2021, 06:12:55 AM
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.
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.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 03, 2021, 08:46:06 AM
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.

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.
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!

Also, I never said it would be prohibitively expensive. Expensive yes, but far less so than than the extra year's entire federal budget they spent on mostly unrelated measures. Which is insane, because when there's an economic downturn, especially when it's the government itself that's crippling businesses, it's not the time to increase governmental spending. The Keynesian rationalization that we need to spend big or things would be even worse has been disproved by every previous recession. They should have steeply cut federal spending to free up money for the productive private sector. But never let a crisis go to waste, eh?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on February 03, 2021, 10:15:58 AM
The other thing to keep in mind with cold rooms at grocers and what not is that it does wear down the workers that are in there a good chunk of the day.  Even with warm clothes and moving around it takes a toll on you and odds are your immune system is a little lower due to fatigue.

I only worked the one month at the meat warehouse but it was 8 hours a day in either the cooler room or the actual refrigerated area.  So close to zero or sub zero with union breaks and occasional run to the mincing room to get the fancy cuts for the fancy restaurants.  Didn't help it was graveyard (10pm to 6:30 am) but if I'd stayed there longer I could feel it taking a toll.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 03, 2021, 12:10:43 PM

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.

That is precisely what I was trying to tell you. In this case, the data are out there, but they are actuals only, giving a two-week snapshot. Fine for the intended purpose of test-and-trace, but without an historical summary, not so good for seeing trends and patterns.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on February 04, 2021, 06:37:12 PM
The average lifespan of a human is 72 years as a global average.
It's 76 in the USA.

Nursing home patients average 85+.
That's 13 years beyond the world average and 9 years beyond the national average.

It's utterly insane to permanently damage the lives of children and shatter the economy to
allegedly "protect" this group of people who have statistically already won the longevity game.

In fact, I'd bet the majority of that group would have preferred to spend 2020 with their loved ones - even if it meant "risking" death - than live isolated, controlled and powerless.

But hey, maybe it all makes sense if you're wearing your double face diapers. Or is it triple now? So hard to keep up with you fucking worthless "science" morons.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 04, 2021, 07:40:10 PM
The average lifespan of a human is 72 years as a global average.
It's 76 in the USA.

If by "human" you mean "male," then okay, 76 years life expectancy in the USA.

If you expand "human" to include females in the USA as well (just a thought, you might want to consider it), then no. Gonna have to bump it up a few years.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 06, 2021, 12:44:45 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on February 06, 2021, 01:13:42 PM
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.

Well, it isn't like they can do something like legally drone American citizens inside the US border...

oh wait...they already set that legal precedent, didn't they.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: The Spaniard on February 06, 2021, 01:14:28 PM
Yea, Wallace is a real klass act... she sounds like a rabid dog when she talks about Trump.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 06, 2021, 02:16:20 PM
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.

She may not be a "talking head divorced from reality" but she is a talking head divorced from authority...In other words, whatever her resume, just a talking head. You can find equally outrageous suggestions from many analysts (some of whom have held high level positions in the past), TV and radio hosts, rpg forum posters,  and frothing YouTube ranters. They don't amount to much. The story here is, "some guy (in this case, "some girl") has outrageous idea." News to nobody. And in any case, Covid protests, though given passing mention in the intro, are quickly left behind to talk about something more.

Doesn't mean it isn't outrageous, it absolutely is.  Extrajudicial killing is not something to be taken lightly. Arguably, this anchor is herself guilty of incitement to violence.  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 06, 2021, 03:56:36 PM
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.".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 06, 2021, 04:05:10 PM
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.".

*Ratchet sounds getting louder*

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on February 07, 2021, 09:37:10 AM
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'.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on February 07, 2021, 09:45:34 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: shuddemell on February 07, 2021, 11:06:42 AM
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'.

No doubt. If they actually did such an evil thing, they would soon come to believe that the Capitol "riot" was their best day ever. You'll actually see a large representation of those millions of firearms they are worried about.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on February 07, 2021, 02:52:46 PM
Greetings!

Interesting that all of these sweet, nice, and kind Leftists are promoting violence against Conservative American citizens. Listen to them talk about how Trump supporters are "Domestic Terrorists" and need to be silenced and removed.

That plan should work out well for all of the Leftists in this country.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 07, 2021, 06:38:39 PM
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 couldn't have imagined anything that would cause the wheels to come off faster than shutting down the economy and restricting people to their homes and essential trips only. But here we are.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on February 07, 2021, 06:41:50 PM
She may not be a "talking head divorced from reality" but she is a talking head divorced from authority...

Debatable.  Her husband is a former ambassador to the UN (for UN management and reform) and is a member of stink tank called Counter Extremism Project.  Given they're both "Republicans" and he works for 2 "bi-partisan" stink tanks there's a good chance his CEP is brought in to "advise" on the "domestic terrorist" situation.  "See even those vile Republicans are united with us against the white supremacists!"

Scare quotes used to represent that these motherfuckers are all globalist uniparty and only give a shit about their club.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: EOTB on February 09, 2021, 01:46:15 AM
SCOTUS knocked a big gaping hole in the Jacobson precedent last night.  That’s the 1905 vaccination precedent usually cited for government public health rules.  The specific circumstance was California restrictions on churches gathering, and it’s arguments they’re more dangerous than going to Costco (and so should be restricted)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 11, 2021, 03:05:09 AM
WHO and China playing footise.



Skip to 18:20 if you are impatient.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on February 12, 2021, 08:28:15 AM
https://nypost.com/2021/02/11/cuomo-aide-admits-they-hid-nursing-home-data-from-feds/

I am stunned at this. 'Oh noez, we didn't want to be targeted by federal investigators'.

Cue me doing a David Troughton in Sharpe impersonation. "You SHOULD have been targeted!"

There is no excuse for this. None. People talk about how Trump killed all those people? Then you better fucking get to work on Cuomo, because he bears far more culpability than the mean ol' Orange Man.

Hell, this is right up there with Bush saying 'You're doing a heck of a job, Brownie' (although again, the culpability rests less on FEMA and more on the incompetence of the local and state authorities of NOLA. But that's another argument).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 28, 2021, 11:10:44 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on March 01, 2021, 09:23:57 AM
The Ohio government got smart and is getting the businesses to enforce their BS for them.  Despite nearly everyone masking up anyway, they told the businesses they would be shut down if someone is caught w/o a mask inside.  So you have private businesses requiring them, not the government, with the excuse that it's no different than "no shirt, no shoes, no service". Some even have police standing at the entrances regularly to deal with "unruly" people who want to put up a stink.

I've had to switch to doing 90% of my shopping online.  It either gets delivered or I get curbside pickup.  I had to completely stop going to one place though because they required masks worn for even their curbside.  A couple pizza places have started asking that you wear a mask when answering the door, to protect their drivers.

The union at my work place delivered a few packages of masks last week with a note: Please double mask, save a life.  No one here took it serious and only 1 person is double masking, but they were already doing it before this.

There are an amazing amount of people, employees and customers, that I've seen wearing it under their nose.  For the few times I do put a mask on I'm tempted to replace my "This Mask is Bullshit!" one with a "It Goes Over the Nose, Asshole!" one I saw online.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 01, 2021, 03:06:55 PM
Double masking is fucking hilarious.

Maybe try using a N95 mask instead - if you are smart enough to wear it properly.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 01, 2021, 04:18:05 PM
Double masking is fucking hilarious.

Maybe try using a N95 mask instead - if you are smart enough to wear it properly.

It also has be be properly sized to wear properly. For my wife (who works at a hospital), it took 2 hr for the *trained* fitters to find a proper sized one for her -- YMMV. Properly wearing it resulted in bruises on her cheekbones -- again, YMMV. Regardless of the bruising, they are not comfortable to wear for long periods of time. They also have to be cleaned properly on a periodic basis.

Any mask has to fit with an air-tight seal on your face or its filter effectiveness is lost due to the majority of the airflow bypassing the filter material. The decrease in effectiveness increases with the bypass area and the ratio of the pressure drop across the filter material to that of the bypass area. That's why most masks are worthless as anything other than a hankie strapped across your face. It will catch big stuff from a sneeze (leaving you with a face-full of snot), as its inertia will carry it into the mask, but the small stuff will stay with the flow and escape via the bypass area. The same is true on reverse. When you inhale, flow will preferentially across the bypass area rather than the filter area.

A good test is if your glasses fog in the cold; if they do, your mask is crap.

I leave the calculation of the Stokes flow threshold for big/small stuff as an exercise for the reader.  :)

Based on my modeling and analysis experience, particles in the >10 micron AED range (the notional cutoff for "respirable" particles) are difficult to filter via impaction. In an N-95 mask, filtration occurs via electrostatic effects (N-95s are made from an electrostatic non-woven polypropylene fiber). I have a colleague that was tangentially involved in looking at using radiation to sterilize N-95 masks. They found that after about 5 sterilizations the radiation damaged the material such that the electrostatic effects were lost. Which begs the question of how "electrostatic" other mask materials are.

One reference I found, found that surgical mask *material* had highly variable filter efficiencies, and hence, "The wide variation in penetration levels for room air particles, which included particles in the same size range of viruses confirms that surgical masks should not be used for respiratory protection."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7357397/

Here's another one showing the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of cloth face masks. It also does a nice job of walking through some basic aerosol physics.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452199X20301481

Obviously one or two studies are not definitive, but they do illustrate that mask *material* effectiveness is highly variable. Couple that with variability in proper fitting and proper wearing, and you start to wonder if wearing a mask is more of a Kabuki dance rather than an effective mechanism to reduce virus transmission. 

IMHO, social distancing along with not spending long durations of time in poorly ventilated rooms that have a high concentration of airborne virus (e.g., a packed conference room, subway car) is your best bet. My one data point for this is that despite the properly fitted and properly wore N-95 mask, a cover mask, a face shield, gown, and gloves, my wife still got COVID.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 01, 2021, 07:39:54 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 02, 2021, 06:20:17 AM
How much brain damage were you born with? Or were you hit with something later in life which caused you to be this stupid?

Not as stupid as someone who believes in an imaginary pandemic.

Didn't your CDC just reclassify a load of "covid" deaths as other things, because the original figures were fraudulent?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on March 02, 2021, 06:24:02 AM
I've seen him posting since before I joined this forum, Mistwell. He's always been like this.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 02, 2021, 06:25:03 AM
Double masking is fucking hilarious.

Maybe try using a N95 mask instead - if you are smart enough to wear it properly.

The Bavarian state in Germany mandated N95 masks in it's mandate. Made no difference whatsoever, in comparison to other mask mandates in other states.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 02, 2021, 08:19:11 AM
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?
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'.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 02, 2021, 11:32:09 AM
https://thehill.com/policy/international/china/540575-china-denies-it-required-us-diplomats-to-take-covid-19-anal-tests

Remember that uncomfortably invasive test China developed for covid-19? They've been using on US diplomats in China. Without consent.

Apparently diplomatic immunity doesn't apply below the belt.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 02, 2021, 11:39:07 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on March 02, 2021, 11:41:31 AM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 02, 2021, 01:44:39 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 02, 2021, 04:16:02 PM
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.
Along with motorcycle injuries and gunshot wounds.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 02, 2021, 05:16:33 PM
The problem really is confusing deaths caused by the Wuhan Flu Virus with the economic damage caused by governments flailing for solutions.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on March 02, 2021, 05:21:34 PM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 02, 2021, 06:17:48 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 02, 2021, 09:02:05 PM
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.
Along with motorcycle injuries and gunshot wounds.

Except that even if every single seasonal flu, motorcycle deaths, and gun homicides were classified as covid-19 deaths (based on the 2019 rates), that would be less than 10% of the covid-19 deaths observed in 2020. And we know that hasn't happened because there are related deaths.

Plus, this would have to be a worldwide conspiracy to inflate deaths in hundreds of countries from Israel to Germany to Brazil -- since all of them also have had major covid-19 death rates similar to the U.S.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 02, 2021, 09:22:24 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 02, 2021, 11:51:05 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 03, 2021, 12:29:19 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 03, 2021, 01:14:43 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 03, 2021, 01:16:29 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 03, 2021, 01:18:02 AM
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.

You think literally the entire planet got together in a massive conspiracy, and you're just smarter than them all?

Jesus, you really are fucking stupid.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 03, 2021, 02:13:40 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on March 03, 2021, 04:56:32 AM
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.

There's even been videos of restaurant owners screaming into live cameras about how their employees are suffering, they can't pay their bills, and they are soon to be bankrupt and destitute themselves because of the pandemic, and the government's response to the pandemic.

States need to get rid of these stupid lockdowns and mandates, and get everything open and running again. Old people, and obese people with trainloads of problems, *THEY* need to wear masks, and quarantine themselves, and stay isolated. Everyone else needs to get on with the business of living. The sooner and stronger that states do this, the better off our economy and society will be. At the end of the day, that's the bottom line.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 03, 2021, 06:39:01 AM
On the upshot, it seems Texas no longer wants to play the game.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on March 03, 2021, 07:04:50 AM
  I am also curious as to the health effects of people being afraid of covid who put off necessary medical check ups as well as many people being advised to stay clear of hospitals/doctors offices unless absolutely necessary (and some people make a mess of that judgement call). 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on March 03, 2021, 07:17:19 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on March 03, 2021, 07:21:25 AM
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.

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.
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on March 03, 2021, 07:32:01 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 03, 2021, 12:50:57 PM
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.

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.
  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.

Yep. The UN has talked about the economic impact on global poverty.

https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/12/1079152

The narrative pushed by governments and mainstream media is that the lockdowns and restrictions are a minor inconvenience. For a lot of white (not my fault that's the demographic) middle class people who can work from home, this might be the case, but I think as the fallout of the past year, financially and socially, starts to manifest over the next few years, people are going to have a lot of regrets.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 03, 2021, 01:17:35 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/06/nyregion/nyc-remote-learning.html

https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/unicef-executive-director-henrietta-fores-remarks-press-conference-new-updated

etc.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 03, 2021, 01:58:08 PM
It seems Mississippi has decided to discard mandates as well.

Note that no one is forcing people to unmask, or demanding businesses fill to the gills. There just won't be any governmental demands that people wear masks or businesses limit customers.

Needless to say, the freakouts are hilarious and disturbing. It seems Loki was right, at least in part: some people are just made to be ruled.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 03, 2021, 03:25:49 PM
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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 03, 2021, 03:35:50 PM
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.

None of which shut down due to masks.

I am not being obtuse. I am responding to an outrageously wrong claim - that mask mandates is what drove businesses under. If I cannot call out blatantly false claims like that, you tell me which false claims are fair game then?



Quote
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.

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.

Also, Fry's was going bankrupt regardless of the pandemic. Have you been to one in the past 3 years? Fry's Electronics was driven to bankruptcy by President Trumps insanely stupid customs charges for Chinese imports, which Fry's responded to by ending all their vendor relationships and going to a pay-later approach (consignment), which almost none of their vendors were willing to do resulting in bare shelves in all Fry's Electronics locations.

But, bottom line, mask mandates have not driven businesses under and are not lock downs. I am waiting for you to tell me which business suffered because of mask mandates? I've been to a movie theater under a mask mandate. I've been do a restaurant (indoors) under a mask mandate. Mask mandates don't harm any business I am aware of. Fuck I think even strip clubs were even able to operate with a mask mandate.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 03, 2021, 03:37:10 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on March 03, 2021, 03:44:30 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on March 03, 2021, 04:15:47 PM
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.

Are you really this retarded?

He is a neocon traitor that sold out to China like the Judas bitch he is.  What do you expect?

Yeah, guess so.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 03, 2021, 04:24:27 PM
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?

Being a neocon was never selling out. It was always my primary choice. I genuinely believe in globalism. Your little union-backed America-first nativist bullshit notwithstanding, there is an actual legitimate ethical dissenting view to your worldview.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 03, 2021, 04:26:54 PM
Brad insults
Brad, 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on March 03, 2021, 05:05:28 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 03, 2021, 05:39:12 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on March 03, 2021, 05:55:12 PM
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.

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 03, 2021, 06:10:42 PM
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.
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.

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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 03, 2021, 06:26:14 PM
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.

To be fair, he's still a fellow gamer. Which means we all have more in common with him than the rest of the differences. I'm not going to "avoid" anyone here based on that alone. He is a nutter. But, you can be a fun and interesting gamer person while still being a nutter. Heck, I am betting a game of Illuminati would be a blast with him :)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 03, 2021, 06:33:54 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 03, 2021, 06:36:35 PM
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.
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.

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.
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.

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.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 03, 2021, 06:39:34 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 03, 2021, 07:36:21 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 03, 2021, 08:17:33 PM
"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&region=World

What source is saying that excess mortality isn't exceptional?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 03, 2021, 08:59:04 PM
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.

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.
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.

Yes, viruses change all the time. See here:
https://nextstrain.org/ncov/global
But no, that doesn't meant covid-19 and the flu have anything even vaguely approaching the same diversity.

I'm not nearly as sanguine as you are that the flu is on the way out. Even the new methods -- Moderna had what, about 20 possible vaccines designed less than a week after China sequenced and released the sars2 genome? -- still require significant (almost a year's worth) testing.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 03, 2021, 09:39:40 PM
"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&region=World

What source is saying that excess mortality isn't exceptional?

FWIW, the excess death numbers greatly exceed the CDCs COVID weekly deaths. For example, the peak number (79,051 @ April 12) is 3x higher than the sum of the CDC number for all deaths involving COVID for the weeks ending 04/04/20 (10,073) and 04/11/20 (16,242) = 26,315. Even if you add in the week ending 04/18/20 (17,106), the peak number (79,051) is still ~2x higher (43,421). In addition, even using the "Deaths involving Pnuemonia, Influenza, or COVID-19 is a lower total (57,892). Not sure what to make of the difference.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm

To my mind, a more interesting way of looking at the data would be to look a excess deaths by age cohorts. For example, the 208 deaths (or 960, if you like the higher number) in the 0-17 year cohort are likely in the normal year-to-year variability.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm#SexAndAge

Even the 155,175 (or 214,459) numbers for 85+ might be within the normal variability, if you look at the deaths going forward for the next couple of years (i.e., excess deaths occurred, but only a couple of years early [873,746/6,604,958 = 13%   of the 85+ cohort die each year: https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D76;jsessionid=D4482A325582CFC030F11DF7D00B]).

Even more interesting would be to estimate the total person-years saved by lockdowns compared to the number of person-years lost due to deaths from the lockdowns. And even, even better would be to convert all of the death and suffering (e.g., long COVID, broken homes, chronic unemployment, etc.) into a dollar-values and to get an estimate if the "cure was worse than the disease". And even, even, better would be to do it with a proper uncertainty analysis so as to see the degree of variability in the results and identify the parameters that contribute the most to the variability.

Sorry... I got all excited there. Better go clean up.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on March 03, 2021, 09:53:17 PM
Greetings!

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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 03, 2021, 10:28:49 PM
Greetings!

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
To quote Immortan Joe, 'Mediocre!'.

I have no idea what Gamedaddy was thinking. I'm not even sure he WAS thinking. I mean, he straight up triple-dog-dared Pundit to go hard option on him (metaphorically speaking) and Pundit obliged. Suicide by mod, I guess.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 03, 2021, 10:45:23 PM
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

Is any of us getting through a year of lock downs and constant fear of the sword of Damocles over your head unscathed?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on March 03, 2021, 11:30:07 PM
Brad insults
Brad, 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.

So yeah...fuck off.

EDIT: Waiting for your claim that's NOT what you meant, but unlike your faggot ass some business owners around here would rather shutdown than have to spend a ton of money and fuck with their customers for something that's not legally enforceable.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 04, 2021, 05:59:09 AM
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.

Not in the UK. We have both operating at the same time (mask mandate since July 2020, lockdowns on and off since then). Mask mandates make some people choose not to shop in-store, which generally hurts small businesses who are not online.

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&region=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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: spon on March 04, 2021, 06:26:49 AM
Yeah, no excess deaths in England. Dream on.

https://fingertips.phe.org.uk/static-reports/mortality-surveillance/excess-mortality-in-england-latest.html

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 04, 2021, 07:18:06 AM
Yeah, no excess deaths in England. Dream on.

https://fingertips.phe.org.uk/static-reports/mortality-surveillance/excess-mortality-in-england-latest.html

He did not say there were no excess deaths in the UK. He said, "With the exception of a spike in March/April last year, our pattern of deaths is normal." This is what is shown in the plot of UK deaths/week (at least up to October):
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-raw-death-count?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute&country=~England%20%26%20Wales&region=World

The April-May spike in the death rate (deaths/week) is reflected in the (time-integrated) cumulative deaths. It is the spike in death rate that causes the higher slope in the Registered deaths line. Once the peak abated (beginning of June), the slope of the Registered deaths line returned to that of the Modeled (expected) deaths line, as would be expected.

The smaller year-end spike (starting in October) is reflected in the increase in the slope of the Registered deaths line. Also, note that the Modeled (expected) deaths line also has increase in slope at about the same time. I suspicion those are expected deaths due to the flu.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 04, 2021, 07:55:21 AM
So many people struggle with basic reading comprehension...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on March 04, 2021, 09:40:58 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 04, 2021, 10:29:13 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on March 04, 2021, 10:38:20 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 04, 2021, 11:02:40 AM
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?

Don't think of it as a grave. It's the future you chose.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on March 04, 2021, 11:11:11 AM
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?

Don't think of it as a grave. It's the future you chose.

They probably have a list.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 04, 2021, 01:53:42 PM
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&region=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.

Your original statement from Reply #1529 (https://www.therpgsite.com/the-rpgpundit-s-own-forum/covid-the-lockdowns-etc/msg1164697/#msg1164697) was:

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?

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 04, 2021, 03:21:19 PM
Brad insults
Brad, 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?

Remember when you chose a porn image as your avatar here?

Quote
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.

No you fucking don't you liar. Because it was lockdowns which harmed businesses, not masks.

Quote
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.

Links. Would love to see proof that it was the mask mandate and not something else which caused this. Bet you it was something else. Like the people working there refusing to wear masks, or the people working there putting up sign saying no masks allowed, or something inane like that.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 05, 2021, 06:45:42 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 05, 2021, 12:28:41 PM
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&region=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.

The U.S. mortality graph above has nothing to do with classifying deaths as covid or not. That's just counting the total number of deaths by year. You can look at the grey lines below 2020 in red for prior years to see the effect of the nasty 2017/2018 winter flu season. There is a huge increase in total deaths in 2020, totally unlike the regular variation of previous years including seasonal flu.

From the source link I gave, you can look at the mortality graphs for dozens of smaller countries, where we can also see prominent spikes around when they encountered covid-19 outbreaks. And again, if this is a hoax, it means that governments, doctors, and researchers from all these dozens of countries are cooperating - from Israel to Italy to Spain to Brazil, despite radically different politics.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on March 06, 2021, 01:52:14 PM
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.

  conservative is an odd word to use for that list of names.  Maybe if more people had dual citizenship they would be more open to the ideas of globalism?  That way if the free markets and globalism lead to their primary home being full of people who used to be middle class forced to compete with overseas slave wages and the place collapses, they have some other place to fall back to.   Bernie is a mess, but listing out a bunch of dudes with divided loyalties regarding corporations with many foreign entanglements and little concern for a rank and file USA citizen doesnt really make the point I think you want to make.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 07, 2021, 11:40:28 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 08, 2021, 11:14:00 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 09, 2021, 10:18:35 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on March 09, 2021, 10:55:57 AM
Greetings!

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.

Millions of traditional Muslims and traditional Hindus also seem to agree with such a view on American culture.

There was a time--now long since past--when many people respected and admired American culture.

So sad that American culture has become such a terrible sewer.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on March 09, 2021, 11:54:58 AM
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.

  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 09, 2021, 02:18:41 PM
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.

You say "schizophrenic" as if it's a bad thing - and that Americans should all conform to a single culture. To me, the point of America is that we have freedom of speech and freedom of religion and freedom to practice different cultures. That's the way it has always been.

As for the CCP shifting -- I'm skeptical as well, but on the other hand, I and most others said the same thing about the Soviet Union in the 1980s. Times do change, and governments can change. Within East Asia, reforms are currently faltering in Myanmar and Malaysia -- but in the long-term, I think that can change, and there has been progress.


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.

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.

cf. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2018/10/01/americas-international-image-continues-to-suffer/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 09, 2021, 02:36:46 PM
You dont export your culture by globalism, you export it with your army.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 09, 2021, 03:04:15 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 09, 2021, 05:02:53 PM
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!"

And regarding the world's impression of the US, what do expect, when the domestic media has been presenting even the most innocent Tweet as the worst thing ever? Propaganda works.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Visitor Q on March 09, 2021, 05:42:53 PM
From the mid 20th century to present day, Africa has had its fair share of countries with left wing governments of varying degrees of intensity/extremism and constitutional recognition.

No idea how they all compare with the US in 2021 in terms of left wing ideology.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 09, 2021, 05:59:26 PM
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.
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.

It's already made MASSIVE changes to Chinese culture. People like to talk about slave labor there, and that used to be the case. Now adays it's mostly bullshit. Instead China has a thriving middle class, which buys homes, and they now IMPORT a bunch of OUR GOODS when before that was impossible. They also negotiate for higher wages. Which happens around Chinese New Year, where a mass strike can happen where all the workers simply never come back to the factory after they go home for New Years. And as this has happened, the Government HAS given up power over the years.

You know what put a halt to those changes? Fucking asshole Trump, whose customs charges threw a wrench in everything. It caused the Government there to feel like they were looking weak, so they cracked down. A lot of progress was lost in that one stupid move.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 09, 2021, 06:03:15 PM

  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 09, 2021, 06:07:20 PM

  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.
As usual, you are a fucking moron.

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 09, 2021, 07:34:49 PM
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.

How could Christianity not spread over the globe when there was the holy trinity of armies exporting it all over the world. England, France and Spain. 

Would Christianity have taken hold so strongly in South America if the conquistadors were not so successful at conquering the existing civilisations? Amen and Awomen
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 09, 2021, 07:37:12 PM

  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.
As usual, you are a fucking moron.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on March 09, 2021, 09:32:54 PM
but that's largely because of disease wiping out the former population, not armies per se.

Like what man?

We just gonna ignore 600 years of Catholic missionaries? Are you insane?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 09, 2021, 09:49:44 PM

  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.
As usual, you are a fucking moron.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 09, 2021, 09:54:53 PM
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.

Its hard to get a true picture of China when you only speak American.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 10, 2021, 02:43:31 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 10, 2021, 03:32:46 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 11, 2021, 01:19:10 PM

  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.
As usual, you are a fucking moron.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 11, 2021, 01:47:11 PM

  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.
As usual, you are a fucking moron.

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.

You are stating a degree of freedom in China that does not fucking exist.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 11, 2021, 05:23:26 PM

  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.
As usual, you are a fucking moron.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 11, 2021, 09:28:43 PM
I'm sure they'll confirm anything that doesn't get them vzyali'd.

Look that word up if you don't speak Russian.

In the meantime, learn to love the renminbi, you bought-and-paid-for chump.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 12, 2021, 10:04:20 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Visitor Q on March 12, 2021, 01:36:12 PM

  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.
As usual, you are a fucking moron.

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.

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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 12, 2021, 02:59:50 PM
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.

This is the guy they gave an honorary Emmy to, folks. This is the guy Fauci said was 'doing everything right'.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 12, 2021, 04:07:15 PM
Honestly can not believe that people think anything good about the CCP.

If you want to look at what China may have been like if they had escaped the yoke of communism then check out Taiwan.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 12, 2021, 04:10:33 PM
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.

This is the guy they gave an honorary Emmy to, folks. This is the guy Fauci said was 'doing everything right'.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 12, 2021, 04:14:35 PM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 12, 2021, 04:40:14 PM

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.
Thanks for the post. It's always useful having an inside view.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on March 12, 2021, 04:53:14 PM
LOL @ anyone thinking China is a "free" country. My dissertation advisor is from China, he said he has to "watch his back" to make sure the CCP doesn't decide to contact the State Department and have his visa revoked. He said that somewhat in jest, but I'm sure there's some truth in it. I'm actually wondering how much of our conversations via Zoom are directly monitored...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 12, 2021, 05:52:15 PM
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!

Damn, down to my last million points.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on March 12, 2021, 09:28:43 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 12, 2021, 09:44:18 PM
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 longer Trumps trade war policies stayed in place, the worse things got in terms of freedom in China. You realize you're proving my point, right?

Mind you, I blame Biden for not getting rid of those tariffs already.  He should have gone right to re-signing the Trans Pacific Partnership treaty. But Biden comes from that old union-supporter background so he's dragging his feat on their behalf I assume. Which sucks.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 12, 2021, 09:49:49 PM

  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.
As usual, you are a fucking moron.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 13, 2021, 08:21:22 AM
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.

Walter Duranty, call your office.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 13, 2021, 06:33:44 PM
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on March 13, 2021, 07:10:27 PM

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 13, 2021, 07:46:15 PM

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.

By the same token, they also are not meant to filter the wearer's exhalent, and in fact because they do not seal tightly, they don't.

Surgical Masks
Surgical masks are used as a physical barrier to protect the user from hazards, such as splashes of large droplets of blood or body fluids. Surgical masks also protect other people against
infection from the person wearing the surgical mask. Such masks trap large particles of body fluids that may contain bacteria or viruses expelled by the wearer.

Surgical masks are used for several different purposes, including the following:
• Placed on sick people to limit the spread of infectious respiratory secretions to others.
• Worn by healthcare providers to prevent accidental contamination of patients’ wounds by the organisms normally present in mucus and saliva.
• Worn by workers to protect themselves from splashes or sprays of blood or bodily fluids; they may also keep contaminated fingers/ hands away from the mouth and nose from exhaling particles

tl:dr = masks filter snot and spit; respirators filter aerosols.
 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 13, 2021, 08:36:09 PM
...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 13, 2021, 09:44:00 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 13, 2021, 10:36:47 PM
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.

 ;)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 13, 2021, 10:58:05 PM

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 13, 2021, 11:02:56 PM
FYI, N-95 "masks" qualify as respirators.
https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/standardinterpretations/2011-11-22-0#:~:text=Response%3A%20An%20N95%20respirator%20is,considered%20a%20filtering%20facepiece%20respirator.

 Question 4: Is an N95 respirator a filtering facepiece respirator, or is it either a demand respirator or a negative pressure respirator?

Response: An N95 respirator is an air-purifying negative pressure respirator equipped with an N95 filter.  If the filter is an integral part of the facepiece, or the entire facepiece composed of the filtering medium, the respirator is also considered a filtering facepiece respirator.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 13, 2021, 11:24:32 PM
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.

 ;)

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 13, 2021, 11:28:03 PM

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.

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.

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. LINK TO CDC CITING STUDIES MASKS WORK (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/masking-science-sars-cov2.html)

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 13, 2021, 11:35:38 PM

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.
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).

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on March 14, 2021, 05:31:41 AM

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.
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).

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.
Your studies are largely focused on protective effects, not on source control. The latter is, admittedly, harder to test (both practically and ethically).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 14, 2021, 09:56:20 AM

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.

Yes. A 2006 article as-quoted in a 2020 article. But here are some more recent articles:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7151430/
https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3739
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30514-2/fulltext

I suspect that both "large" and "small" aerosols are transmission mechanisms.

I despise the mask mandates because, even if masks provided some (debatable) reduction in transmission, their implementation by fiat is unacceptable and their specifics are patently stupid. When they tell me that I have to wear a mask outside when there is nobody around, they are telling me they are full of shit.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 14, 2021, 10:17:52 AM

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.
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).

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.
Your studies are largely focused on protective effects, not on source control. The latter is, admittedly, harder to test (both practically and ethically).
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 14, 2021, 01:14:21 PM
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).

I agree about there being too much certainty. Too many people feel that conversely either (1) masks make them definitely safe and therefore they can be indoors and/or close with others; or (2) masks have no effect therefore they don't wear them at all. The issue of large droplets vs aerosolized is an open question, and it is likely *not* a simple either one or the other. There is a wide range of droplet sizes from less then 1 micrometer to 100 micrometers or more. Aerosolized ​droplets (under 5 micrometers) might be *possible* to carry covid-19, but if larger droplets carry more of it, then infection chances can be decreased. Here are two papers on droplet size, for example:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293495/
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-78110-x


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).

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).

There are vanishingly few randomized studies of mask wearing specific to covid-19, because in most places, officials haven't wanted to subject the public to risky randomized trials in the face of the pandemic. Regarding the one you cited earlier...

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 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.

I think it's exactly this sort of statement that leads to false certainty. 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. From the Environmental Research paper earlier:

(https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/corecgi/tileshop/tileshop.fcgi?p=PMC3&id=391684&s=105&r=1&c=1)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 14, 2021, 02:43:34 PM
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).
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.

And I feel like I'm talking to a child who doesn't understand how population studies are conducted, because anyone else would know that the mere fact that those countries had low death rates doesn't prove anything about masks. Population studies are messy and it's very hard to draw conclusions, because it's extraordinarily difficult to isolate the different factors. One of the leading theories for why the death rates were lower is simple cross immunity: Waves of earlier coronaviruses in the region led to at least partial immunity. If we consider it in the longer term, there might even be genetic adaptations in play. But that's all highly speculative. The truth is, nobody really knows.

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'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). And I've also stated that there are many studies that show that masks work, but they're either testing N95s; or studying mask use in clinical environments like hospitals, where people are rigorously trained and adhere to strict standards, and thus are completely different from Average John or Everyday Kim wearing a mask while juggling groceries, kids, and a budget; or are focused on different diseases. The Danish study is one of the few that tests plausible masks in real world environments and covid-19, and of those is the only large randomized study. And to repeat myself again, since you apparently just decided to ignore it, the regional studies on mask mandates don't care whether the person wearing the mask is spreading the disease or trying to protect themselves.

That can be summarized as "masks don't work" because it coveys the essential information, and typing that every fucking time is ridiculous.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 14, 2021, 08:25:08 PM
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).

NZ bet the Chinese Wuhan virus without mandated masking (except on public transport).

Social distancing seemed to work much better for us.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 14, 2021, 11:17:20 PM

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on March 15, 2021, 12:23:16 AM
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.

What's going to get real fun are the dropout rates, suicide rates, addiction rates, long term poverty, academic failure rates and all those other neato-peachy-keen effects we're going to see happen for the next decade because the mass of the so-called "first world" chose security over freedom, and predictably received neither.

Plus we get to see how mRNA experiments work in the wild! Whee!!

And before anyone starts crying that I'm a dreaded anti-vaxxer, allow me to assure you that I absolutely recommend that everyone who wears face diapers and supported the lockdowns should get as many mRNA doses as they can...and then get more.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 15, 2021, 07:36:22 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 15, 2021, 08:26:53 AM

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.
No I made no such claim. Do you not understand what the words "until now" mean?

As I've pointed out in I think 3 different posts now the studies I referenced were not just talking about the protective effects to the person wearing the mask. The population studies, for instance, look at the overall rise or drop in the infection rate across an entire population. Which, it should be obvious, involves both people infecting others, and being infected themselves. The hamster study I alluded to, while it seems to favor masks (albeit in very artificial conditions that don't seem to hold up given later evidence), explicitly tested and separated out both. There are others, but that's enough to completely repudiate your claim. Ignoring half of what I said and then claiming I didn't say it isn't a valid argumentative technique.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 15, 2021, 02:41:03 PM
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.

Quote
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.

It's not an on/off virus. Exposure to a tiny amount of virus is typically not enough for you to be infected. It's an issue of quantity, often from larger particles. Masks help prevent that from spreading away from your mouth/nose if you're wearing a mask. You know this. You've known this for 9 months.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 15, 2021, 04:59:03 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on March 15, 2021, 05:19:15 PM
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 15, 2021, 05:40:10 PM
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).

I'm not sure what this is supposed to show. Comparing different states and countries is always difficult, but what I see is,

Florida has has 32,254 deaths out of population 21.5 million, or 150 per 100K.

California has had 56,546 deaths out of population 39.5 million, or 143 per 100K.

But there are a host of factors besides mask-wearing that differ between both populations.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on March 15, 2021, 07:05:03 PM
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.

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 15, 2021, 08:19:04 PM
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 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.

Then a few studies came out like the hamster study that supported the idea that masks did work, which made masks sound like they might have an effect. But they were highly artificial studies, and eventually the weight of evidence shifted as they began to study the effects outside of the lab, for instance in all the population studies. Note that the evidence is still fairly weak; most of the studies are absolute crap, very low on the tiers of evidence based medicine, with weak controls and small data sets; or in the case of population studies, are dealing with a situation where it's notoriously hard to isolate effects, because people and societies aren't particles. That's the main reason I've mentioned the Danish study a couple times, because it's the only real, high quality study (randomized, thousands of participants, etc.). But while the mask studies are heterogeneous and inconclusive, there have been enough of them that the case for masks is very weak and would require strong evidence to budge the dial.

I think mask mandates are absurd. The 90% or so compliance rates when mask wearing was elective makes them pointless, even if mask wearing had a significant effect. But the evidence is against that, so they're pointless on top of pointless. In addition, there's the moral issue. They're a massive intrusion on personal choice, and set a horrible precedent when it comes to the limits of governmental control. The fact that the public has largely acquiesced gives me little hope for the future of free societies. We already don't seem to care about massive surveillance, and basic civil liberties are being eroded. How long before all that's a distant memory? In 100 years, I fully expect the entire world to be controlled by a totalitarian super-state. Mask mandates aren't just bad policy, they're evil. But that's far beyond a covid-19 discussion, because this is just the latest slide down a long, slippery slope already stained a deep brown with skid marks.

I don't think filtration matters, because viral particles contained in aerosolized particles are far too small to be filtered out. As I mentioned before, what masks do is affect the air flow, and catch large droplets. That can stop transmission, if transmission is by large droplets. A mask can break up a sneeze and prevent the beads of snot and water and virii from being blasted across a room, and generally lower the speed of exhalations and redirect them sideways instead of straight forward. But that doesn't seem to be a big mode of transmission. At the start of the pandemic, medical science had a model that disease were either aerosolized, or they were not. That was a false model, and covid-19 helped jump start the realization that aerosolization is a spectrum, with all airborne diseases displaying a spectrum of particle sizes. There still isn't good direct evidence of aerosolization/non-aerosolization for sars2, but the circumstantial evidence is very strong. The seeming lack of spread by surfaces or close proximity, for instance. The nature of superspreader events, the vast majority of which are indoors, and the bias is even greater when it comes to the number of cases (outdoor superspreader events cause far fewer cases than indoor ones). The few cases in Japan, despite the trains. The effectiveness of ventilation. That people talking seems to be one of the major drivers of infection. And on and on. Covid-19 appears not just to be on the aerosolized spectrum, but highly aerosolized, with most infections being caused by viruses suspended in the tiniest of droplets, which can hang in the air for hours or days, and spread quickly (minutes or tens of minutes) through any enclosed area, regardless of their origin point or initial velocity, and which build up over time, as more of them are emitted (and you lose a lot of moisture/small droplets when you keep your mouth open, say to speak). Masks without a perfect seal don't affect that.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 15, 2021, 08:24:38 PM
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.

Quote
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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 16, 2021, 07:20:18 PM
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.

Quote
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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 16, 2021, 07:39:06 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on March 16, 2021, 07:55:28 PM
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.

She points out that the messaging from public health authorities has been mixed and inconsistent, and that political leaders have politicised the issue. We can't do much about political leaders, but public health messaging could be better. She also says,

Quote
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.
Quote
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.

Anyway, her article is good and you should read it. It's evidence-based practice for public health messaging.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on March 17, 2021, 07:16:35 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on March 18, 2021, 12:07:25 PM
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.

Quote
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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on March 18, 2021, 01:19:32 PM
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.

Quote
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 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.

Trying to explain the difference between doctors/scientists who actually practice/research both medicine and science and "doctors" and "scientists" who are policy wonks has been one of my biggest hurdles in the "pandemic" (even that term pisses me off and I need to explain that too).  People think that someone who's a doctor who does nothing but make rules/regulations/policy documents is the same as a top notch heart surgeon.

NO they are bureaucrats with slightly better education to be able to understand the really smart people.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 18, 2021, 01:26:05 PM
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.

The "study" where they deliberately gave already gravely ill people lethal doses of HCQ, you mean?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 18, 2021, 01:27:52 PM
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.

Massive Chinese study showed it was statistically insignificant. Which would be why all the mask mandates have done precisely fuck all.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on March 18, 2021, 01:34:34 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 23, 2021, 09:59:52 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on March 23, 2021, 10:10:55 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on March 23, 2021, 10:31:30 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on March 23, 2021, 10:47:53 AM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 23, 2021, 11:35:39 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on March 23, 2021, 12:55:20 PM
[quote author=jhkim link=topic=42126.msg1166671#msg1166671 date=1616513739
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.
[/quote]

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 23, 2021, 01:13:51 PM
Those of you pining for the bootheel of government on your neck should move to Germany. Mutti Merkel's locking down EVERYTHING Easter Week. Everything. Supermarkets, essential services, manufacturing...

And may your chains lie lightly upon you.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 23, 2021, 02:22:57 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on March 23, 2021, 03:28:00 PM
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.

"cases"?

This is the rub. You're doing the quote thing so I take it you're questioning whether there really are cases, or "cases" as you prefer.

Explain the conspiracy please. Who are the conspirators, what is their motive, how have they managed to coordinate a worldwide fake pandemic. Lay it all out for idiots like me.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 23, 2021, 03:47:15 PM
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!

No one wears two masks!  That would be crazy.

Its three masks or bust.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on March 23, 2021, 04:29:31 PM
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.

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?

Also, imagine trying to sound smart by talking about p values when it was pretty clear what I meant. You're seriously annoying as fuck. Adding Comrade Kim to ye olde ignore list as he seems to add nothing but "actually!" vibes to every discussion.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on March 23, 2021, 04:36:14 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 23, 2021, 05:31:24 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on March 23, 2021, 06:20:43 PM
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.

Greetings!

Hi there, Brad! Good to see you still standing strong! ;D

Fuck the goddamned masks! I rarely ever wear the fucking things. The *only* times that I do put the fucking mask on is when I have to go to some place that absolutely requires it, of everyone. Such as when I have had a medical appointment--they require everyone to wear a mask to enter the building--or when I needed to conduct business at my phone company--they, too, have a mask requirement for everyone entering the business. So, I have occasionally had to wear the fucking mask.

Fortunately, most places around where I live--businesses, restaurants, markets, do not have such requirements, and the majority of patrons and customers going into such places aren't wearing the fucking mask, either. Some restaurants, for example, have their employees wearing masks--but I'm glad to also see that some restaurants have gotten rid of that program, too, and the girls that cook for me and bring me my food often are smiling and happy, and normal--not all masked the fuck up and making everyone feel like they are sitting in a fucking hospital.

I'm very glad that the society--at least here--is making efforts to return life to normal, and are not embracing hysteria, paranoia, and fucking government tyranny.

It's so nice to see people's faces, enjoy actually having conversations together, seeing them laugh. Fucking LIVING and enjoying LIFE.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 23, 2021, 07:00:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on March 23, 2021, 07:50:37 PM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on March 23, 2021, 08:21:01 PM
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...

Your grandma is, sure.  Mine are both dead, and if they weren’t I’d tell them to stay the fuck home if they were worried about this sham.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on March 23, 2021, 09:06:00 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 23, 2021, 10:10:59 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on March 24, 2021, 09:36:35 AM
How else are Brads Grandmas going to vote for Biden again next election?

They both voted for Biden at least five times, I bet. Also:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971220305348

So...yeah. Fucking dumbasses like Comrade Kim calling themselves scientists but ignoring studies like that because they don't fit the media narrative is exactly why I have zero respect for anyone in academia anymore.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on March 24, 2021, 12:11:13 PM
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?

I would. I'm concerned about the homicide rate in my zip code. It is vanishingly small. Spread it out the county, vanishingly small. National figures are of no use to me.

And if our murder rate was as suspicious as our corona-related deaths it would mean even less.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 24, 2021, 12:48:50 PM
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.



Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 24, 2021, 01:50:43 PM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 24, 2021, 02:33:56 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 24, 2021, 02:39:45 PM
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!

Are you fucking daft? I never said Biden is a simple moron.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 24, 2021, 02:51:42 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 24, 2021, 03:03:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 24, 2021, 04:29:39 PM
Well, I'll just be in the corner laughing like a maniac.

https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1374777986965209100
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 24, 2021, 05:16:08 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 24, 2021, 07:06:08 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: shuddemell on March 25, 2021, 11:12:02 AM
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.

It would be nice, but it's a taller order than you realize. I work in a Bacteriology Lab, but having been trained as a chemist, I have discovered through time that we all touch our faces unconsciously almost constantly. It's a tough habit to break, even when you are being exceptionally mindful of it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on March 26, 2021, 10:30:27 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on March 26, 2021, 05:41:26 PM
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.
Well, it says protests will be permitted, so just say you need to travel to take part in a protest.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 27, 2021, 01:05:18 PM
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

TL:DR = (see p 7 of 18); MR = Dr Michael Ryan; MK = Dr Maria Van Kerkhove

This is a question on Austria. The Austrian Government has a desire to make everyone wear a mask who's going into the shops. I understood from our previous briefings with you that the general public should not wear masks because they are in short supply. What do you say about the new Austrian measures?

MR Thank you. I'm not specifically aware of that measure in Austria. I would assume that it's aimed at people who potentially have the disease not passing it to others. In general WHO recommends that the wearing of a mask by a member of the public is to prevent that individual giving the disease to somebody else. We don't generally recommend the wearing to masks in public by otherwise well individuals because it has not been up to now associated with any particular benefit.

It does have benefit psychologically, socially and there are social norms around that and we don't criticise the wearing of masks and have not done so but there is no specific evidence to suggest that the wearing of masks by the mass population has any particular benefit. In fact there's some evidence to suggest the opposite in the misuse of wearing a mask properly or fitting it properly or taking it off and all the other risks that are otherwise associated with that.

There also is the issue that we have a massive global shortage and where should these masks be and where is the best benefit? One could argue that there's a benefit of anything but where does a given tool has its most benefit? Right now the people most at risk from this virus are front-line health workers who are exposed to the virus every second of every day.

The thought of them not having masks is horrific so we have to be very careful on supply but that is not the primary reason why WHO has advised against using masks at a mass population level. I'll pass to Maria on the technical side, you may have something to add.

MK Thanks. No, only to reinforce what Mike has said, that our recommendations are that in the community we don't recommend the use of masks unless you yourself are sick and as a measure to prevent onward spread from you if you are ill. The masks that we recommend are for people who are at home and who are sick and for those individuals who are caring for those people who are home that are sick.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on March 27, 2021, 01:13:36 PM
Is it possible that the WHO have changed their advice in the last year?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 27, 2021, 01:49:41 PM
Is it possible that the WHO have changed their advice in the last year?

Absolutely.

Interestingly enough, this CNN article:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/30/world/coronavirus-who-masks-recommendation-trnd/index.html

links to his WHO page, which says, "Masks should be used as part of a comprehensive strategy of measures to suppress transmission and save lives; the use of a mask alone is not sufficient to provide an adequate level of protection against COVID-19.":
https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public/when-and-how-to-use-masks

and links to this twitter thread which has the video:
https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1244637360706342917

from which the transcript was taken:
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/transcripts/who-audio-emergencies-coronavirus-press-conference-full-30mar2020.pdf?sfvrsn=6b68bc4a_2




Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on March 27, 2021, 01:52:30 PM
So what's the current WHO guidance?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 27, 2021, 02:36:42 PM
So what's the current WHO guidance?

WHO knows?   ;)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on March 27, 2021, 02:38:48 PM
So what's the current WHO guidance?

I'm sure we'll find out shortly after the WHO receives their new guidelines from the CCP.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on March 27, 2021, 10:18:16 PM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 27, 2021, 10:31:31 PM
Pre-COVID, the WHO and the CDC did not recommend mask wearing for the general public during flu season. The hospital my wife worked at did not require her to wear a mask if she got the flu vaccine.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 27, 2021, 11:45:55 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 28, 2021, 12:45:56 AM
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?
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.

But you'll note they never explain what the "new evidence" is. Not even a hint, much less a citation to a peer-reviewed paper. There were some new arguments in favor in June 2020, like the hamster study, but if that was the reason, why not say it? And in the months since, the evidence has shifted back in the other direction. Why haven't they adjusted their recommendations back?

Because the WHO is a political entity. When you leave them alone (like in 2019), they won't always make the correct recommendations, but they'll tend to follow the science. But when the political establishment of their member nations all decided to do the opposite of what they recommend, what happens? Do they take a brave stand and hold the line? Or do they make a politically motivated concession?

Look at the disgraceful way they handled the investigation into the Wuhan lab, with more than a year before they assembled a team, highly biased "investigators", and they didn't even talk to the janitorial staff or have access to the needed records. Yet they praised China's response to the heavens, and fully exonerated them despite not having any basis to do so. And that was just in response to the pressure of one of member nation, not nearly all of them.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 28, 2021, 07:43:47 AM
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?

Well just f*&^ me stupid.  :-[

I will have to be more mindful of dates in the future.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on March 29, 2021, 09:50:38 AM
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?

Oh thank goodness the impartial meritocracy of the WHO is following the science. What would we do without them.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 29, 2021, 05:55:10 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 29, 2021, 08:46:57 PM
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.

It's such a small thing to prevent people dying of Covid! [/s]
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on March 29, 2021, 09:02:35 PM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 30, 2021, 08:16:45 AM
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.

Welcome to Arztotska!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on March 30, 2021, 11:00:47 AM
I guess I should get used to the idea of having to wear some sort of patch or pin to display that I'm an untermensch that has not had the "vaccine"?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 30, 2021, 09:42:07 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 30, 2021, 10:03:19 PM
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.

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 30, 2021, 10:37:30 PM
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.

Totally nothing at all.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on March 31, 2021, 09:31:23 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 31, 2021, 09:41:47 AM
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on March 31, 2021, 11:10:08 AM
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).
There's also a major Democrat push to eject her from the House.

But I'll tell you what. When the Dems start pushing to remove Ilhan 'brother-fucker' Omar, I'll start giving a shit about Greene. Until then, they can just suffer.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on March 31, 2021, 11:53:00 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on March 31, 2021, 12:03:18 PM
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.
Good for her to faithfully represent her constituents. Too bad though that we have a population behind the idiotic beliefs she champions.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on March 31, 2021, 12:05:51 PM
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).

Revalation 13:16-17
Quote
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.

So, pretty sure that's the jist of the claim.  If you can't go into a shop, movies, travel, etc without a vaccine passport it sort of bears a resemblance to what the biblical Mark of the Beast is suppose to be like.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 31, 2021, 12:10:18 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 31, 2021, 12:33:20 PM
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 31, 2021, 12:39:06 PM
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.
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on March 31, 2021, 02:06:06 PM
to calling vaccine passports Biden's Mark of the Beast.

She may or may not be correct, but your blatant disregard for religious interpretation of events is pretty bigoted...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 31, 2021, 03:34:55 PM
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.

Totally nothing at all.

Oh I agree it does have a lot to do with that. But pretty hard to argue totalitarian rule and influence of the people on that rule by use of a signed petition in the same breath.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 31, 2021, 03:36:15 PM
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.

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.

I'm right of center, sparky. You really pretending Pat's free of ideological influence?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 31, 2021, 04:47:58 PM
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?

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.

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."

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 31, 2021, 05:19:02 PM
I'm right of center, sparky. You really pretending Pat's free of ideological influence?
So what's my ideology?

I'm not right of center, BTW.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 31, 2021, 05:37:27 PM
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.

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."
What you're describing isn't a relaxing of restrictions, it's the equivalent of a Mafia protection racket.
"You've taken away everything from me!"
"Yes, and if you want anything back, you're going to have to do exactly what I say..."

And that's not even the truth of what's happening, because a lot of the restrictions have already been lifted. The vaccine passes are being accompanied by the threat of new restrictions, to get people to go along.
"It puts the lotion on or it gets the hose again."

Not to mention, who's going to trust them? They've lied and lied and lied.
"Two weeks to slow the spread."
"Once we've beaten back the virus, everything will go back to normal."
"We should be back to normal by 2021."
"Once you have a shot, you'll be able to go about your life like normal."

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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 31, 2021, 05:52:05 PM
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."

How is your Vaccination Passport going to work for the 99.8% of people that caught the Wuhan CCP Virus and survived?

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 31, 2021, 05:53:15 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on March 31, 2021, 05:57:23 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on March 31, 2021, 06:47:22 PM
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.

Almost like its the common fucking flu.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 31, 2021, 08:32:34 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 31, 2021, 09:54:13 PM
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.

They were naive. The government loves to take advantages of crisis to push restrictions on freedoms.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on April 01, 2021, 01:53:32 PM
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.
Good for her to faithfully represent her constituents. Too bad though that we have a population behind the idiotic beliefs she champions.

Oh we're talking about bad populations now are we? Plenty of room to explore there.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on April 01, 2021, 01:55:25 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 01, 2021, 02:58:02 PM
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.
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on April 02, 2021, 09:44:25 AM
I would be fine with 10k representatives. Make it much harder to bribe, it would create more regional parties/independents, and my rep might actually answer the phone if I call him.

It would be bonkers but our system of government doesn't work to well with how big it is anyway.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 04, 2021, 01:05:30 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 04, 2021, 02:41:00 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 04, 2021, 06:56:31 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 04, 2021, 07:13:32 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 04, 2021, 07:25:30 PM
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.

75% sounds good to me. What is our benchmark? Say I wanted to resolve the bet right now, how would we determine who won?

And what about the possibility that the mask mandates go away for a few months and then come back if a new strain or a different epidemic arises?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on April 07, 2021, 08:40:35 PM
Greetings!

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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on April 07, 2021, 10:10:00 PM
Greetings!

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
Self righteousness collides with reality.

Dipshit would've been in the clear if he hadn't slapped the guy's phone away. At that point, it's game on.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on April 07, 2021, 11:04:59 PM
Greetings!

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
Self righteousness collides with reality.

Dipshit would've been in the clear if he hadn't slapped the guy's phone away. At that point, it's game on.

Greetings!

Hey my friend! Yeah, exactly! I read the quote from him, where he is all so proud of himself, casually mentioning that he knocked the man's phone out of his hand.

I'm thinking, dude, what the fuck are you thinking? I know people that have paid $1,000.00 for their cell phone. Does this moron have a deathwish? Yeah, I can see how some might think it *extreme*--but people have been beaten to a fucking pulp and even killed for *FAR LESS*

Some fucker like him trying that shit with me, and I too, would have beat his fucking ass. He's lucky he didn't get curb-stomped to death right there on the spot.

The self-righteousness, and the total, obliviousness of these people is just mind boggling to me, you know? It's like, fuck, man, how did you manage to make it this far as an adult?

It's probably because he lives in a coddled fucking bubble up there in Canada. I can just imagine him trying that shit on some black dude over in Long Beach, CA, or a Hispanic guy in Santa Ana, CA. Or on some bearded white dude in Couer'D Lane, Idaho. I can see lots of different people knifing the fuck out of him, and watching him lay there, bleeding the fuck out and crying like a bitch.

These people like him are such smug jackasses. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 07, 2021, 11:25:57 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on April 08, 2021, 12:33:46 AM
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.

Greetings!

Nah, no worries. I just thought the fucker was pretty entitled and stupid. It boggles me why he didn't think acting in such a manner would provoke someone to respond strongly in response. It amazes me how clueless so many people are.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on April 08, 2021, 12:57:41 AM
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.

There is always one asshole bringing a knife to a gun fight.

Probably Irish too.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on April 08, 2021, 08:23:16 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on April 08, 2021, 08:47:37 AM
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.

https://southpark.cc.com/video-clips/ufig22/south-park-mexican-space-program

I mean...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on April 08, 2021, 05:52:12 PM
Oh look...

https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.com/wp-content/uploads/5thsciencereview-masksharm-1.pdf

You fucking sheep amuse me.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on April 08, 2021, 06:15:09 PM
Oh look...

https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.com/wp-content/uploads/5thsciencereview-masksharm-1.pdf

You fucking sheep amuse me.

FWIW, the citation that supports, "The government claims that masks work are in effect disingenuous propaganda, improperly relying on substandard and irrelevant studies":
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343399832_Face_masks_lies_damn_lies_and_public_health_officials_A_growing_body_of_evidence
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 08, 2021, 07:30:25 PM
You fucking sheep amuse me.
Everybody's got their kinks, but voyeuristic bestiality is exactly what I imagined would amuse Brad.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on April 09, 2021, 01:46:05 PM
https://nypost.com/2021/04/08/second-vaccine-site-paused-after-adverse-reactions-to-johnson-johnson-shots/

Yeah, this seems really neat. Good plan taking experimental vaccines, guys.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 09, 2021, 02:06:29 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 09, 2021, 02:07:55 PM
https://nypost.com/2021/04/08/second-vaccine-site-paused-after-adverse-reactions-to-johnson-johnson-shots/

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 09, 2021, 02:11:23 PM
https://nypost.com/2021/04/08/second-vaccine-site-paused-after-adverse-reactions-to-johnson-johnson-shots/

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.

18 outta 2300 is less than 99% and 99% is the number at which people are not supposed to give a shit about things so it's cool.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on April 09, 2021, 03:09:41 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 09, 2021, 03:37:46 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 09, 2021, 05:50:11 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 09, 2021, 05:52:17 PM
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.

Fuck. Time to wither away.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 12, 2021, 08:51:32 PM
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on April 12, 2021, 09:23:06 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 12, 2021, 09:59:52 PM
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.

I'm generally pro-vaccine, with the caveat that I dislike the proponents who want to downplay side effects, and proclaim anyone who is concerned as "anti-vaccers".

What bothers me is, we have a vaccine rolled out in record time, and pushed onto the majority, hell I'd say the entire population, with an impossibility to determine the long term side effects. I can't shake the mental image in 5-10 years of a TV advertisement asking "Were you or a loved one vaccinated against Covid-19 in 2021-22? You may be entitled to monetary compensation..."

I literally cannot make an informed risk assesment of vaccination against Covid and natural immunity from being exposed to the virus. There just isn't enough information available at this time.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 13, 2021, 09:46:14 AM
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).
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 13, 2021, 10:55:49 AM
https://nypost.com/2021/04/08/second-vaccine-site-paused-after-adverse-reactions-to-johnson-johnson-shots/

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.
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 13, 2021, 11:09:39 AM
https://nypost.com/2021/04/08/second-vaccine-site-paused-after-adverse-reactions-to-johnson-johnson-shots/

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.
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

RIP. Oh well too late anyway taking my chances with Moderna.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on April 13, 2021, 12:29:18 PM
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

Saw that on the news this morning, then heard it on the radio on the way to work. Some shill was complaining about how bad it was to remove the vaccine from the market because of how many lives would be saved, regardless of the risk to some people. Get your vaccines, comrade!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on April 13, 2021, 01:37:58 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on April 13, 2021, 01:48:03 PM
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 also have a minuscule chance of dying if I catch this nonsense virus, so I'd rather not actively seek out something that could potentially be harmful "just in case".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 13, 2021, 02:34:40 PM
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 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?

Or why weren't schools closed, decades earlier? About twice as many children die each year from the regular flu.

Statistics are important, but when taken out of context they're just another type of emotional appeal. Humans aren't good at assessing low-probability risks, and almost all public discourse on the subject is about 30 steps below garbage.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on April 13, 2021, 02:57:04 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 13, 2021, 03:09:10 PM
It's like a visible, physical version of autism.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: ThatChrisGuy on April 13, 2021, 03:32:39 PM
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.

Those heady, ancient days of two years ago?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on April 13, 2021, 04:20:22 PM
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 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?

Or why weren't schools closed, decades earlier? About twice as many children die each year from the regular flu.

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.

With the flu, first of all, the overall death rate is at least 10 times lower. Secondly, covid-19 is more specific and could potentially be largely stopped - so there are more lives to be saved, and reason to think that life-saving efforts are more effective.

Also, you're taking the number of children who actually died of covid even with school closures and other precautions to be the same as if we did essentially nothing (i.e. treated it like the flu). But the covid deaths per capita in different U.S. states and different countries is quite significant - which suggests that at least some things make a big difference in rate. U.S. states vary from 33 to 280 deaths per 100k.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 13, 2021, 05:04:49 PM
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.

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 13, 2021, 05:51:43 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 13, 2021, 05:56:01 PM
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.
I'd be curious to see some studies on long covid and the vaccines.

Completely concur that it's a strange virus.

Quote
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.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 13, 2021, 06:13:04 PM
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.
I'd be curious to see some studies on long covid and the vaccines.

Completely concur that it's a strange virus.

Quote
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.

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.
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.

In what world is 1/3 "extremely rare?" You saying you know better than the studies on the topic because....reasons?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 13, 2021, 06:19:12 PM

In what world is 1/3 "extremely rare?" You saying you know better than the studies on the topic because....reasons?
[citation needed]
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on April 13, 2021, 06:56:02 PM
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.


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 was talking about the general population here - not just children. That's what I meant by "overall". Since the stated reason is protecting the community, the deadliness to families and others that children contact is relevant.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 13, 2021, 09:15:25 PM
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.
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.

You trying to spin it as "secret political motivations" is just another bald-faced lie.

Nobody said there was zero spread. But 1) the incidence and spread in schools was spectacularly low (see the reports from Italy after they reopened -- with tens of thousands of schools, they literally had zero cases where a child spread the disease to anyone else), 2) children are at more risk from dozens of background dangers than covid-19, and 3) most importantly, remote learning has been devastating for children. It's a been a lost year for education. That's horrific.

And what the fuck is this: "you have argued that it is right for people to question scientific assurances". That's just really, really vile. You're making vague and snide assertions that are implying nasty things that aren't true but are hard to rebut because you're not making any concrete claims. That's miserable behavior, and not a valid way to make an argument. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 13, 2021, 09:16:57 PM
Are you getting tired of seeing the Conspiracy Facts being proven correct time and time again byt the MSM?

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: ScytheSong on April 13, 2021, 10:19:55 PM
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 14, 2021, 12:55:11 AM
Alex Jones was right, again.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on April 14, 2021, 07:48:47 AM
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



Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on April 14, 2021, 09:12:05 AM
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

I believe the gentleman is implying deaths are up at the church because of poor care, as seems to be the case with his father. Miscarriages were up by 30% (or so, don't remember exactly) in the England. Hasn't been a whole lot of deep reflection as to why.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 14, 2021, 11:30:34 AM
Man I'm not listening to that whiny-voiced beanie with a small dick attached for twenty minutes, summarize or gtfo. Tl;dl
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 14, 2021, 11:50:30 AM
Man I'm not listening to that whiny-voiced beanie with a small dick attached for twenty minutes, summarize or gtfo. Tl;dl
Tim 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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 14, 2021, 12:05:42 PM
Man I'm not listening to that whiny-voiced beanie with a small dick attached for twenty minutes, summarize or gtfo. Tl;dl
Tim 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

You mean they had the power to kill us all with Spanish Flu in the palm of their hand and they didn't gift us with that mercy. Way to bury the lede Daily Mail.
Also this microchip is not the thing the Bugle led me to believe it was. I want my time back.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on April 14, 2021, 01:28:57 PM
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.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 14, 2021, 02:24:07 PM
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.

We locked down for "two weeks" and gutted economies worldwide for a year and counting because we didn't have enough information about Covid.

Pausing the use of one out of four available vaccines that are experimental and rushed due to the pandemic, and the one in question caused unexpected side effects that lead to at least one death seems reasonable to me.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 14, 2021, 04:57:53 PM

In what world is 1/3 "extremely rare?" You saying you know better than the studies on the topic because....reasons?
[citation needed]

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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on April 14, 2021, 06:57:23 PM
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 14, 2021, 07:39:44 PM
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.)
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).

The absolute increase in diabetes deaths is almost as large as unintentional accidents, but the relative degree probably tells us more about what was affected by covid-19. By that standard, diabetes took far and away the biggest jump, going up almost 20% between '19 and '20, almost twice as large as the next highest category. After that, the ranking is injuries, alzheimers, flu, stroke, and only then heart.

In other words, most of the increase was probably preventable deaths, caused because people were staying away from hospitals. Yay shutdowns.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 14, 2021, 08:11:09 PM

In what world is 1/3 "extremely rare?" You saying you know better than the studies on the topic because....reasons?
[citation needed]

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
You made the initial claim. It's up to you to back it up.

Forbes isn't a good source on medical issues, and it's just referring to a letter in JAMA rather than a peer reviewed article. Also, it doesn't support your claim that 1/3rd of young people have symptoms 9 months later. It's "up to" 9 months, and it's not specific to young people.

Here's a better source. It's a practice guide for primary care doctors, with extensive references.
https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3026
It says 10% of covid-positive patients have symptoms that last beyond 3 weeks, and a smaller proportion stretching into months.

There's also an older CDC study that comes closer to your percentage, but not the duration:
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6930e1.htm
30% of covid-positive patients have symptoms after a month, and even among the younger healthy cohort (18-35s with no preexisting conditions), it's about 20%. But it's a very small study, so the numbers should be considered fairly tentative.

Here's a more recent survey from the UK:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/prevalenceofongoingsymptomsfollowingcoronaviruscovid19infectionintheuk/1april2021
This study relies on self-reporting, but it's a large sample and tested against a control group. Suggests about 14% have symptoms longer than 3 months (vs. 2% in the control group).

Another British study:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01292-y
2% had symptoms longer than 3 months.

Sars 2 is a very strange disease, but it doesn't help to sensationalize it.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on April 14, 2021, 08:15:56 PM
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)

Just to clarify. 
If you get the shot it should have the mark of the beast on it and if you don't get the shot you go with the yellow star, right?   ;D
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: ScytheSong on April 15, 2021, 12:01:15 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deathknight4044 on April 15, 2021, 01:23:28 AM


Heres a CNN employee talking about how they manipulate the COVID situation for ratings
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 15, 2021, 03:01:13 AM
Lookin forward to the retractions
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 15, 2021, 07:52:00 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on April 15, 2021, 10:06:27 AM
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.

Whoa okay maybe I should stop bitching about health care here in British Columbia.  Doesn't the NHS do triage?  They'll also attempt to keep you with your doctors here if they can.  At the very least they call them up and get your history.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 15, 2021, 11:45:40 AM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 15, 2021, 12:17:01 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on April 15, 2021, 12:27:16 PM
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.

...because it is all about control.

...and fear has always been the best gateway to control.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deathknight4044 on April 15, 2021, 01:36:10 PM
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.

This one was recently released and it's even more damning in my opinion.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 15, 2021, 05:31:21 PM
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.

...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 not
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 15, 2021, 05:56:19 PM
Have you considered we ought to be controlled, look at what we waste our time doing when we're not
If 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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 15, 2021, 06:08:59 PM
Have you considered we ought to be controlled, look at what we waste our time doing when we're not
If 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 15, 2021, 06:14:11 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 15, 2021, 06:28:21 PM
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.

Those racist monsters!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 15, 2021, 06:30:31 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 15, 2021, 07:20:26 PM
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.

Murderous fuckers, should be tried and condemned for crimes against humanity.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 15, 2021, 08:20:21 PM
Have you considered we ought to be controlled, look at what we waste our time doing when we're not
If 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 15, 2021, 11:00:02 PM
Have you considered we ought to be controlled, look at what we waste our time doing when we're not
If 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.

Oh no, the "we" is the bit that ought to be controlled.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on April 16, 2021, 09:44:09 AM
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.

Sorry, this is just hilarious to me. The same fucktards are just running around shouting at the top of their lungs that none of this sort of crap actually exists and call you a conspiracy theorist because CNN tells them what to think. Yeah, they're not coming for your guns! There won't be any interment camps for people who refuse to get vaccinated! No one is gonna burn your RPGs!

Right...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on April 16, 2021, 11:01:36 AM
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.

Thanks for the info, Pat. I hadn't heard about this previously. Your post made it sound like people were being killed by superfast flows, though, which doesn't seem to be the case. From reading updates since Tuesday, though, here's what I gather:

(1) There have been no casualties reported.
(2) They are not evacuating the entire island. They are evacuating 16-20% of the residents who were in "red zones". (The island has pop 100k, evacuating 16k to 20k.)
(3) The primary danger seems to the usual problems of evacuees - lack of clean water and food, crowding, unhealthy conditions, etc.

Sources:
https://yubanet.com/world/un-to-launch-funding-appeal-for-saint-vincent-and-the-grenadines-following-volcano-eruption/
https://reliefweb.int/report/saint-vincent-and-grenadines/education-hold-saint-vincent-fallout-volcano-continues
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/roughly-20000-people-displaced-by-ongoing-volcanic-eruptions-in-st-vincent/ar-BB1fEEUK
https://www.foxnews.com/world/st-vincent-covid-19-positive-cases-climb-volcano-eruption

Given this, it seems likely that among the evacuees, more people will be killed by covid than by pyroclastic flows - so it seems appropriate to worry about both. That doesn't mean abandoning people who are infected - but it will mean trying to keep people separate. Thus far, Saint Vincent has had only 1800 infections and 10 deaths from covid, so if the disease does spread unchecked, dozens more could die - especially with overcrowding and unhealthy conditions.

Source: https://graphics.reuters.com/world-coronavirus-tracker-and-maps/countries-and-territories/saint-vincent-and-the-grenadines/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 16, 2021, 11:48:59 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on April 16, 2021, 11:52:39 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 16, 2021, 11:58:52 AM
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.

Everybody deserves a voice even mentally challenged people like you and me.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on April 16, 2021, 12:29:44 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 16, 2021, 12:38:21 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on April 16, 2021, 01:49:34 PM
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?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 16, 2021, 02:41:54 PM
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?

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.
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.

And if you look at the news, it's straightforward. Officials were barring anyone who didn't have a vaccine from being evacuated. That's. Monstrous. This isn't something any reasonable person would debate. That's the reasonable, obvious interpretation of the facts that were presented across multiple news articles.

It's possible this was only part of the picture, and that they had alternate plans. But that's not what the articles said, and as I pointed out, 1) it's generally considered bad optics when news articles are reporting you did something that can be compared to death camps, 2) therefore, they have every incentive to correct it, and 3) it's been a week, so they've had a lot of time to do so. So you think they would have rushed to get their story out.

Your failure to understand this makes it seem like you're being deliberately obtuse. What happened to you? You used to be able to discussion things on their merits without all these weaselly attempts at misinterpreting and maliciously miscasting everything.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: ScytheSong on April 16, 2021, 02:56:16 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on April 16, 2021, 03:00:37 PM
If your forcing people to get killed by a volcano eurption that will Pompeii everything and everyone around it, then you do deserve to burn in hell.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 16, 2021, 03:00:53 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 16, 2021, 03:10:51 PM
https://www.upi.com/Health_News/2021/04/16/coronavirus-pfizer-vaccine-booster/9421618581832/

Pfizer CEO says that after people have taken the first two shots, they'll probably need a booster in 6-12 months, and then another one annually.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: ScytheSong on April 16, 2021, 03:13:18 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 16, 2021, 03:17:18 PM
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.
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).

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 16, 2021, 06:01:32 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 18, 2021, 04:34:20 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 18, 2021, 05:34:00 PM
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.
You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 18, 2021, 06:08:14 PM
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.
You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.
Under the most generous possible interpretation, they're segregating access to rescue services. It's horrific.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 18, 2021, 06:50:35 PM
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.
You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.
Under the most generous possible interpretation, they're segregating access to rescue services. It's horrific.
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 18, 2021, 08:17:05 PM
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.
You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.
Under the most generous possible interpretation, they're segregating access to rescue services. It's horrific.
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?
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.

Or it is, if you're trying to deflect the argument.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 19, 2021, 05:56:04 AM
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.
You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.
Under the most generous possible interpretation, they're segregating access to rescue services. It's horrific.
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?
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.

Or it is, if you're trying to deflect the argument.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 19, 2021, 08:28:40 AM
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.
You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.
Under the most generous possible interpretation, they're segregating access to rescue services. It's horrific.
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?
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.

Or it is, if you're trying to deflect the argument.
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.
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.

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.

Even if everything you said is true, these are people fleeing potential burning death, into conditions that themselves can be deadly, and their opportunities to escape those conditions are being segregated based on based on a jab that doesn't provide immunity anyway, when there are less than half a dozen cases of covid-19.

That's horrific.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 19, 2021, 09:23:20 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 19, 2021, 10:19:22 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on April 19, 2021, 10:29:14 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 19, 2021, 11:09:10 AM
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.
Who's burning, bitch? That's right, nobody is burning.

You're another alternative facts fuckwit.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 19, 2021, 11:19:21 AM
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?

Seems to be the rule bout Covid badness yeah
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on April 19, 2021, 01:18:56 PM
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.
Who's burning, bitch? That's right, nobody is burning.

You're another alternative facts fuckwit.

So is the bad thing only bad if people died from it, or what?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Brad on April 19, 2021, 01:22:37 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 19, 2021, 01:30:27 PM
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.
Who's burning, bitch? That's right, nobody is burning.

You're another alternative facts fuckwit.
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?

If your only argument is literally ignoring everything I said and making up things I never said, you don't have a good argument.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on April 19, 2021, 03:15:15 PM
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?

This is assuming that covid-19 is fake. But even most of the conservative posters here believe that covid-19 is real, and that ots of people have *actually* died from it -- while zero people have died or been injured by the Saint Vincent lava flows.

The new claim seems to be that even though there were zero casualties, people were *almost* melted by lava. But no one has shown any evidence to that effect. As far as I can tell, everyone - vaccinated and unvaccinated - was evacuated safely. The actual dangers that evacuees are facing are crowded and unhealthy conditions, such as lack of clean water and infectious disease.

The story is that unvaccinated people were not allowed onto the cruise ships -- which have been proven to be hotbeds for spreading covid-19. Some posters evidently read this as (1) "the unvaccinated people were left to die from lava and they were almost burned up". But the alternate possibility is (2) "the unvaccinated people were evacuated by other means - such as buses, cars, and fishing boats". If #1 was actually true, I agree that is a horrible violation. But I don't think it has actually been demonstrated to be the case.


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.


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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 19, 2021, 03:22:57 PM
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.
Who's burning, bitch? That's right, nobody is burning.

You're another alternative facts fuckwit.
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?

If your only argument is literally ignoring everything I said and making up things I never said, you don't have a good argument.
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 19, 2021, 03:26:04 PM
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?
It's clear enough to me that Brad is a flat earth dumbass, but thats old news.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 19, 2021, 04:24:45 PM
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.
Who's burning, bitch? That's right, nobody is burning.

You're another alternative facts fuckwit.
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?

If your only argument is literally ignoring everything I said and making up things I never said, you don't have a good argument.
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).
I didn't say anything about want. I said that's what the government was doing. And they did.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 19, 2021, 04:32:47 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 19, 2021, 04:42:35 PM
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.
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.

It's the degree of uncertainty that leads to the evacuations. If we knew what was going to happen with a high degree of certainty, they'd only need to make a few targeted evacuations. But they don't, so they're evacuating a big chunk of the entire island.

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.
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?

There seems to be a problem with your math.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 19, 2021, 05:21:07 PM

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.

Didn't say anything about want? But your quote has that word in it... must be more of your alternative facts then.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 19, 2021, 05:22:38 PM
I'll repeat: You used to be better than this. What happened?
Pat, you've never been better than this. What happened to you?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 19, 2021, 05:27:23 PM

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.
Here, let's try a more apt analogy:
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 19, 2021, 05:28:29 PM

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.

Didn't say anything about want? But your quote has that word in it... must be more of your alternative facts then.
There's a difference between wanting them to burn, and wanting them to take a drug.

Or there should be.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 19, 2021, 05:30:00 PM

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.

Didn't say anything about want? But your quote has that word in it... must be more of your alternative facts then.
There's a difference between wanting them to burn, and wanting them to take a drug.

Or there should be.
So you admit you did say something about want?

And, again, who burned?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 19, 2021, 05:31:25 PM

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.
Here, let's try a more apt analogy:
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.
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.

Is that a problem?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 19, 2021, 05:35:32 PM

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.
Here, let's try a more apt analogy:
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.
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.

Is that a problem?
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 19, 2021, 05:40:04 PM

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.

Didn't say anything about want? But your quote has that word in it... must be more of your alternative facts then.
There's a difference between wanting them to burn, and wanting them to take a drug.

Or there should be.
So you admit you did say something about want?
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.

Now go back and re-read everything, with context, and realize there's no contradiction at all. You're avoiding the plain meaning of statements made in the context of an on-going conversation, in an attempt to find apparent contradictions that don't actually exist.

You're not really replying to me anymore, are you? Because I've been involved in the conversation. I know what I said, what it means, and what I was replying to. You're never going to fool me. Instead, you're playing to the crowd. You're attempting to score points with those watching, in the hopes that they weren't following along closely, and won't immediately spot your false dichotomy.

And, again, who burned?
Oh look, another example.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 19, 2021, 05:41:39 PM
What crowd, it's all the same chuds thinking all the same things, and we're all replying to ourselves.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 19, 2021, 05:44:41 PM
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.

And Pat is still full of shit.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 19, 2021, 06:03:20 PM

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.
Here, let's try a more apt analogy:
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.
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.

Is that a problem?
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?
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.

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.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 19, 2021, 06:07:34 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 19, 2021, 06:11:38 PM
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.

I mean you don't have to tell me that but who's he scoring points with then, and who cares if he misses your dichotomy. Were you comin to a mutual meetin of minds anytime soon and lighting upon the truth or what.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on April 19, 2021, 06:31:31 PM
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 yes, posters *have* been making claims about the threat of being burned by lava. Brad's post that I was replying to specifically referred to "possibly getting melted by lava because you don't have a vaccine".

I generally prefer to try to move forwards and establish what people's current real positions are. Particularly here on theRPGsite, people will trade barbs and claims of various sorts, and the best way to get past them is to move forward rather than get caught up in name-calling.

My position is:

(1) There was advance warning about the eruption, and the 15-20k residents in the red zones were all successfully evacuated.

(2) Unvaccinated people were not allowed on the cruise ships sent to help, but it appears they were still evacuated by other means - and other means were mentioned in the news coverage I read. Cruise ships have been proven to be great breeding grounds for covid-19, so there was reason to take precautions.

(3) I have not seen anything to indicated that anyone was in danger of being burned or buried. Instead, the problems seem to be falling ash, crowded conditions, lack of supplies, and infectious disease - including covid-19.

(4) I don't see evidence that the government engaged in anything that would be equivalent to death camps or death squads.

(5) These are factual statements, not political positions. It is technically possible that maybe the government *did* have death camps and/or left people to die, but I have not thus far seen evidence of that. If new evidence comes to light, I'll have to review it and decide.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 19, 2021, 06:36:12 PM
kim have you seen like any benefits out of this stance of yours in fifteen years? Here specifically I mean
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 19, 2021, 06:38:13 PM

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.
Here, let's try a more apt analogy:
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.
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.

Is that a problem?
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?
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 19, 2021, 06:41:44 PM

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.
Here, let's try a more apt analogy:
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.
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.

Is that a problem?
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?
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.

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.

Good, harming Latin America is an unqualified good thing.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 19, 2021, 06:46:33 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 19, 2021, 06:48:31 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 19, 2021, 06:52:03 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 19, 2021, 06:53:28 PM
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.

But you're the empatethic one no?

Fuck off.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 19, 2021, 06:58:05 PM
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.
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.

Who can look at the devastation of this board and think we are not deserving of the coof.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on April 19, 2021, 07:00:15 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 19, 2021, 07:02:51 PM
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.

Cool, cool, carry on then.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on April 19, 2021, 07:44:50 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 19, 2021, 07:45:59 PM
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.

Hey the on-topic section has its problems too, me among 'em. Just been readin' thread upon thread of kim-shitting when he pops up.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 19, 2021, 08:33:31 PM
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.

1. You're still a nutcase for thinking covid is a "fake disease";
2. You're literally the only guy here who Pundit had to ask them to change their avatar because you used what appeared to be an underaged porn star as your avatar once. Which feeds the "he's a nutcase" image you appear to be going for.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 19, 2021, 08:36:59 PM
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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 19, 2021, 08:39:04 PM
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.
You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.
Under the most generous possible interpretation, they're segregating access to rescue services. It's horrific.

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."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 19, 2021, 08:42:57 PM
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.
You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.
Under the most generous possible interpretation, they're segregating access to rescue services. It's horrific.

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."
Again, that would be reasonable explanation. But do you have a source?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 19, 2021, 08:58:33 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 19, 2021, 09:40:04 PM
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.
You're excluding other options that were avaliable to those people.
Under the most generous possible interpretation, they're segregating access to rescue services. It's horrific.

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."
Again, that would be reasonable explanation. But do you have a source?

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.

Link (https://www.businessinsider.com/st-vincent-volcano-cruise-ship-evacuation-only-for-vaccinated-2021-4)

Quote from: article
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."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 19, 2021, 09:47:56 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 19, 2021, 10:25:31 PM
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.

It doesn't seem strange at all to me. It's not the United States. They're not treating this issue like we are. It's just a fact of life to them and not some rights and freedom issue.

Also noteworthy, "Gonsalves added that he highly recommends those who opt to go to a shelter in St. Vincent and the Grenadines, an island chain of more than 100,000 people, be vaccinated."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 20, 2021, 05:31:56 AM
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.
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.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 20, 2021, 05:34:10 AM
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.
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.
You can't fix the fact that nature hurts people either.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 20, 2021, 11:04:06 AM
HappyDaze's fee-fees are hurt. So sad.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 20, 2021, 11:07:39 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 20, 2021, 12:15:08 PM
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.

Your fee-fees are hurt, and you're lashing out irrationally. So sad.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 20, 2021, 04:17:31 PM
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.

Your fee-fees are hurt, and you're lashing out irrationally. So sad.
I suppose people are going to burn too, right?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 20, 2021, 05:57:04 PM
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.

Your fee-fees are hurt, and you're lashing out irrationally. So sad.
I suppose people are going to burn too, right?
Are your fee-fees on fire?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 20, 2021, 07:19:38 PM
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.

Your fee-fees are hurt, and you're lashing out irrationally. So sad.
I suppose people are going to burn too, right?
Are your fee-fees on fire?
No. Just like before, nobody burned, you lying piece of shit.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on April 20, 2021, 07:27:40 PM
Greetings!

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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 20, 2021, 07:45:02 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on April 20, 2021, 08:04:03 PM
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.

Greetings!

*laughing* Yeah! That's what I thought.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 20, 2021, 08:48:54 PM
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.

Wait, you mean HappyDaze is a fecking lying liar that lies? Say it ain't so!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 20, 2021, 08:50:51 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 20, 2021, 09:12:37 PM
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.
About three bonfires high.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 21, 2021, 05:56:17 AM
Greetings!

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
I've quoted the little bitch's statement at least three times. If you've ignored it, that's on you.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 21, 2021, 08:45:46 AM
Greetings!

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
I've quoted the little bitch's statement at least three times. If you've ignored it, that's on you.
Are the people who have been burned up in the room with you right now?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 21, 2021, 11:31:13 AM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 21, 2021, 12:45:47 PM
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
The Thern Poverty Law Center has classified the Heliumite flag as a symbol of hate.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on April 21, 2021, 09:51:25 PM
we're all replying to ourselves.

We're all replying to ourselves?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 22, 2021, 01:54:02 AM
We are always replying to ourselves all the time. The name of the reply is ideology.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on April 22, 2021, 03:26:36 AM
This is what I mean by lack of content to the conversation.

To Pat - I did not mean to misinterpret you previously, and 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?


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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 22, 2021, 03:45:45 AM
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?


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.
I don't know, it's not clear what happened.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on April 22, 2021, 05:05:40 AM
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.

In your analogy, you're drawing an equivalence between people who are sick and guilty criminals. But people who are sick aren't guilty of anything. They aren't deserving to be punished. They should be treated with respect and dignity, and they have the same rights as healthy people. Morally, government action against sick people is no more justified than it is against healthy people. Ultimately, the justification for either depends on the idea that there is a threshold of public good that overrides individual rights. If enough people are dying of war, natural disaster, or disease - then at some point it is considered an emergency that overrides some usual rights. And those measure might be against either sick and healthy. Who is acted on is a practical matter of what will do the most good.

I'd give an alternate analogy comparing two regimes:

(1) A government who lock people up with no trial or rights - but they only do this to a small minority groups.
(2) A government who regularly lock up a broad groups of the majority population.

Which of these two is totalitarian? To my mind, they both are.

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.

EDITED TO ADD: One might argue that Italy isn't democratic - but that's separate from the principle of what justifies the pandemic restrictions for any country.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 22, 2021, 11:03:13 AM
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.

Quarantines need to be justified on their own merits. The key is the balance between the threat to public health, and individual rights. Quarantines are inherently a violation of individual rights, which means the threshold for imposing a quarantine needs to be very high. That's why quarantines, in any time and any place except the crazy upside down present, are imposed on those who are sick. People who are infected by a disease, and who either show clear symptoms, or who were exposed to someone who was known to be contagious, usually via personal contact. It's also restricted only to the most severe diseases, based on a combination of infectiousness and effects like death. Since there is no guilt, it means these people must be treated with a high degree of consideration, because they're being imposed on, not punished. And because it is such a great imposition, it must be highly curtailed, and the people must be released under clearly defined conditions, and as soon as possible.

Quarantines are a violation of basic human rights, which is why they've always been highly targeted and require strong justifications. This is a clear and present danger kind of thing, not a theoretical, amorphous statistical risk. It is simply not acceptable, and not just, for basic human rights to be thrown out because of a vague mighta coulda; or to impose those restrictions on an entire population, instead of on individuals.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 22, 2021, 02:45:50 PM
we're all replying to ourselves.

We're all replying to ourselves?
We're all replying to ourselves?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: This Guy on April 22, 2021, 03:06:14 PM
we're all replying to ourselves.

We're all replying to ourselves?
We're all replying to ourselves?
We're all replying to ourselves
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on April 22, 2021, 04:51:18 PM
we're all replying to ourselves.

We're all replying to ourselves?
We're all replying to ourselves?
We're all replying to ourselves

We're all replying to ourselves
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: yancy on April 22, 2021, 09:41:07 PM
We're all replying to ourselves.

Don't you fuckin' mouth off to me.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 05, 2021, 11:04:21 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 05, 2021, 11:37:35 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 05, 2021, 12:03:15 PM
Needless to say you probably live in your mother's basement and have no employment that requires you to leave it.

No; I live in my own place, am in full time employment and leave my house every single day.

I have offspring too, who can see for themselves how much bullshit this all is.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 05, 2021, 05:12:31 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 05, 2021, 05:16:32 PM
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.

We have exemptions available, and medical confidentiality means no one is allowed to ask you what your reasons are. I claim an exemption under the Regulations which mandate mask-wearing, and thus never wear a mask.

I go in shops every single day without a mask on, have done for over a year now, it was last July this nonsense came in.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on July 05, 2021, 06:53:55 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: yancy on July 05, 2021, 07:14:37 PM
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 :/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 06, 2021, 06:21:08 PM
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 :/

Yep, all the OCD neurotic weirdos have been indulged by society as a whole and now they can't handle things being returned to the actual normal (fuck their "New Normal").

As an aside, one of my kids was born en caul. It's supposed to be lucky.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on July 22, 2021, 11:47:03 PM
Spoiler alert, mask mandates are likely to make a comeback before mid August.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 23, 2021, 01:52:00 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on July 23, 2021, 06:30:09 AM
Spoiler alert, mask mandates are likely to make a comeback before mid August.

Sadly pretty likely. We already know this is completely ineffective at reducing spread in any significant way (and has yet to be shown in actual studies to have any effect at all). But we've already entered the phase where people aren't talking about deaths anymore, we're just talking about "cases."

The pressure is on Florida and Texas to stand against masks and against mandatory vaccinations. Neither De Santis or Abbott really have a spine, but they hopefully perceive that if they bend on these issues they'll break their political careers. If they are able to stand against the manufactured regime-propaganda pressure, ideally other states will be compelled to be defectors too.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 23, 2021, 10:59:54 AM
And lockdowns.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9813079/LA-restaurants-close-California-coronavirus-hospitalizations-hit-highest-point-months.html
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 23, 2021, 11:50:32 AM
And lockdowns.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9813079/LA-restaurants-close-California-coronavirus-hospitalizations-hit-highest-point-months.html
I don't think the economy can survive another full scale lockdown.

Jesus fucking Christ.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on July 23, 2021, 05:36:05 PM
And lockdowns.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9813079/LA-restaurants-close-California-coronavirus-hospitalizations-hit-highest-point-months.html

Thats impossible!  Its only the un-vaccinated that can get sick.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on July 24, 2021, 11:56:29 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 24, 2021, 02:06:50 PM
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.

That post was in reply to FelixGamingX1's "Likely to make a comeback", which I think it's likely that Lockdowns make a comeback.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on July 24, 2021, 03:06:22 PM
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]  ::)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 25, 2021, 10:06:20 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 25, 2021, 12:36:40 PM
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* but I've seen plenty lately for Covid-19. Your dismissal of reality is foolish and harmful to others.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on July 25, 2021, 12:41:59 PM
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* ...

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 25, 2021, 12:47:00 PM
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* ...

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on July 25, 2021, 01:24:53 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on July 25, 2021, 02:01:26 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 25, 2021, 02:33:47 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on July 25, 2021, 03:23:53 PM
Information coming out of Israel and the UK is indicating that people who have utilized AstraZeneca & Pfizer are receiving protection that seems to decline after ~6 weeks. Lends a lot of context to the number of "breakthrough" cases we are seeing in vaccinated people lately. Also relevant to why countries have pre-ordered literally billions of doses of the pharma DLC, easily 10x as many doses as would be required to vaccinate their entire populations.

Meanwhile natural immunity continues to provide broad and enduring immunity. No wonder the pharmaceutical companies want to change the definitions to deny natural immunity's safety and efficacy.

Question now is, whether people are going to put up with governments demanding regular monthly/bimonthly/biyearly booster shots of medication. Especially given that for younger demographics (< ~25) there have been provably been more harmful effects from the vaccines than from Covid itself.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 25, 2021, 04:12:54 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 25, 2021, 04:48:12 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on July 25, 2021, 04:54:05 PM
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* ...

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.
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on July 25, 2021, 04:59:35 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on July 25, 2021, 05:04:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 25, 2021, 05:04:55 PM
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.

And even then people dying "with" covid didn't actually die from it. The death figures are massively over-inflated. Here's just one example from a Birmingham hospital trust (https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/744125/response/1774876/attach/html/4/FOI%20060421%20Response.pdf.html):

Quote
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.

79 deaths "with" covid, but only 2 from it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on July 25, 2021, 05:09:07 PM
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.
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on July 25, 2021, 05:25:48 PM
I like the spin that no one ever died from the 'Flu' before.

Seriously can not make this shit up.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 25, 2021, 05:35:01 PM
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.
Your special brand of stupid is truly sad. You have my pity.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 25, 2021, 05:35:36 PM
I like the spin that no one ever died from the 'Flu' before.

Seriously can not make this shit up.
Who is saying that?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 25, 2021, 06:04:36 PM
But muh lockdowns.

(https://gunfreezone.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/E7B_N9KXMAARkiR.jpeg)

(https://gunfreezone.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/E7B_N9LX0AAYarD.jpeg)

(https://gunfreezone.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/E7B8DZDXoAIF2dG.jpeg)

Those of you championing lockdowns, at the expense of children's mental health? Kill yourselves.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on July 25, 2021, 06:04:52 PM
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.
Your special brand of stupid is truly sad. You have my pity.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on July 25, 2021, 06:11:52 PM
I like the spin that no one ever died from the 'Flu' before.

Seriously can not make this shit up.
Who is saying that?

Yeah  ???
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 25, 2021, 09:27:05 PM
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.
Your special brand of stupid is truly sad. You have my pity.
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.
I have real people thanking me for my help everyday as I tend them or their loved ones. I can easily dismiss your foolishness.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on July 26, 2021, 10:00:27 AM
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.
Your special brand of stupid is truly sad. You have my pity.
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.
I have real people thanking me for my help everyday as I tend them or their loved ones. I can easily dismiss your foolishness.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 26, 2021, 04:41:10 PM
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.
Your special brand of stupid is truly sad. You have my pity.
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.
I have real people thanking me for my help everyday as I tend them or their loved ones. I can easily dismiss your foolishness.
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 don't have to defend my anything from fools like you. But I can still pity you for being so foolish.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on July 27, 2021, 08:23:22 AM
So, this is Australia right now.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on July 27, 2021, 09:45:15 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on July 27, 2021, 09:47:03 AM
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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on July 27, 2021, 09:57:10 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on July 27, 2021, 12:21:47 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 27, 2021, 01:19:37 PM
So, this is Australia right now.



Was it Clive James who said the problem with Australians wasn't that they were descended from prisoners but that a lot of them were descended from prison officers?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on July 27, 2021, 02:02:20 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 27, 2021, 02:22:22 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on July 27, 2021, 02:30:51 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 27, 2021, 02:32:36 PM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on July 27, 2021, 02:37:10 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 27, 2021, 03:12:06 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on July 27, 2021, 03:31:05 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 27, 2021, 05:04:05 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on July 27, 2021, 06:51:12 PM
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.

It doesn't have to be the worst ever to be bad.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on July 27, 2021, 08:16:39 PM
"It isn't the Black Death." = Healthcare's Godwin.
"You're killing grandma!" is a better candidate.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on July 28, 2021, 12:05:23 AM
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]  ::)

Of course they do. I was not saying or implying there is no basis for that distrust. I was stating it's because of that distrust. But it IS an issue. African Americans are dying at a higher rate than others, and in part it's because of the low vaccination rates.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on July 28, 2021, 12:08:36 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on July 28, 2021, 01:05:57 AM
"It isn't the Black Death." = Healthcare's Godwin.

It doesn't have to be the worst ever to be bad.

"It isnt the Nazis"

Thats not a Godwin.  I guess maybe an Anti-Godwin,
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on July 28, 2021, 07:09:39 PM
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.

  Why do you not just wear a gas mask or a respirator?  As for lockdowns....how are your kids handling it with school?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on July 28, 2021, 07:15:49 PM
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.

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.

   i think it is great if you have a situation where you can make your living and not leave the house for a year, in all honesty, I can go the next 20 and not leave the house and make a living.  That is not great for my kids though, and the fact is "ordinances" are in fact crushing on the idea of being a free citizen, as well as lockdowns.  If this was dropping healthy people, I would have a different attitude.  I treated it seriously for a couple of months, and wore a respirator if I went out (because that is an actual protection from infection).   Maybe this does become captain tripps, right now it seems to be getting less dangerous and more contagious.  I also do not mind a bit if you wear a mask, and stay locked down.  I do mind if people start telling everyone what they have to do,  because if we are going to say people just being out breathing is selfish and dangerous, as a society it is going to go poorly from there.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on July 28, 2021, 08:36:11 PM
Greetings!

Well, the absolute Chaos is accelerating. More cock-sucking Liberals are being shot to death, or being beaten as soon as they wag their finger and start whining like bitch-Karens when someone else isn't wearing a fucking mask. This is starting to happen everywhere--in the McDonald's drive-thru's, at coffee shops, restaurants, parks, at the Walmart, even on planes. Good plan. Keep screeching and trying to control and shame people, and act like an authoritarian mommy-cunt. More of these idiots will get shot or beaten to death.

I guess it's Darwin's Law, of culling the stupid and retarded from the herd. Maybe someday these Liberal morons will learn to show other people respect, and shut their fucking mouths.

That's what our society needs. More controlling, authoritarian bitch-Karens. The more they scream and look down their arrogant, condescending noses, the more blood will flow.

It definitely is a culture thing. Where I live, everyone shows people respect, and no one opens their mouth to try and scream at or control other people. Most people don't wear masks at all here. A few people do--and that's good for them. They do themselves, and others are free to do them, too. Then again, people here are known to be armed to the teeth, and there's a good chance some moron will get blazed on for acting like a fucking jackass. That's the way it goes. "An armed society is a polite society". ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 29, 2021, 01:38:37 PM
"It isn't the Black Death." = Healthcare's Godwin.

It doesn't have to be the worst ever to be bad.

Fortunately, it's not even bad. Good job we've got those people clearing the bodies from the streets every night, eh?

"You're killing grandma!" is a better candidate.

I've heard them all.

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.

You seem to keep forgetting you're talking to someone who's had it. It was a bad cold. I didn't require hospitalisation, or any medical attention at all. I wasn't even bedridden, even last year when I had the nastier variant. No lingering effects at all from either infection. Almost as though I'm healthy...

And go fuck yourself if you think you have the right to declare something "isn't open for debate", you don't get to decide what is and isn't allowed to be discussed.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 29, 2021, 01:49:48 PM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 29, 2021, 02:09:43 PM
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?

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 29, 2021, 02:35:44 PM
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?

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.

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.

Just a coincidence I'm sure.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on July 29, 2021, 02:46:03 PM
Nothing to see here, move along citizen.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1419653002818990085.html
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 29, 2021, 02:54:26 PM
Nothing to see here, move along citizen.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1419653002818990085.html
Wow. Someone's nest was getting seriously feathered here.

Going through it now, I'm kind of amused at the 'double-dog-can't-sue-us' bit. Because, hey Pfizer, the U.S. passed a law like that to stamp out nuisance suits against gun manufacturers and they're STILL getting sued.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 29, 2021, 03:32:31 PM
Colour me utterly unsurprised that the reason they've suppressed generic treatments is that they didn't want the money they've pissed up the wall on "vaccines" that don't even work to be wasted.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on July 29, 2021, 05:08:01 PM
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.

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.
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:

"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!

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on July 29, 2021, 05:39:46 PM
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.

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.
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:

"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!

Drongo is the Australian equivalent of "jolly fine fellow". 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on July 29, 2021, 06:56:01 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 30, 2021, 05:58:02 AM
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.

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.

Why else would there be such secrecy around them, with the terms being put into "official secrets" measures where no one can see them until 10 (or even 30!) years after the fact?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on July 30, 2021, 07:35:13 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 30, 2021, 09:19:31 AM
Hey guys, if you're going to try and astroturf, don't give all your bot accounts the same goddamn script.

https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2021/07/26/the-i-just-left-the-er-variant-is-multiplying-on-twitter-warning-people-theyre-back-to-getting-crushed-by-covid-19/

https://bayourenaissanceman.blogspot.com/2021/07/covid-19-blatant-propaganda-and-rampant.html

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hUs78A0OiZE/YQO7gNogDiI/AAAAAAAAtRs/hSCnZbVeKYArH44w6_NUGOJseAMj0Q-6QCPcBGAsYHg/s900/Twitter%2Bpropaganda%2Babout%2BCOVID-19.png)

(Okay, the last one in that pic is probably faked. But seriously.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on July 30, 2021, 09:58:45 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on July 30, 2021, 10:12:28 AM
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.
The level of economic ignorance in your post is staggering.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on July 30, 2021, 10:14:09 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on July 30, 2021, 10:31:30 AM
The last few months haven't been good for China. Massive lockdowns especially in the Northeast, lockdowns in multiple sections of huge cities like Beijing and Shanghai, huge lines for mandatory PNC tests, mass containment units being built, people being welded into their apartments or buildings, and people running out of food. Imagine what it would be like if the CCP hadn't almost entirely eradicated the coronavirus!

But I found this amusing. How to walk your dog during lockdown: https://twitter.com/TruthAbtChina2/status/1353660379159793665
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on July 30, 2021, 10:40:23 AM
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).

So now we're getting reimposition of the mask mandates that failed to do anything last year, and in another 2 weeks we'll be getting lockdowns again (that also failed to do anything). I mean, I'm not happy to be right, but this was all so predictable. The only way they are going to let us out of this mess is if we resist.

Pfizer's trial data from the stabs was released,
(https://i.imgur.com/UftEbTH.png)

Also relevant
(https://i.imgur.com/IwIBCMI.jpeg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on July 30, 2021, 10:50:33 AM
I hope to God you're being sarcastic.

Look at the bigger picture. Eviction protection ends soon, the jobs that are available aren’t good paying jobs, for the most part. Would you go back to Walmart? That pizza shop? You can’t just completely withdraw funds overnight, it will create a surge in homelessness and crime. I sure as heck don’t want my relaxed small neighborhood turning into a post apocalyptic LA setting. Even if we aren’t impacted by the pandemic, some people were. Like I said, I’m a taxpayer and I’m ok with it. Doesn’t mean I approve it, but I’m ‘okay’ with it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on July 30, 2021, 10:52:37 AM
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).


Besides the 'alternate' testing methods between people with the jab vs those without, there is also some evidence that the viral load in both groups is very similar for the delta variant.

The fact that they aren't getting the death rate spike from 'Delta' is why they are desperately trying anything they can to hide numbers.
Imagine if everybody actually found out that the experimental medical treatment does nothing for new variants... ;)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 30, 2021, 01:23:50 PM
Imagine if everybody actually found out that the experimental medical treatment does nothing for new variants... ;)

It's worse than that, vaccination is causing the evolution of new variants. You can't win an arms race against this virus by trying to out-vaccinate it. Not when we don't even have effective vaccines.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on July 30, 2021, 01:29:12 PM
So, I'll just drop this right here:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9844761/CDC-FINALLY-releases-data-showing-vaccinated-people-viral-levels-Delta-variant.html

Points of interest:


Looks like the delta variant is putting the lie to the simple mantra that more vaccinations means less virus...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on July 30, 2021, 01:55:00 PM
I add my two cents just in case:

Covid is a real disease made in Chinese labs with American funding to trigger the Great Reset of capitalism and further the globalist Agenda 2030. Event 201, gain-of-function research (on coronaviruses from bats!) and the fact that this is the first time in history in which we "totally need" to stop the world for a disease (the death rate of which has been inflated by counting deaths with covid as deaths by covid, amounting to a 2% average) suggest that this too coincidental. It's textbook fear, manipulation and totalitarianism.

The goals of the Great Reset and its globalist advocates (British Royal Family, Rothschilds, Antipope Francis, Trudeau, Merkel, Democrats, Chinese Communist Party, the Kirchners, Rockefellers, World Economic Forum, John Kerry, Kissinger, Soros, Bill Gates, International Monetary Fund, the Bush, controlled-opposition Boris Johnson, and other ideologues who have spoken openly about the great reset, the new normal, the new world order, new social contract, green new deal, inclusive capitalism, etc.) are coincidentally the same ones pushed by the whole pandemic:


You literally had people advocating for a "temporary" world government because of covid, like ex-PM Gordon Brown. This is the goal; the communist goal of a one-world, totalitarian, socialist technocratic government ruled by elites. This was the dream of people like Churchill, H.G. Wells, Truman, the founders of the European Union, Mandell House, Ben Gurion and many secret societies.

Call me crazy, delusional, conspiracy theoriest, paranoid or whatever media slur you want, but I have tons of evidence for this, and I an show it to whomever wants to read it. I don't trust governments or the media.

And btw; don't get the vaccine. Just in case.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 30, 2021, 03:32:40 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on July 30, 2021, 05:18:30 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on July 30, 2021, 05:52:28 PM
Pfizer's trial data from the stabs was released,
(https://i.imgur.com/UftEbTH.png)

Holy fuck, stop giving people Placebos.  You are literally killing Grandma!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on July 30, 2021, 05:57:44 PM
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.
The level of economic ignorance in your post is staggering.

Its so bad even Pat can see it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 30, 2021, 06:42:23 PM
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.

Are you deluded? You don't need a vaccine to do that, not with a virus as trivial as coronavirus. We have been dealing with them for millennia before now.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on July 30, 2021, 08:13:55 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on July 30, 2021, 08:25:28 PM
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.
The level of economic ignorance in your post is staggering.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on July 30, 2021, 09:56:20 PM


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 advantage of putting several hundred thousand people on the street is that it will probably motivate people to find a real solution fairly quickly.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 30, 2021, 10:10:22 PM
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.
The level of economic ignorance in your post is staggering.

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?

I think you're missing the big picture. The United States has printed 40% of all the money it's ever printed, just in the past year.
https://techstartups.com/2021/05/22/40-us-dollars-existence-printed-last-12-months-america-repeating-mistake-1921-weimar-germany/
Massive, massive inflation is on the horizon, and the devaluation of the dollar means that extra 50 cents isn't going to buy you that cup of coffee.
We do not have an infinite debt. Eventually the bubble will burst, and it's going to be a disaster.

Now, on a personal level, I don't care. I can't influence US policy. They can print gozillions and my opinion won't affect that one iota. The only thing I can do, personally, is be prepared for the dollar to be massively devalued and for the government to lose control of the currency. Those hundereds of thousands of people are going to be evicted eventually, roaming the streets with no income, and stimulus money that's next to worthless in their pockets.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on July 31, 2021, 09:38:21 AM
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.


No, covid didn't "shut down the whole world". Governments did. Media-induced panic did. Fake news and lying with statistics did. The WHO did.

Compare states and countries with little or no quarantine vs. states and countries with strict quarantines and tell me if you see a significant difference in death rates. Take a look at the death rates per age and see if there's any reason to keep the whole world locked up.

This is exactly the agenda they're pushing; "we can't do X because of covid", "a tiny bug turned capitalism upside down". The result is the reset of capitalism.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on July 31, 2021, 02:53:47 PM
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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on July 31, 2021, 04:48:44 PM
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 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.
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 still stand by that observation.  They are going to have to use therapeutic medicines which they have been resisting and banning  for well over a year.




Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 31, 2021, 07:41:36 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on July 31, 2021, 08:36:23 PM
I gotta say, while I can understand frustration, I don't think getting confrontational with people really helps anything. In fact, it hurts. I know we all look up to Joseph Biden for moral guidance, intellectual clarity and eloquence, but his statements calling half of the country "Morons" didn't exactly change any minds.

Every normal person wants to keep people safe and save lives. A lot of good natured people are going along with vaccination and masking because they think these are the only approaches that will work. This is a lie created by the media and The Powers That Be through a policy of censorship that has denied people the right to hear mainstream scientific perspectives that contravene the narrative of the Pharma-Govt alliance.

The Great Barrington Declaration (https://gbdeclaration.org/) outlines a different approach, the approach that used to be the the consensus approach. Here's Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University discussing 12 guidelines for public health that are being violated by public health officials.
Quote
#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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 31, 2021, 08:38:57 PM
This is normal: https://twitter.com/MayorofLondon/status/1421395081647505409

The mayor of our capital city encouraging people to turn up and get jabbed. No appointment or ID required. Why are they in such a desperate hurry?

"Vaccine festival" in London and at a circus in Yorkshire: https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1421547960110886915

Totally normal. :o
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on July 31, 2021, 08:48:48 PM
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?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on July 31, 2021, 08:55:42 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on July 31, 2021, 09:03:52 PM
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.
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 support wearing masks, then you are politicizing public health.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on July 31, 2021, 09:26:00 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on July 31, 2021, 10:03:16 PM
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.

I agree,  if by "mask" you mean a properly-fitted, properly-worn, N-95 mask. Otherwise, surgical masks, cotton masks, etc. provide little to no protection from viruses, due to bypass flow and the inability of anything other than specialized materials to filter out virus-size (< 1 micron) particles. That's why, before covid, they were not recommended for the public to wear to prevent the spread of influenza.

I will grant you that a mask will contain the snot and/or spit from a sneeze or cough. Or if someone is close enough to sneeze or cough on you, it will protect you from their snot and/or spit. In fact, the former is exactly the purpose of a surgical mask.



Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on July 31, 2021, 11:48:57 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 01, 2021, 12:05:19 AM
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.

Your refusal to read the plain evidence presented to you doesn't mean there's no evidence. It just means you're choosing to accept a political narrative, and refuse to look at anything that might contradict your pre-existing beliefs.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 01, 2021, 12:26:11 AM
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.

You are 100% repeating the narrative. Science is an infallible, incorruptible, non-partisan institution that is the absolute owner of truth. We should all live our lives based on the mandates and findings of settled science. Until it changes, of course.

The flu kills people by the hundred thousands a year. Not a single person gave a fuck, vaccines are still optional and mostly for the elderly. With covid everybody has to get the shot ASAP no matter their age. Maybe this isn't about saving lives, it's about getting the whole population vaccinated.

Catching covid outdoors is literally less than 0.1% likely, according to the Holy Science, btw. And masks won't help you indoors since the air literally escapes through the sides and the virus can enter through your eyes as well. You need to be wearing a mask, goggles and a screen just in case. The best thing to do is stay at home if you have symptoms, wash your hands, cough and sneeze on your elbow and go to the doctor if you're not feeling well, just like we did with all pandemics before this political madness
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: yancy on August 01, 2021, 12:55:30 AM
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 :/

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 :)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 01, 2021, 01:08:14 AM
Maybe this isn't about saving lives, it's about getting the whole population vaccinated.


I'm starting to think it's not about whether getting the vaccines are a good idea, it's about forcing everyone to agree that getting the vaccines is a good idea.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 01, 2021, 01:13:56 AM
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.
In the newest version of Mage, the Technocracy are the protagonists.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 01, 2021, 01:20:14 AM
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 :/

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? 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on August 01, 2021, 01:33:13 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: yancy on August 01, 2021, 01:49:42 AM
Private businesses that require masks within their wall are violating what state law?

Who said it was a private business? I was perhaps a bit vague, I have seen some of them posting signs, but in this case it was a public library, and whatever mask mandate they're attempting to enforce is almost certainly in violation of the law.

Many of the businesses posting mask requirements here have been doing it based on the notion that some authority is requiring it, usually the city, and those city requirements are now in violation of state law.

So while you're correct that individual private businesses *might* get all dictatorial and insane about masks because they really want to, I doubt many of them are likely to do that.

In this case, I merely ignored the sign and wandered around maskless, and nobody called me on it, perhaps because they know what they're attempting to do is illegal.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: yancy on August 01, 2021, 02:06:03 AM
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.

Yeah, we'll see how it goes, but it is at least a little encouraging to see legal opposition to this nonsense on the state level, as well as a measure of moral support. Last night was the first time I saw any signs of the bullshit starting up again; I'll be curious to see what I encounter when I go shopping at more places during the week.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 01, 2021, 10:32:46 AM
How is your country handling the whole deal?

Here in Argentina:

More than a 100,000 deaths.

Higher death rate than countries who did little to no quarantine.

Longest quarantine in the world

Ubiquitous use of masks here in the city (not so much in the provinces, though)

A province went full Stalin, locking up the ill and going full police brutality. Still has more deaths than other provinces which didn't.

Politicians break the protocols often

For some reason, the government didn't allow Pfizer and Moderna into the country, claiming they were demanding sovereignty over our glaciers and other natural resources (which nobody believes). Through a decree, they were finally allowed.

High vaccine acceptance, apparently. Yay.

Left-wing marches are totally okay, though.

The government spent millions of pesos in wooden penises for sex ed., a stadium in a poor province with 40% of its population without access to drinking water, furniture, vehicles and catering for the "ministry of women, gender and diversity" (I shit you not that's the actual name), painting fences, etc.

We get the countries we deserve as a society. Americans stood up from the very beginning. Argentina, in general, simply complied.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: strcondex18cha3 on August 01, 2021, 11:33:07 AM
In my country, like pretty much everywhere in the west, it further splintered society into two dumb factions.
Most are either in the sheeple camp ... Neighbours told us literally we should obey the bureaucracy and put our trust in the gov
Or they are in total denier mode.

How about: it's been overblown and the most rational thing would be to accept a very slight deathbulge.
Vaccines seem to be shit - big surprise, as they were rushed and try to combat a rapidly mutating flu virus.
This happens when your countries are run by women and foreigners.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on August 01, 2021, 11:41:17 AM
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.


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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on August 01, 2021, 12:02:10 PM
Wishing everyone lots of health in the coming days. Follow science, not stupid. I yield.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 01, 2021, 12:24:37 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 01, 2021, 12:44:54 PM
Wishing everyone lots of health in the coming days. Follow science, not stupid. I yield.

How would you know what "Science" is? You just trust whatever consensus they come up with... until they find out they got it wrong.

You think they didn't know that variants would appear? Do you really think they thought the virus would just go away? Did you really think they didn't know they would need another dose of the vaccine every year to boost your immunity for years and years? Any virologist knows how it is; the virus would never go away, with or without taking the sacrament of vaccinations (that is why chickenpox, the flu, measles, etc. didn't disappear in spite of having most of the population vaccinated).

But they didn't give you the full picture in the media, did they? They told you it was just 15 days, and slowly revealed to you the actual condition. Their plan has always been this, but they wanted to boil the frog slowly, letting the fish settle in the fishbowl because otherwise people would resist. Did the media ever mention the fraud charges that J&J and Pfizer are guilty of? Or did they stay casually silent on that?

Science is going through a crisis of replicability and publication bias; it's findings cannot be considered true because they can't be replicated and positive findings attract more people (and more funds) than negative or inconclusive ones.

People just don't want to acknowledge the fact that science has been co-opted by politics and lobbyists, the politicians are not interested in the public good and that conspiracies are real. Fear is the tool through which they manipulate people into compliance. Wilfull ignorance is what keeps people prisoner.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on August 01, 2021, 12:48:49 PM
Do you have a source on that? I tried googling the Australian cases but nothing showed up.

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/sydney-under-strict-new-lockdown-rules-cases-soar-2021-07-29/
Quote
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.

I don't have the specific data on these 13 people, but I did find this site (https://www.covid19data.com.au/deaths) which has a lot of the data. Here's a graph of the age breakdown:

(https://i.imgur.com/aLMVD2t.png)

80 - 90 year olds are dying, better turn the country into a dystopian police state.


Quote
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.

"Populism" in English can mean either of these things, grassroots popular movement or demogoguery. Generally it is used in the latter sense, but here I am using it in the former because I am referring to actual genuinely popular movements. Most "popular" movements are actually fake & funded by corporations and billionaires (such as Black Lives Matter, Woke-religion in general).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 01, 2021, 01:15:35 PM
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.
 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 01, 2021, 02:23:58 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 01, 2021, 02:31:45 PM
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.

IK was asking you.

Yeah, it's the same here in México and ALL of Latin-America and also Spain.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 01, 2021, 02:41:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 01, 2021, 02:45:29 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 01, 2021, 02:51:22 PM
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.

Spain is slowly but surely sinking into socialism; you cannot disagree with someone's perceived gender, either. "Hate speech".

They tried to pull a similar one here in Argentina, but nobody gave a crap. We're too close to collapse that it would only speed things up.

Labor laws are not a conquest of the employee against the evil capitalist; they are simply imposing more expenditures on the employer. Either he can afford them at the cost of money he could have invested either on himself or his business (including your wage) or he can't, and thus you're not legally hired. Minimum wage, paid leave, etc. it's all deducted from your wage, while the idiotic masses believe they've earned something thanks to politicians.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 01, 2021, 03:09:01 PM
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.

You might recognize some of the names from the Mont Pelerin Society: Milton Friedman, George Stigler, and Karl Knight were from the Chicago School (monetarism). Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig von Mises were from the Austrian School. And others, like Karl Popper, were more generally in the classical liberal camp. They believed in the free market, and individual rights. Stagflation in the 1970s was an inflection point, and the failure of the traditional models led to the institutional acceptance of many of their ideas, including strong support for free markets, deregulation, and lower tariffs.

This came to be known as neoliberalism, though from the start the term was applied by enemies of the new establishment, and used derisively. To this day, almost no one calls themselves a "neoliberal". Neoliberalism also wasn't a complete overthrow of the established order; Keynsianism survived as neo-Keynsianism, by adopting some of the ideas of Friedman while retaining their belief in monetary manipulation and heavy government spending. In fact, if anything, they got much stronger, since stagflation was also a direct cause of the demise of the Bretton Woods system, and the final stamping out of the gold standard. Central banks no longer had any real constraints, and neo-Keynsian/monetarist manipulation became part of the new orthodoxy. Reagan and Thatcher are considered exemplars of neoliberalism, though so are the Clintons, so don't read too much of one political wing and not the other into the label.

So neoliberalism is a term of derision, not self-identification. It's free market, but a free market tied to the central planning of monetary policy. It cuts across both sides of the political aisle, in both the US and in European and European-descended countries that interpret left and right somewhat differently. But more than that, it's the established order. It's the Powers that Be, the primary belief system of the elite class of Western leaders who have had outsize influence on the world, from central bank policies, to national leadership, or through international organizations like the WTO and the IMF.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 01, 2021, 03:36:24 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 01, 2021, 04:42:07 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: yancy on August 01, 2021, 08:32:50 PM
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.

Incidentally, I'll be going to my LGS tomorrow to pick up the last piece of the arms stockpile. I'm curious to see if they're going to be going back to mask requirements or not. As of now the state law explicitly states they don't have to follow any crackpot leftist shit-for-brains mask ordinances, and they clearly don't want to, but this time last year the leftists made a major effort at getting the place closed down (ratting on them to local government about customers not wearing masks, some liberal scumbags even attempting to set fire to the place).

They made it through okay, probably just required a little extra palm grease, but they did knuckle under to the insane leftist demands for masks; I wonder if they will this time now that the law is 100% on their side.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 02, 2021, 05:56:29 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: yancy on August 02, 2021, 06:27:13 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 02, 2021, 07:33:41 AM
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....
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 02, 2021, 08:13:20 AM
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?
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 02, 2021, 08:22:15 AM

I'm not offering you the "same narrative," just what I dealt with last night. I actually saw less patients in the ED last night than usual, but that's because so many of them had admission orders and were holding for beds. This morning we had to pull inpatient (ICU & PCU) nurses to the ED to help.cover them while ED nurses dealt with taking on patients in hallway beds. This left some ICU nurses covering 3 patients each, which is a high load for that care level. Meanwhile, the lobby is backed up with less urgent cases that are actually getting some treatment while still sitting in the lobby chairs. If this seems to be the "same narrative," then perhaps it's a real problem for others too.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 02, 2021, 08:26:41 AM
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....
As for "breaking narrative," last night I got to see a vaccinated patient having severe Covid-related respiratory distress.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 02, 2021, 09:05:55 AM
Maybe Happyderp is just treating patients who already died.

https://nypost.com/2021/07/31/spike-in-reported-increase-of-covid-19-deaths-skewed-by-old-data/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 02, 2021, 09:46:20 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on August 02, 2021, 09:59:07 AM
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.

Did she in fact tell you that or was she just listed as unvaccinated?
What were the co-morbidities (already have heart issues, etc.) or was it strictly the Covid?
Was it the flashy new 'delta' variant which seems to be more contagious, but hasn't really affected the weekly death numbers much?
You guys aren't still testing using the PCR test the FDA pulled because it couldn't tell the difference between Coof and Flu are you?

Inquiring minds want to know!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 02, 2021, 11:11:53 AM
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? :)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 02, 2021, 11:58:58 AM
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.

Funny, I've had coronavirus; didn't even need bedrest, never mind medical attention.

51 isn't exactly young, and how fit was she? The fact that you even saw her suggests she may have had underlying co-morbidities, since most healthy people who are infected shrug it off.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Jaeger on August 02, 2021, 02:47:39 PM
...
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....

Stop it with the Right-Wing conspiracy theories already!

We need to believe the Science!

Why can't you just believe what you are being told by everyone?

(https://social.infogalactic.com/images/posts/cc79d6e4-c727-44c1-8b1e-e7d1990d33a2/original-8d5533cf65461024d04fa01003f117ea.jpg?v=63795140101)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 02, 2021, 03:05:02 PM
Stop stealing my shit, Jaeger! :D

Jokes aside, yeah, I find that rather interesting. There's arguments that it's actually an attempt to dilute a pro-vaccine message.

Uh huh. Sure.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 02, 2021, 03:54:22 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 02, 2021, 04:30:51 PM
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?

I'm not an "anti-vaxer" just because I have no interest in this experimental therapeutic treatment that provides no immunity to coronavirus.

I have received many vaccinations in the past.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 02, 2021, 05:06:26 PM
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!"
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 02, 2021, 05:09:45 PM
Did she in fact tell you that or was she just listed as unvaccinated?

It is easy to tell because she did not have the mark.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 02, 2021, 05:34:11 PM
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!"

Pretty much. No real arguments to offer, just the standard slur and dismiss.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 03, 2021, 12:53:06 PM
So turns out my dad got sick with the covid (he kept it secret until he got better). He was vaccinated with the phizer.

In theory it made recovery better, but it still sucked. His blood pressure has spiked and he will need pills for that for the next few months.

So I cannot personally vouch for the efficacy of the vaccine if its mostly ineffective.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 04, 2021, 03:03:08 PM
Interesting article:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/misinformation-covid-vaccine-hesitancy-polling-demographics-polarization-partisanship-11627914431

Biden recently said that Facebook was killing people, by not censoring "misinformation" about the vaccines. In other words, he's saying that people are sheep and will do exactly what they're told, so to control people all we need to do is control the information they receive.

Evidence suggests that's complete bullshit. The percentage of people who haven't taken the vaccine almost perfectly matches the percentage of people who told pollsters, before the vaccines were even in the public eye, that they wouldn't or were very unlikely to take a vaccine. This remains true across different demographic groups -- for instance, Biden voters and women were always more inclined to take vaccines, African and Hispanic Americans less so. These numbers have been consistent across multiple polls over the past year. In other words, people made up their minds about whether or not they'd take a vaccine very early in the process, and no information since has changed their opinion. Talking to people about benefits or side effects only influences a vanishingly tiny segment of the public. Misinformation, from either side, doesn't matter.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on August 12, 2021, 02:05:40 AM
I heard on Twittar that even READING A POST from an unvaxxed-trumper could give you COVID!
Then again, I also heard on Twittar that OSR is dying.
I want a shot against going to twittar.  :'(
===============================
VAX ME BABY! VAX ME GOOD!!!   ;D
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Trond on August 12, 2021, 10:28:37 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 12, 2021, 11:23:25 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on August 12, 2021, 11:24:55 AM
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.

DemonKKKrats had a mid term to win that year didn't they?  Can't make Obummer seem bad.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 12, 2021, 12:24:58 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on August 12, 2021, 12:48:43 PM
Truth is, Lockdowns will continue indefinitely until governments are deposed.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 12, 2021, 04:32:44 PM
Truth is, Lockdowns will continue indefinitely until governments are deposed.
Those terms are acceptable.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 12, 2021, 05:31:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 12, 2021, 07:26:56 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 12, 2021, 07:39:51 PM
how deadly does a disease have to be for us to lock down society? Why aren’t we discussing this?

If its say.... super incurable ebola, then a lockdown wouldn't really fix it anyway. The Spanish flu wasn't enough to lockdown the states back in the 1910s.

Lockdowns aren't magic and diseases generally don't just go away.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 12, 2021, 08:14:16 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 12, 2021, 08:33:34 PM
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.

https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/governor-asks-president-send-navy-hospital-ship-washington/ZM5P53CXG5GCROEFP4X7OBIW2U/

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/19/politics/ship-deploy-seattle-coronavirus/index.html

https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/03/23/why-navys-hospital-ship-mercy-going-la-instead-hard-hit-washington.html

Maybe that's because of good planning, maybe that's because the demand didn't match the projections. Maybe a bit of both.

We dont' get important numbers, like total ICU beds, typical occupancy, expected emergency occupancy, etc. Or like you pointed out, number of doctors and nurses. We get told, "Those beds are gonna fill up, and then when you break your foot, you're gonna be shit out of luck!" Or a vague number like a percentage or a factor. Five times! Five times what? Nearly full! What does that mean? 12 beds? 2 beds? 100 beds? That's not helpful. That tells me nothing.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 12, 2021, 08:41:07 PM
That's what I mean. We get told that the hospitals will be overwhelmed, and then... they don't get overwhelmed.

If they dont get overwhelmed this week, then its going to be next week for sure.

Because, supposedly, the people in charge of Hospitals are all idiots that have not noticed there is a Wuhan China virus pandemic going on for the last 18 months and have got no process in place in deal with having sick patients turning up at hospital.

So definitely over whelmed next week.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 12, 2021, 10:30:32 PM
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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 13, 2021, 03:41:50 AM
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.
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.

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.
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on August 13, 2021, 08:07:44 AM
The US system may be flawed and absurdly expensive, but it's not as threadbare as the UK's.

I avoid US doctors mostly due to the ‘quick fix’ pill prescriptions. I’ll treat things naturally with herbal or organic medicine and if convenient, I’ll visit doctors and dentists abroad. A root canal costs you $170 in South America.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on August 13, 2021, 10:44:52 AM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on August 13, 2021, 11:18:33 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 13, 2021, 11:22:16 AM
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
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 13, 2021, 11:33:15 AM
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 look at the ICU beds, it's still 77% in total, but about 1 in 4 (23%) are covid-19.

And yes, it's always about regional capacity. That's why horror stories about individual hospitals, aggregate numbers across the entire nation, and counts of individual hospitals at capacity are misleading. EMS can take people to different hospitals, but only so far. So a tiny hospital with 7/7 ICU beds in use doesn't mean much when there's a massive regional trauma center a few miles away with beds to spare. Conversely, if that regional system is close to capacity, that's really bad. A measure of how many regions are close to capacity would be the most useful metric.

Looks like the entire US South and parts of the West is at fairly high capacity.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on August 13, 2021, 11:38:25 AM
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
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).

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 13, 2021, 12:28:42 PM
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
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).

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.
I said almost half the ICU beds in Florida were occupied by Covid patients, not half of the inpatient beds.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on August 13, 2021, 04:04:17 PM
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
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).

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.
I said almost half the ICU beds in Florida were occupied by Covid patients, not half of the inpatient beds.
And I said 27% of the inpatient beds were Covid, not the ICU beds.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 13, 2021, 06:45:47 PM
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.
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.

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 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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 13, 2021, 09:42:44 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on August 13, 2021, 10:26:50 PM
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
Yeah. When he was President he gave all of the U.S. AIDS, and now the patient is dying. So, what's your point?!  ;)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on August 14, 2021, 12:37:01 AM
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!!!!!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 14, 2021, 12:04:17 PM
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!!!!!

  Well...they also are very staunch supporters of putting in climate control protocols and restricting carbon footprints to prevent the tides of the ocean from drowning the coast.  Now of course he has a 30 acre estate on the shore, with parties where people private jet in, being served by hundreds of servants who are making quite a carbon mess to get it done.  I think anything those fucks say is solely for the purpose of increasing their power.  Period.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on August 14, 2021, 04:50:37 PM
They built a floor for the tents and it looks to be wood.  How much carbon you think the trees absord and now think how much is added to air to make that temporary floor.  They are killing the solution and adding to the problem.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 14, 2021, 04:54:53 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 15, 2021, 03:26:21 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 16, 2021, 04:49:28 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 16, 2021, 06:35:47 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 16, 2021, 07:49:15 AM
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.

Chuck Schumer, the lead Dem in the US Senate, is trying to get Customs, the FBI, and the Justice Department to prioritize going after fakes, using the CDC logo on the cards as justification (it's a federal crime to forge documents with the seal of a federal agency).

Your body, my choice, enforced by guns and prison. These people are evil.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 16, 2021, 08:19:59 AM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 16, 2021, 08:27:09 AM
"Papers, please."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 16, 2021, 12:34:54 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 16, 2021, 01:55:16 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 16, 2021, 02:14:31 PM
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.
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.

What a concept, right?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 16, 2021, 02:17:16 PM
I'm not sure Surrey NHS Trust getting rid of a 22.5hr a week role is going to result in the massive savings you're envisioning.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 16, 2021, 02:23:43 PM
Of course this is all moving away from Keiro accusing NHS staff of being pampered and not living in the real world from the ivory tower of his cushy high paid job.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 16, 2021, 04:42:03 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on August 16, 2021, 11:30:00 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on August 17, 2021, 12:39:32 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 17, 2021, 08:00:20 AM
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.
At least the patient was sedated. Imagine the horror for the OR team of having to witness traffic court.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: tenbones on August 17, 2021, 03:49:58 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 17, 2021, 06:47:20 PM
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.

For the vast majority of people, covid is the sniffles. For that tiny minority of vulnerable people who are always susceptible to respiratory illnesses (generally both old and already chronically ill), it isn't. Protecting the latter doesn't justify locking up the former. Or shutting down the health service.

Of course you don't have a problem with other people's money being pissed up the wall. Doesn't do a thing for the billions paid out in medical negligence every year.

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.

It's almost as though the way we've understood how immunology works for the last century didn't change in 2020. Even if the WHO and others think they can arbitrarily change the definitions of things like "vaccine" and "immunity".

Haha, they do nothing to save the billions a year paid out in medical negligence. Which part of Leviathan do you work for?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 17, 2021, 11:18:27 PM
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"
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 18, 2021, 07:14:12 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 18, 2021, 11:04:34 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 18, 2021, 03:00:34 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 18, 2021, 03:01:31 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 18, 2021, 04:15:12 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 18, 2021, 04:36:12 PM
Every single study has show hospitalization and death rates from Delta are drastically lower if you are vaccinated versus unvaccinated.

That's total bollocks, as all the latest data from Israel shows.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on August 18, 2021, 09:33:20 PM
https://www.statnews.com/2021/08/18/health-workers-overwhelmed-covid-deaths-among-unvaccinated/

Meanwhile, in the real world…
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 18, 2021, 09:54:57 PM
https://www.statnews.com/2021/08/18/health-workers-overwhelmed-covid-deaths-among-unvaccinated/

Meanwhile, in the real world…
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on August 18, 2021, 10:00:59 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on August 18, 2021, 10:17:40 PM
https://www.statnews.com/2021/08/18/health-workers-overwhelmed-covid-deaths-among-unvaccinated/

Meanwhile, in the real world…
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.

I certainly admire your commitment.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 19, 2021, 01:03:24 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on August 19, 2021, 06:54:34 AM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 19, 2021, 09:05:15 AM
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 19, 2021, 09:33:47 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 19, 2021, 10:46:10 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 19, 2021, 01:33:27 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on August 19, 2021, 01:36:22 PM
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.

Now I’m interested in knowing how! Would you be kind to show the data?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 19, 2021, 03:22:11 PM
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...

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 19, 2021, 07:56:23 PM
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...

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.

 I think the time media can do that has passed by.  There will be a leak down the road of Anderson Cooper standing up in the water he was pretending was chest high, or people gathered to look like a bunch and another angle showing the reality, etc.  I buy it is no fun to get, and that some people are in real danger.  You still do not sacrifice the children of a society for the preservation of the very old.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on August 19, 2021, 08:37:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on August 19, 2021, 10:58:05 PM
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.

I mean take the medicine that literally millions of people have been using for generations around the world or allow yourself to be experimented on with injections that have emergency approval not full clinical trials.  Seems pretty elementary to me.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 19, 2021, 11:45:42 PM
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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZiPO-AVKBc
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 19, 2021, 11:51:09 PM
  What is the vast majority of 9?  6?  Odd to me the lady did not specify that, because if we are splitting hairs, it could mean 5.   I find it more interesting ANYONE who has been vaccinated is in the ICU.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 20, 2021, 01:32:31 AM
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.

Quote
For 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 20, 2021, 02:37:59 PM
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.

Quote
For 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 20, 2021, 03:04:26 PM
But God bless him, JKhim will try anyway. The man is a fucking saint.
You misspelled pond scum.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 20, 2021, 04:29:11 PM
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 :)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 20, 2021, 04:55:10 PM
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.

Quote
For 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. So we're stuck pointing fingers at each other saying "He's not arguing in good faith!" We're down to rhetoric instead of discussion.

And while I sometimes enjoy a rhetorical battle, I also think it's a frivolous waste of time. Amusing, but not really productive.

Quote
But God bless him, JKhim will try anyway. The man is a fucking saint.

Yes, I imagine you'd have high regard for someone who agrees with you.  ::)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on August 20, 2021, 05:06:15 PM
Maybe hospitals should stop firing unvaccinated nurses who worked all through the pandemic without vaccines?  That'll cause all sorts of issues wouldn't it?

https://fee.org/articles/massive-nurse-shortage-hits-houston-weeks-after-150-unvaccinated-nurses-and-hospital-workers-fired/ (https://fee.org/articles/massive-nurse-shortage-hits-houston-weeks-after-150-unvaccinated-nurses-and-hospital-workers-fired/)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 20, 2021, 05:34:41 PM
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.

Quote
For 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 20, 2021, 05:55:05 PM
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 :)
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 20, 2021, 05:56:13 PM
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.

Quote
For 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 20, 2021, 06:58:08 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 20, 2021, 07:01:42 PM
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?

No, definitely not.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 20, 2021, 08:13:30 PM
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?

If I thought I'd get a straight answer, I'd ask him some questions.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 21, 2021, 03:07:09 PM
Prior to the pandemic, the US federal government spent $4.0 to $4.4 trillion a year. Their tax revenues were $3.3 to $3.5 trillion. So the deficit each year was about $0.7 to $0.9 trillion. Even in those flush years, the government was hemorrhaging cash.

In 2020, the US federal government spent $6.6 trillion dollars, but revenue was only $3.4 trillion. That means the deficit was $3.2 trillion, roughly the same as the entire federal budget.

Another way to look at it: That works out to 14.9% of the entire nation's GDP. The last time the federal deficit was that high, as a percentage of the GDP, was in 1945. Covid-19 scared people so badly it resulted in a World War II level of spending. And that percentage is just the deficit. Total government spending in 2020 as a percentage of the nation's GDP was 31.2%.

In 2021, the deficit is expected to drop to 10.3% of the entire nation's GDP. That will still be the second highest since 1945, trailing only 2020.

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53624
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/55342
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/56324
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/57170
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/56977
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 21, 2021, 05:21:54 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 23, 2021, 06:00:28 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on August 24, 2021, 12:15:59 PM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 24, 2021, 12:30:54 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on August 24, 2021, 12:47:24 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 24, 2021, 01:11:41 PM
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.

  Of course.  A quite large chunk went for gender studies in afghanistan.  If we want to talk wasteful spending we can do that all day I think.  I suspect you are buying in a limited scope, which is why you are not going to notice a shortage of things till you want them specifically.

   Given the mortality rate of the virus, a good deal of the "crisis" has been somewhat self inflicted.   Yet some have profited massively from it...dumb luck I guess
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 24, 2021, 01:23:06 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on August 24, 2021, 01:34:37 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 24, 2021, 04:10:13 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 24, 2021, 04:16:23 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 24, 2021, 04:33:09 PM
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.

The main advantages of a lump sum are two: 1) It's easy to administer. The checks wouldn't have gone out, if they needed to do casework. Look at the disaster surrounding all that unused rent assistance, for instance. 2) It creates a new government dependency. (The real reason.)

If they really wanted to help, then they'd be handing out most of what they're spending. But the CARES Act cost $2.2 trillion. That works out to a cost of $15,000 per taxpayer, but they only gave each taxpayer $1,200.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 24, 2021, 04:42:54 PM
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.

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.

  This is more to my point, giving people money will only fix their problems if money is their problem.  People buying TVs and Cars with money from the government do not have a money problem.  They have a serious judgement problem.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 24, 2021, 04:55:07 PM
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.
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.
They don't? My compliance department says otherwise.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 24, 2021, 05:31:43 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 24, 2021, 05:33:09 PM
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.
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.
They don't? My compliance department says otherwise.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/1148376
(avoiding the paywall: http://files.mccn.edu/media/ds/Berwick%20et%20al%202012.pdf)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 24, 2021, 05:55:44 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 24, 2021, 06:07:31 PM
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.

It's mainly because everything you say is a piece of nonsense. HMRC left 20% of people in the workplace, I agree that's far short of the 80% for the lower paid DWP,  under direction of their employers. The 80% that worked from home did this because they were directed to which in no way implies that they were workshy. These are people in mostly low paying jobs who have to do what they're telt.

Perhaps if you lived in the real world of people who don't get paid all that much you'd understand that doing what your boss says isn't being workshy.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 24, 2021, 06:30:37 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 24, 2021, 07:33:13 PM
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
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.

And remember the "robot shoves down your throat" part? Notice it's immediately followed by the words "cotton swab". I know verbs and objects are tough concepts, but it's referring to the part (the swab!) that the robot inserts.

All of which is demonstrated in the video I linked. Which you'd know, if you watched it.

I can see why you were scared away, though. China Uncensored doesn't employ propaganda, they employ sarcasm, and you're clearly confusing the two. For instance, when the bald guy refers to the Global Times as "my favorite Chinese state-run media", he's not supporting their blatant attempts at propaganda. No, he's mocking them.

I have to say, it's entertaining when someone tries to debunk me by by agreeing with every point I made.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 24, 2021, 07:43:46 PM
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.
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.
They don't? My compliance department says otherwise.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/1148376
(avoiding the paywall: http://files.mccn.edu/media/ds/Berwick%20et%20al%202012.pdf)
Your source is dated, and much has changed with CMS since 2012.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 24, 2021, 07:46:09 PM
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.
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.
They don't? My compliance department says otherwise.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/1148376
(avoiding the paywall: http://files.mccn.edu/media/ds/Berwick%20et%20al%202012.pdf)
Your source is dated, and much has changed with CMS since 2012.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 24, 2021, 07:52:38 PM
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.
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.
They don't? My compliance department says otherwise.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/1148376
(avoiding the paywall: http://files.mccn.edu/media/ds/Berwick%20et%20al%202012.pdf)
Your source is dated, and much has changed with CMS since 2012.
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 24, 2021, 08:12:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 24, 2021, 09:10:56 PM
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
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 24, 2021, 09:12:22 PM
I was being hyperbolic

I'm shocked. Shocked I say!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 24, 2021, 10:03:23 PM
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
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.

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.
No, you're just switching what you're saying.

First of all, the South China Morning Post? And you're accusing others of repeating propaganda? In 2017, the SCMP became a mouthpiece of a totalitarian regime that's lied about almost everything when it comes to covid-19. So those are all carefully curated and vetted staged shots, while China Uncovered video is actual footage of what happens in the field. Not only that, but a huge chunk of CU video involves them explicitly pointing out out that China violates their own safety standards in innumerable ways. They show at at least a dozen examples. So even if this is a perfect solution under ideal conditions, there's every reason to expect expedience, pressure to get it done, and control over all media will lead to widespread unsanitary practices.

Secondly, your video doesn't show that. Only one shot shows a part being removed, and it's a weird angle, done very quickly, and the part isn't clearly seen. But it's a small part, easily removed, and thus clearly doesn't make a tight seal. And you can see from other shots that people are pressing their lips down to the glass.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 25, 2021, 12:41:47 AM
So the report Biden ordered which he apparently wanted to come back as "Virus origin from an animal and not the Wuhan lab" has instead come back as "Inconclusive: Could have been an animal, or could have been the Wuhan lab." Which I am sure is not landing well in Washington DC today.

Link (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/biden-receives-inconclusive-intelligence-report-on-covid-origins/ar-AANHRNz?ocid=uxbndlbing)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 25, 2021, 05:07:52 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 25, 2021, 09:53:59 AM
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.

The lawyer in me recognizes and admires Pat's skill in this :)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 25, 2021, 11:02:39 AM
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.
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 countered with a throw away line about a compliance department, which also used rhetorical devices that weren't intended to be taken literally, like personification. Your compliance department didn't "say" anything, but like with my hyperbole, every reasonable person with a basic grasp of language structure would know that and understand exactly what you were saying. I replied with a cite, that showed a high level of fraud and waste in general in Medicare. You pointed out my source was almost 10 years old, and I in turn pointed out that information on this topic was hard to come by, and that source seemed to be widely used by other more recent analyses. You then replied with more details about compliance practices that you were familiar with, and I replied with a more nuanced explanation of my position, where I clarified that the program investigated fraud, but only at a minuscule level due to political reasons.

In other words, we were carrying on a reasonable conversation. We'd moved beyond simple statements and rhetorical devices to more substantive details. That means you understood the intent of my first post, I understood the point of your similar statement, and that we were engaging in good faith.

At least up until your last post. In another throw-away line in the post you were replying to, I clarified that my original statement was hyperbole. It wasn't necessary; we'd moved beyond that, and you clearly understood what I was saying. There was no ambiguity. But I thought it might be useful to anyone who was following along, but not following the discussion as closely.

And you jumped on it as a sign of weakness. Which it isn't. It's not a confession, or an admission or error, or of wrongdoing. There's no reasonable way it could be interpreted like that. But you chose to interpret it that way, anyway, because it allowed you to make a cheap shot that might fool someone who was only superficially following the conversation.

The lawyer in me recognizes and admires Pat's skill in this :)
And you're being a douchebag.

Mistwell and HappyDaze, this is exactly the kind of bad faith sniping and unwillingness to engage people fairly that makes this board shit so much of the time. You may or may not be shitty people in general, but this is shitty behavior.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 25, 2021, 01:26:22 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 25, 2021, 02:19:16 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 25, 2021, 06:44:01 PM
Just as I said, they're coming for 12-15 year olds - and claiming they can use Gillick competence to waive parental consent (and bully and intimidate children into agreeing to it): https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/08/25/nhs-draws-plans-vaccinate-12-year-olds/

Only a matter of time before they then move on to 5-11 year olds. Evil fuckers, pushing this so they can boost the profits of their mates in Big Pharma. All for a virus that is of no concern whatsoever for children, and a "vaccine" that not only doesn't work, but is much deadlier to the under-25s than the virus itself.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deadDMwalking on August 25, 2021, 07:08:55 PM
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....
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on August 25, 2021, 07:36:51 PM
It's almost like some people would prefer the pandemic to continue for some reason....

I used to think the same. Truth is, not getting vaccinated doesn’t represent that.
Unfortunately foreign nations are planting trojan horses to create misinformation and division. We simply lost track of our priorities. Without a doubt, Covid is nasty and particularly dangerous on the elderly. However, the panic has been fueled by news networks like CNN, etc. If you watch Newsmax you’ll only hear about the virus once or twice a day. We are back to the usual routine for the most part.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 26, 2021, 07:41:37 AM
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. 

Nothing has changed as a result of covid, with the exception of massive government overreach.

My children have had all their childhood vaccinations. They have never had the flu jab, because it's unnecessary. They will not be having this jab, because it's equally unnecessary.

They had covid, as I did, at the beginning of the year. It was a trivial infection, just as they usually are. 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.

As for "social responsibility", that would only apply if these jabs actually worked. They don't stop infection or transmission, which makes that entire argument irrelevant.

I'd suggest you do some more research on smallpox, the conditions that led to it's successful eradication are rather specific. In particular there being no animal reservoir for that virus. By contrast there are multiple animal reservoirs for coronaviruses. Which is why we are infected with them all the time.

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....

Wow, months! Vaccine trials are normally 3-5 years. I'd suggest you update your Israeli data, particularly for August, because breakthrough infections are happening at a much higher rate than that.

And it's not the unvaccinated who cause mutations, that isn't how evolution works. In fact, forget it, you're true believer...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deadDMwalking on August 26, 2021, 09:45:52 AM
And it's not the unvaccinated who cause mutations, that isn't how evolution works. In fact, forget it, you're true believer...

If you are infected with the virus, due to random mutation there is the possibility that you create a new strain and spread it to others.  The more people who are infected, the more chances there are for a random mutation to result in either a higher rate of infection or a higher rate of morbidity (or both).  The new strain then may become dominant until the process repeats. 

If 100 people are infected and there is a 1% chance of this type of random mutation, you'd expect that probably 1 person perpetuates a new strain.  If those people had all been vaccinated before the infection and the vaccine provides an 80-90% protection from infection, only 10-20 people would have active infections.  As a result, there would be a much smaller chance that a more virulent/more deadly variation arose among the infected population. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 26, 2021, 09:50:28 AM
 You had me at HPV, just tell me you are not going to give that one to the son(s) as well.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deadDMwalking on August 26, 2021, 01:58:34 PM
I don't have any sons.  I have three daughters.  If I had sons, yes, they would get the HPV vaccine, too. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 26, 2021, 02:00:59 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 26, 2021, 03:03:48 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 26, 2021, 03:09:45 PM
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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 26, 2021, 03:12:43 PM
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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on August 26, 2021, 03:19:09 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 26, 2021, 03:21:00 PM
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.
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.

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.
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 26, 2021, 03:22:05 PM
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
<points to the 18 months of lockdowns and mask mandates in the US>
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on August 26, 2021, 03:47:57 PM
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.

That’s hilarious! Given they only had a few thousand cases. Guess they should have invested in checks and balances.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on August 26, 2021, 04:03:40 PM
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
<points to the 18 months of lockdowns and mask mandates in the US>

Greetings!

*Laughing* Sadly, very true, Pat. However, over the last 18 months, we have also witnessed growing resistance--and not with just a gathered handful, but thousands of people. Increasingly, such resistance is also becoming more violent, whether from lone nutjobs just going crazy on a mask-tyrant employer, or riots in opposition to such government sponsored policies. I admit I don't have a whole lot of confidence concerning most of the country being submissive sheep, but there seems to be some glimmers of hope! ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 26, 2021, 04:05:07 PM
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
<points to the 18 months of lockdowns and mask mandates in the US>
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 26, 2021, 04:06:41 PM
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.

  Likely a good idea, as rectal cancer is MUCH higher probability from HPV than cervical cancer.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 26, 2021, 05:09:06 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 26, 2021, 06:35:00 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 26, 2021, 07:12:59 PM
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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on August 26, 2021, 08:25:09 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: The Spaniard on August 26, 2021, 08:32:25 PM
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
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on August 26, 2021, 08:41:55 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on August 26, 2021, 08:51:05 PM
The states with the lowest vaccination rates have the highest hospitalization and death rates right now. Why?
Mississippi is the heaviest State.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 26, 2021, 09:00:43 PM
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.

Why do states with the least vaccinations have the most hospitalizations and deaths, and states with the most vaccinations have the least hospitalizations and deaths?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 26, 2021, 09:05:36 PM
The states with the lowest vaccination rates have the highest hospitalization and death rates right now. Why?
Mississippi is the heaviest State.

Michigan is a top 10 obesity rate state but has only 10 Covid hospitalizations per 100,000 and 0.13 deaths per 100,000. But they have higher rates of vaccinations at over 50%. So obesity doesn't explain it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on August 26, 2021, 09:05:51 PM
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.

I believe that the technical term is "a fuck-ton of confounding factors".   :)

And while you can use various statistical methods to torture answers out of the data, the answers are only as good as the data and the assumptions you bake into your modeling. Given the replication crisis and p-hacking, I am skeptical of any results (whether they confirm my biases or not) where the data and the methodology are not provided for public review.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 26, 2021, 09:12:11 PM
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.

Maryland is in the top 10 for African American population but has low hospitalization and death rates. But they have high vaccination rates. New Mexico is in the top 10 for poverty rates and lowest GDP per 100,000 but has low hospitalization and death rates. They also have a top 10 highest vaccination rate. Your guesses just are not panning out.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on August 26, 2021, 09:32:33 PM
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.

I'm pretty open to saying that I think the injections reduce hospitalizations and deaths, particularly among the elderly/vulnerable population.* However I don't think it's correct or appropriate to imply that the relationship to injections is linear or as simple as you seem eager to portray it. It's clear that factors outside of vaccination are actually much more significant than %injected when it comes to assessing C/H/D in a population. The kind of cherry picking gotcha you're trying to engage in simply demonstrates you've already reached the conclusion you wanted and aren't engaging meaningfully with the data.

* I don't think the cost/benefit is there for much of the population, and pursuing 100% as a goal is harmful and not grounded in science or ethics. The majority of healthy adults and children will be exposed and become immune without major health consequences, and we can improve outcomes overall with early treatment and other methods that are far less likely to result in heart attacks, strokes, and other negatives.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 26, 2021, 10:07:32 PM
  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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 26, 2021, 10:57:04 PM
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.
Even 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 26, 2021, 11:02:17 PM
  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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 26, 2021, 11:04:15 PM
  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).

  Fun fact:  I do not get Flu vaccines either, for that very reason.   Edited to add: meaning it is often the wrong shot for the wrong bug.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on August 26, 2021, 11:26:37 PM
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
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.

Greetings!

Yeah, Spaniard, you are right. So many weak, pussy sheep. Oregon is full of them!

I know. I'm an old Tyrannosaurus Rex. Not that long ago, corrupt, evil politicians were strung the fuck up from trees. If not that, they were removed from their positions and titles, stripped naked, and tarred and feathered, and run out of town, their political careers ruined, and lucky to escape with their lives.

Now, we have so many people that want to get on their knees and grovel like animals. Scraping at the feet of their masters. These fucking cowardly worms are born for the yoke. So sad, my friend.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 26, 2021, 11:30:08 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on August 27, 2021, 12:32:55 AM
For reference:

(https://i.imgur.com/pVyEVV2.png)

158,429 tests performed

5.86% positive in fully injected cohort
6.11% positive in uninjected cohort

The uninjected cohort is obliged to be tested more frequently creating a significant bias in their data (among many other factors that should be biasing toward higher %).

FWIW all of this is pretty strange and it's not clear what to make of it. To me this suggests injections have 0% (or less) protection against infection.

Right now Israel is one of the top 5 most injected countries, but also top 5 per capita cases, hospitalizations, and deaths. I sincerely can't imagine that the US has a healthier overall population than Israel, so what the hell are things going to be like for the US when flu season really hits in the winter? I fully expect worse than last year, and it wouldn't surprise me if several US states go full Australia.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 27, 2021, 07:08:46 AM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on August 27, 2021, 07:24:03 AM
  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"?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 27, 2021, 07:33:14 AM
   I should also mention, I know 17 (the number seems to keep growing) different people who have had covid.  No deaths, one hospitalization, no long term effects afterwards.   I also realize personal experiences are not the same for everyone, nor do mass statistics make.  After talking with these people, I made my own decision about vaccine.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 27, 2021, 12:49:19 PM
  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.
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.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/polio/public/index.html
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 27, 2021, 04:22:05 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 27, 2021, 04:24:03 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 27, 2021, 04:32:07 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 27, 2021, 04:34:38 PM
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.

False (https://www.techarp.com/science/japan-ivermectin-covid-19/).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 27, 2021, 04:39:26 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on August 27, 2021, 04:48:27 PM
  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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 27, 2021, 04:49:12 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on August 27, 2021, 05:14:34 PM
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?

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 27, 2021, 06:17:26 PM
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?
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deadDMwalking on August 27, 2021, 06:56:58 PM
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). 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 27, 2021, 07:25:18 PM
I would agree with deadDM, if you just choose not to get sick then that beats a +1 from the vaccine every day of the week.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 27, 2021, 07:34:50 PM
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?
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.

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.

  Your blood type would not happen to be O+ would it?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 27, 2021, 07:36:23 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on August 27, 2021, 08:24:21 PM
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. 

Just curious, which specific vaccines do not prevent you from getting infected, but only mitigate your symptoms?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on August 27, 2021, 08:52:59 PM
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.



Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 27, 2021, 11:21:35 PM
  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?

Yes, at least according to the latest information.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 27, 2021, 11:25:35 PM
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.


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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 27, 2021, 11:30:41 PM
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.

Speaking of which I just re-watched one of the Batman movies and I really want a face mask which looks like Ra's ahl Ghul's facemask.

(https://i.ibb.co/89KV29h/shot-Remember-Batman06-jpg.jpg])
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 27, 2021, 11:32:36 PM

(https://i.ibb.co/89KV29h/shot-Remember-Batman06-jpg.jpg])
Ah yes, Liam Neeson eating a stapler.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 28, 2021, 12:06:41 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 28, 2021, 12:19:41 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 28, 2021, 12:30:47 AM
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.

 ;D I'm pretty fastidious. I use a nakpkin before putting my mask back on and dispose of it after game night.
No comment about others though.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 28, 2021, 03:25:12 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 28, 2021, 06:47:40 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on August 28, 2021, 08:09:01 AM

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.

Yep, completely stupid. Unless you are wearing a properly fitted, properly worn N-95 mask, you are, barring sneezing and coughing, puting pretty much the same viral load into the room as if you were not wearing a mask. And sneezing and coughing can be mitigated by coughing into your hand or sneezing into a napkin.

Equally stupid, but not as annoying as your situation, is the masking requirement where I live.

Here, you have to wear a mask indoors unless you are in a restaurant and sitting at a table.  And restaurants are back to 100% capacity. Good to know that our Dear Leader has discovered that sitting at a table in a restaurant makes you immune to catching covid. This is the stupid but not annoying part.

The stupid and annoying part is that at work, unless you are in an enclosed office with a door you can close, you have to wear a mask at all times, unless you are eating or drinking. I sit in an 8'x8' cube with 5' high walls. It has a sliding door. My cube is in a group of 6, three each on either side of a 3' wide aisle. The ceiling is 10'. Each cube has a supply register over it.

So I can sit at a table in a packed restaurant with no mask on, but at work, in a much less dense situation, I have to wear a mask. It's dumbassery like this that tells me that the fuck-heads in charge are fucking clown shoes.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 28, 2021, 09:35:08 AM
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.
Sounds like a notice made very early in 2020 and not updated since.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 28, 2021, 09:52:08 AM
Natural immunity 13 times more effective than the jabs against Delta: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1

Previous study was merely 7 times more effective.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 28, 2021, 10:45:23 AM
  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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 28, 2021, 11:32:03 AM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on August 28, 2021, 11:48:33 AM
  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.

The bearer of this letter has acted under my orders and for the good of the State.

- Joe Biden
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 28, 2021, 11:57:15 AM
  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.

At least the CDC hasn't decided they have the authority to manage contracts between landlords and tenants across the entire nation.

(What they did? And the SCOTUS didn't immediately shut it down, but gave them a grace period? And then Congress decided not to do anything about it, so after the grace period the President decided to do it again anyway. SCOTUS of course said no, leading to the Speaker of the House blaming SCOTUS for not lawmaking for her when she couldn't manage to get the votes by herself? You're pulling my leg, right?)

Edit: Ninjaed by Kiero.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 28, 2021, 01:14:31 PM
The CDC has completely gone down the woke rabbit hole. Been that way for a few years now, and exasperated by the Covid situation.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 28, 2021, 01:52:45 PM
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.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 28, 2021, 02:03:24 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 28, 2021, 02:52:43 PM
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.
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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 28, 2021, 03:14:58 PM
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.
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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 28, 2021, 03:28:30 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on August 28, 2021, 06:00:01 PM
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.
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.
 


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on August 29, 2021, 06:52:36 AM
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".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on August 29, 2021, 07:28:40 AM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on August 29, 2021, 07:51:17 AM
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.


It was my understanding that the flu vaccine is effective against the variant(s) it was designed for. However, knowing which variant(s) are going to be prevalent over a given flu season (due to flu virus' high mutation rate) is difficult to quantify, resulting in a large lack of coverage, and leading to variants against which the current year's vaccine is ineffective. Hence the typical 30-50 percent overall effectiveness.

Sounds similar to how covid is appearing to behave. Initial vaccines against the initial variant are very effective. But effectiveness tails off against the inevitable variants. The exception seems to be that (according to the powers that be) a booster of the same vaccine will result in an increase in effectiveness against variants.

It is also not clear to me if break-through cases in the vaccinated driven by the ineffectiveness of the vaccine against variants or if it is due to the vaccine's effectiveness fading.






Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 29, 2021, 12:06:42 PM
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
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 29, 2021, 12:47:07 PM
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
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on August 29, 2021, 07:01:39 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 29, 2021, 09:21:51 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on August 29, 2021, 09:47:56 PM
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.

(https://i.imgur.com/S3kLMRa.png)

By now Sweden is only discussed in hushed tones. A country that didn't lock down, didn't mandate masks, and operated more-or-less as normal throughout all of 2020. The prevailing narrative I've heard about Sweden is that Sweden fared much worse than its neighboring countries.

(https://i.imgur.com/iA1TQVS.png)

One of the strangest things is that Sweden has one of the most aggressive Covid-classification metrics. In Sweden any death for any reason within 30 days of a positive Covid test is considered a Covid death.

(https://i.imgur.com/tCr6DOI.png)

Now I have no doubt that the Swedish population as a whole is healthier than the US population, but it's really puzzling how this works out. However, one of the most shocking things to me wasn't that Sweden fared better than most other countries through the 2020 hysteria. It's that Sweden fared better through the 2020 hysteria than it did through most prior years.

(https://i.imgur.com/mIuSwU7.png)

Sincerely, what.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on August 29, 2021, 09:51:08 PM
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.

I thought that Sweden was a mask-less, no-lockdown, hellscape, and that the entire population died of covid -- hence the 0 deaths 7-day average.

Or maybe they reached herd immunity?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 29, 2021, 09:55:23 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 29, 2021, 10:05:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 29, 2021, 10:30:37 PM
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.

OK genius, do you know what the RR rating is on the MMR vaccine for measles?

"The vaccine effectiveness for measles prevention was calculated to be 95% after a single dose (RR: .05, 95% CI, .02—.13. Vaccine effectiveness was 96% after administration of 2 doses (RR .04, 95% CI .01—.28). Among household contacts, the effectiveness of vaccination to prevent transmission to other children after a single dose was 81% (RR 0.19, 95% CI .04— .89), 85% after 2 doses, and 96% after 3 doses (RR .04, 95% CI .01–.23)."

Now compare those numbers to the numbers you discussed earlier in this thread regarding the Covid vax, for the first 6 months of that vaccine.

In fact the MMR vaccine is less effective against mumps than the Covid vaccine is against Covid in the first 6 months. ("72% effective after 1 dose (RR .24, 95% CI .08— .76) and 86% after 2 doses (RR .12, 95% CI .04–.35)."

Oh and by the way the measles vaccine ALSO EXPERIENCES BREAKTHROUGH CASES and ALSO PROVIDES FOR A MORE MILD CASE OF THE MEASLES (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32418790/). In fact it was a series of breakthrough measles cases in the late 1980s which led to the two dose regimen we use today to help reduce those breakthrough cases though they can and do still happen.

For for me personally, no I have no comorbidities.  I have high blood pressure controlled by a light dose of some meds but that doesn't seem to be a comorbidity and my weight and other health issues are all pretty good. My wife also had Covid (before a vaccine was available) and I didn't get it and she did fine with it and it was rather mild. Thanks for asking. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 29, 2021, 11:52:06 PM
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.

That's what I thought as well.
I have to wonder why they'd recycle an old notice. It was one page, double sided. It's not like it would have taken much time to create a new notice.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 30, 2021, 04:42:24 PM
Where were you when you realized the covid scandal was just an excuse for a one-world, totalitarian, socialist government?

(https://files.catbox.moe/3h94z0.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/tup246.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/8dqjvn.png)
(https://files.catbox.moe/9ep24c.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/11v0k5.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/mstsg3.jpg)

(https://files.catbox.moe/i455ww.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/3azgjr.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/7i7gpp.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/odyses.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/vsq9zb.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/qa4gq7.jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 30, 2021, 04:43:32 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 30, 2021, 05:06:53 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 30, 2021, 05:13:03 PM
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.

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.

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.
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 want evidence, I can offer it to you. But I reckon you won't be willing to accept it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 30, 2021, 05:16:57 PM
 Never let a crisis go to waste.  Said the dude right out loud.  Not too conspiratorial.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 30, 2021, 05:17:36 PM
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.

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.

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.
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 want evidence, I can offer it to you. But I reckon you won't be willing to accept it.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 30, 2021, 05:18:28 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 30, 2021, 05:30:55 PM
Never let a crisis go to waste.  Said the dude right out loud.  Not too conspiratorial.

Don't forget that the US funded gain-of-function research in China FUCKING WUHAN which targeted "coronaviruses from bats". Wonder why there isn't worldwide suspicion on that.

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.

I never said it was efficient or convenient, just to clarify. I'm saying that is the explicit goal of many organizations. In the words of both Chruchill and Kalergi, founders of the EU, it was meant to be a step towards world government.

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?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 30, 2021, 06:05:41 PM
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 want evidence, I can offer it to you. But I reckon you won't be willing to accept it.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 30, 2021, 06:07:24 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 30, 2021, 06:09:25 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 30, 2021, 06:14:20 PM
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.

(https://files.catbox.moe/3lfjvz.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/qx5rrt.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/uurgct.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/omfjp9.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/skda5j.jpg)

(https://files.catbox.moe/e42mai.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/f9yir2.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/pguklo.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/6t7mps.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/m8kmuu.png)

I'm not interested in arguing banal things or insulting each other.

These ideas were official state policy and the personal vision of many accomplished heads of state, organizations and religions. What's irrational is to think these goals are somehow gone and irrelevant in the globalist world we live in.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 30, 2021, 06:14:29 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 30, 2021, 06:15:47 PM
 And if that fails, do what they do to the nations that refuse to use the petro dollar or central banking and drop a little freedom and democracy on them.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 30, 2021, 06:20:00 PM
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.

Sounds like fun.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 30, 2021, 06:21:01 PM
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.
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.

Edit: Here's a good analysis:
https://mises.org/wire/biden-and-janet-yellen-are-pushing-global-minimum-tax-rate-eu-very-pleased
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 30, 2021, 06:23:34 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 30, 2021, 06:34:28 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on August 30, 2021, 06:46:35 PM
Greetings!

The resistance against Vaccine Mandates grows throughout the world!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on August 30, 2021, 06:50:17 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 30, 2021, 06:55:01 PM
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?
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 30, 2021, 06:56:59 PM
  Seems more like a Homer Simpson blunder that Mister Burns uses to control the town and make more money.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 30, 2021, 07:08:24 PM
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

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.

This "deadly" virus gave them the perfect opportunity; global warming wasn't enough (admitted by the Club of Rome, a made-up crisis to unite humanity against a common enemy). Global problems require global solutions. Mandatory vaccines and biometric and digital surveillance (ID2020); otherwise you're putting us all at risk!!!! Transition to traceable, digital currencies (ideal for rationing meat, deplatforming "extremists" and banning guns) because cash became toxic. UBI so everyone depends on the state for allowance. Abolishing national sovereignty because viruses and climate change. It's all a step towards international social credit system.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 30, 2021, 07:20:15 PM
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.
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on August 30, 2021, 08:01:34 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 30, 2021, 08:49:15 PM

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 30, 2021, 08:53:31 PM
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.

According to whom? Who says there is a natural progression of humanity towards unity or government?

This has a name; whig historiography. The idea that history is a liner process towards "progress" and therefore anything past is necessarily bad. It assumes government means progress as well. Take a look at history and you'll see that governments get more and more unstable as they grow, until they finally collapse.

And why would world government be a good thing? Since when is government a solution to anything? If anything, it will be an unaccountable bureaucracy whose laws and taxes cannot be evaded.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on August 30, 2021, 09:09:14 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 30, 2021, 09:16:46 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 30, 2021, 09:38:53 PM

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 30, 2021, 09:49:26 PM
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.
That's incredibly superficial thinking.

And larger and larger societies have not proved advantageous. The prevailing theory for why Europe suddenly took off and eclipsed the rest of the world in science is that it happened because Europe was balkanized. Germany alone had 300+ states. It was the great diversity that led to the flowering of the Enlightenment, while monolithic empires often stagnated. And the great unification of the 20th century led to the first modern totalitarian states, and the worst repression and greatest death tolls in history. A more accurate statement would be something along the lines that, over history, larger and larger societies became possible as new techniques arose that allowed rulers greater and greater control over their people.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on August 31, 2021, 12:08:42 AM
Long suspected this was happening, but this paper confirms it. Vaccine-related deaths are recorded as Covid deaths.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/352837543_Analysis_of_COVID-19_vaccine_death_reports_from_the_Vaccine_Adverse_Events_Reporting_System_VAERS_Database_Interim_Results_and_Analysis

(https://i.imgur.com/GZAyJd2.png)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 31, 2021, 12:09:31 AM
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.
Have you considered making and selling your own line of pillows?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 31, 2021, 08:52:09 AM
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.

I had heard some scientists state that it is manmade, but there is no way to conclusively prove it was; at least I can't since I'm not a virologist. I do believe it is for many reasons (scientists saying it is, gain of function research, the fact that coronaviruses and bat soups have always been around and nobody noticed, how timely it is, how it requires more authoritarianism, etc.)

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?

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...

Take a look at the World Economic Forum's "predictions" for 2030. "You'll own nothing and you'll be happy"; a world in which everything is rented online. Why would they post that? Why the year 2030? Does it have anything to do with the Agenda 2030 of the United Nations, which is now being led by the head of the International Socialist, which openly stated they wanted world government by strengthening the United Nations?

If you stop to think about why they post those things you arrive to the conclusion that it wasn't a prediction but a planned goal.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 31, 2021, 08:56:20 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 31, 2021, 09:37:16 AM
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?
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.

Evolution might be a good analogy, but I'm not using evolution in the highly inaccurate pop science sense. Pop science treats evolution as a kind of destiny, but that's based on a fundamental misunderstanding. Evolution isn't about general improvement or developing into "higher" forms. No, it's much narrower. It's about adapting an organism to a specific environment. It's also highly progressive. Complex features like eyes or wings can't just spring out of nowhere, overnight. They have to evolve through a series of small, incremental steps. And every single one of those incremental steps has to provide a new, progressive benefit to the organism, or they won't happen.

Human behavior is similar. While humans do have some direction -- the Frankfurt school, for instance, laid out a lot of the intellectual underpinnings, and it was later merged with postmodernism -- grand conspiracies where large groups of people over multiple generations coordinate in secret to accomplish some grand goal are incredibly implausible. What really happens is you have a school of thought that gives some general direction to a group of people, but they're all reacting independently to their personal circumstances. As a result, it adapts and changes over time, and while there may be some thought-leaders, it's the result of a lot of independent people acting based on their own values in their own perceived interest. So there's no secretive cabal, and no head to cut off. And it also means the movements changes over time, adapting in unpredictable ways to new political climates.

Small increases in centralized power benefit those currently in power, so the movement in the direction of one world government doesn't require some grand conspiracy. It's just individuals acting in their own selfish interests. There are theories surrounding it and advocates who do promote the end goal of a politically unified world as a good in itself, but it's mostly just things like individual governors going "hey, there's a virus and people want me to do something. What solution can I give them? Lockdowns! Whether or not they really work, it makes it look like I'm doing something! Plus, I'm on the news every day, and I really love that! Oh, and some people are complaining. How do I discredit them? I know, I'll call them antivaxxers!"

See? Pretty much every atomized action that's been done is in the immediate self-interest of those currently in power. If it required everyone to agree on a goal and work toward it all at the same time, or required short term sacrifice in the interests of a long term aim, then it would break down almost instantly. Instead, this is people waking up every morning, and going "what's my best response to what's happening today?" While it is tending toward an end result, that's the natural result of all these independent, selfish actions. Which is also why it's so hard to fight, because to stop it you don't just have to defeat a few leaders, you have to change how broad swaths of people think.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 31, 2021, 09:54:28 AM
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.

The reason why is money and geopolitics. The scientists who wrote that highly influential letter in the Lancet debunking the lab leak theory at the very start of the pandemic all received major funding and awards from China. It's similar to the reason so many companies are kow-towing to China; they see gold in the world's biggest market, and know saying anything that might reflect badly on the Chinese Communist Party can kill their chances. So they shut up, and ignore the slave labor, organ harvesting, and lax lab safety protocols. And once that caught on, it became firmly ensconced because there's a lot of social pressure in the media and among the political elite to adopt the prevailing narrative, and suppress alternate points of view.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 31, 2021, 10:21:10 AM
What is the outlandish theory I believe in? Both you and I agree that there is

1) A man made virus
2) Media silence and international compliance
3) A tendency towards world government

But saying this is intentional is too crazy. What you attribute to incompetence I attribute to a deliberate attempt. There's an adage that goes "never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity", which is commonly accepted as a trueism. I do not rule out incompetence, but when it comes to viruses, top security labs, media coverup and a dictatorship superpower, I assume they're not that stupid. I could be wrong, but it's not adequate to just rule out malice. We know these people lie, kill and strive for world dominion. It's no secret. Or do you really think communists disappeared in 1991?

My questions to you are:

1) Why does the WEF predict a future in which "you'll own nothing and you'll be happy" for 2030? Does this have anything to do with Agenda 2030?

2) Why did the US accept as its official policy to strive for a "world federation", "world law" and "disarmament" of all nations to be replaced by a singly UN army?

3) Why did NATO officials talked about a transitions towards world government?

4) Two founders of the European Union (Churchill and Kalergi) meant for it to be a step towards world government, and Sutherland, another EU official said it had to "undermine national homogeneity" a couple of years ago. Is that project still ongoing or not? Why?

5) Did all the communists abandon their ideology of an international soviet union by 1991 or did they simply switch to a different strategy, as defectors Yuri Bezmenov and Anatoly Golitsyn and Fidel Castro himself stated (infiltration of the catholic church, oppressors-oppressed dialectic, media and university indoctrination, focusing on Latin America, etc.)?

6) When politicians mention the "new world order" in their speeches, is it just a coincidence or is it a cover reference to H.G. Wells' book, which advocated for a socialist world government?

7) The UN has the "Isaiah wall" outside of its HQ. What bible verse does it reference and what does it mean?

Anyway, here are a few more pics just in case anyone is interested:

Fabian Society, the socialist group that believes in gradual transition towards socialism. To this group belonged Tony Blair and Stuart Chase, from whom FDR got his "new deal".

(https://files.catbox.moe/8gimgv.jpg)

Freemasonry's goal is the unification of all mankind

(https://files.catbox.moe/s6c554.jpg)
(https://files.catbox.moe/d0j1zk.png)
(https://files.catbox.moe/6o0rrq.jpg)

Unesco's job is to strive towards world government

(https://files.catbox.moe/5m7cx4.jpg)

Paul Ehrlich, environmentalist alarmist, and John P. Holdren (Obama's environmental advisor) arguing for world government.

(https://files.catbox.moe/m1gcdy.jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 31, 2021, 10:37:43 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 31, 2021, 11:00:33 AM
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.

Not at all what happened. You can't tell me I didn't offer any arguments or evidence. I didn't bother with the ad hominems and went straight to the point we have in common and stated my personal view quite clearly. I'm asking you a few questions but you're not obliged to answer any. I showed you official statements from US, UN and EU which state a deliberate world government project, yet you still think it's "irrational" to suspect the project is still ongoing and that the globalist trend is purely spontaneous and unintentional.

This is the denial of conspiracies because of feelings; you feel it is irrational and don't like it so it must be false. We've been told by the media that all conspiracies are irrational and that we must ostracize or ridicule those who dare question the integrity of authority, while we're advised to simply move along and pretend there isn't anything. I've seen it plenty of times, no matter how much evidence you show they still evade it. If you're intellectually honest with yourself, do think about it and see what arguments you have for and against.

Anyway; here are a few more quotes. This time from James Warburg, from the Warburg banking family:

Quote
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.

Source: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/James_Warburg_before_the_Subcommittee_on_Revision_of_the_United_Nations_Charter
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 31, 2021, 01:07:26 PM
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.

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, 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.

See?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 31, 2021, 01:26:07 PM

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.

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.

Quote
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

If you do think there is a general, intentional trend towards world government... What do you disagree with me on, exactly?

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?

I don't see how they support your position because at this point I'm not even sure what it is. You also assume you know what "human behavior" is, and think your position is logical just because it makes sense to you. None of those are "isolated" statements; they were official statements from heads of states, the UN, the USA, and the EU, as well as NATO and the WEF. They were not isolated comments with no relation to each other as you seem to imply. I don't have to resort to feelings when I have their admission.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on August 31, 2021, 01:38:00 PM
Can we get a separate thread for the bigger socio-political agendas at play and keep talk about SarsCov-2 & Covid to this thread?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 31, 2021, 01:58:27 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 31, 2021, 02:00:18 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on August 31, 2021, 02:04:11 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 31, 2021, 02:10:15 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 31, 2021, 02:10:24 PM

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.
As I pointed out, that's exactly what you've been doing by saying I'm emotional and irrational.

Conversely, all I did at the beginning was call your post "conspiracy theory nonsense". It's quite a stretch to call that an ad hominem, because it's specifically talking about what you said, rather than attacking you as a person. It's the difference between saying "that's a stupid argument". and "you're stupid".

So you yourself are using a typical Woke stratagem: You're attacking me for using the tactics you're using, in the apparent hope that it'll give you cover when I inevitably point it out.

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.

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.
Quote
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

If you do think there is a general, intentional trend towards world government... What do you disagree with me on, exactly?
I don't believe there's a conspiracy.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 31, 2021, 02:29:34 PM
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. There was an acknowledgement of the power of governors and states in general, and thus a slight revival of federalism. Combined with the previous attempts like sanctuary cities, marijuana legalization, and gay marriage; there are now strong precedents in place for states to go their own on way on key issues. Even in the EU, national sovereignty took priority over the Schengen region, and probably lent a bit more oomph to any future Eurexits. In Canada, you couldn't drive from Nova Scotia to British Columbia.

So while the lockdowns have strongly favored totalitarian measures rather than freedom, and they've set a lot of precedents that grant more power to central authorities, they also may have revived the formerly moribund concept that all politics are local, and the idea that people should be able to decide what the rules are in their own backyards.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on August 31, 2021, 02:31:36 PM
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?

No such thing as a stupid question.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on August 31, 2021, 02:49:31 PM
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
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on August 31, 2021, 03:00:26 PM
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.

Yep, people also indulged into extremely high drug and alcohol abuse. If a virus can do that, imagine WWIII! We need more mental health specialists.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 31, 2021, 03:16:22 PM
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. 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 31, 2021, 03:19:14 PM

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 31, 2021, 05:01:10 PM

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?

  Asking for a friend, is Jewish a faith, or an ethnicity?   I noted in the rules around immigration for Israel, it seems it can be either or both.

  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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 31, 2021, 07:39:26 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on August 31, 2021, 07:47:43 PM
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.
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.

Though your answer to Mistwell's Jewish question wasn't bad.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: ThatChrisGuy on August 31, 2021, 07:49:31 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 31, 2021, 07:50:35 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SonTodoGato on August 31, 2021, 07:52:57 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 31, 2021, 08:17:28 PM
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.

When did I say or imply you cannot criticize a Jewish person? Odd that you'd jump to "pin me down as "anti-semitic", as if that meant my arguments are necessarily invalid because of that alone" which sounds like you've made that argument before elsewhere?

If antisemetism is part of your argument of course I'd think that's relevant. If for instance you're pulling from Protocols of The Elders of Zion I think that would be relevant. Are you?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on August 31, 2021, 09:16:33 PM
Greetings!

Who the fuck cares if there are Jews involved with Globalism? There are also Catholics, Atheists, Hindus, and what the fuck else, too. All are equally corrupt, equally disgusting, and equally depraved. They are all eagerly pushing for a one-world government that will crush freedom-loving people, cultures and different religions everywhere. TRADITIONAL RELIGION X--Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu--will all be caught in the crosshairs and put on the list for oppression and destruction.

Fucking Globalism needs to be opposed by *EVERYONE*

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 31, 2021, 09:36:08 PM
  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 guess he has to become a dentist then.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 31, 2021, 10:01:16 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 31, 2021, 10:22:47 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on August 31, 2021, 10:23:39 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on August 31, 2021, 11:00:34 PM
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.

   Do they sound anything like how whiteness is a disease and systemic racism is such a horror that we must remove white privilege from society? 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on August 31, 2021, 11:04:33 PM
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.

No thanks, I'm good.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on September 01, 2021, 10:05:18 AM

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 01, 2021, 10:28:46 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 01, 2021, 11:01:03 AM

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.
IIRC, the Protocols were a whole-cloth invention by the Tsarist Okhrana (the secret police of the old Russian Empire, pre-USSR).

But hey, to-may-to, to-mah-to, it's still a fraud and you're still right :)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on September 01, 2021, 11:22:50 AM
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.





Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 01, 2021, 11:29:39 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on September 01, 2021, 11:44:48 AM

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.
IIRC, the Protocols were a whole-cloth invention by the Tsarist Okhrana (the secret police of the old Russian Empire, pre-USSR).

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 01, 2021, 11:53:17 AM

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.
IIRC, the Protocols were a whole-cloth invention by the Tsarist Okhrana (the secret police of the old Russian Empire, pre-USSR).

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.
Interesting. So Taxil basically tried to make his bones on taking advantage of Catholicisim by using Masonry as a club. What an asshole.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on September 01, 2021, 01:13:06 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 01, 2021, 01:22:22 PM
that was before SonTodoGato was banned.

Good riddance.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 01, 2021, 01:23:05 PM
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.

Thank you for posting this. I knew I had heard this stuff before in some well known antiemetic circles and I knew there was some link to the Elders of Zion but I couldn't recall what that was. Which is why I asked him and he suddenly became very evasive.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on September 01, 2021, 07:33:44 PM
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?

Sure! Always an area of interest to me.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 02, 2021, 04:25:22 PM
Mu

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/01/who-says-it-is-monitoring-a-new-covid-variant-called-mu.html
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 02, 2021, 06:59:56 PM
 Joe Rogan.  Can not even properly get Covid for the powers that be. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 03, 2021, 12:56:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 03, 2021, 02:15:09 PM
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!?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 03, 2021, 03:51:53 PM
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!?
Darwin hates people who can not do math
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 03, 2021, 03:59:44 PM
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!?
Darwin hates people who can not do math

Imagine now that Math was replaced by CRT. These are scary times indeed.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 03, 2021, 04:10:31 PM
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!?
Darwin hates people who can not do math

Imagine now that Math was replaced by CRT. These are scary times indeed.


  I have a feeling anyone who drinks up CRT is not going any where near ivermectin, so may be an even break.   That said, given how people balance their budgets and decide upon entering debt, etc.... Math is probably already gone for most.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 03, 2021, 04:29:44 PM
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!?

They're really pushing the Horse Goo narrative. There's so much bad info in that article, it's hard to know where to begin...

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-YxwejUUAIDoct?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 03, 2021, 04:50:18 PM
Remember, half the media reported that Joe Rogan took horse paste.

Even though he didn't.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 03, 2021, 04:53:21 PM
Remember, half the media reported that Joe Rogan took horse paste.

Even though he didn't.

Half? I bet it is more like every media outlet to the left of Fox News.  ;D
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 03, 2021, 05:25:56 PM
Reminds me a bit of idiocracy, every time the main character asks for water to drink, or water plants, everyone looks disgusted and says "like out the toilet?" 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on September 03, 2021, 07:48:53 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 03, 2021, 08:11:49 PM
The good news is that when the world reopens, those pesky and defective MCDonald’s ice cream machines should be fully functional. Because ice cream, certainly is America’s first priority right now. Especially as fall is about to kick in. That was my first feed of the day, Mcdonalds…
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 03, 2021, 09:22:07 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 03, 2021, 09:52:44 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 03, 2021, 10:29:54 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on September 03, 2021, 11:12:07 PM
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.

Honestly this is a hopeful sign for the inevitable winter surge. Even though injections are pretty poor in comparison to natural immunity, a good coverage of protection from both prior infection and injection could help take the brunt of the serious cases off. I think it's 100% inevitable that we see a huge case spike over the coming months, but I'd much rather see a case spike and fewer hospitalizations & deaths.

I wish the issue weren't so heavily propagandized so we could actually get leadership in northern states getting serious about focused protection and early treatment.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 04, 2021, 05:16:12 AM
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.
Neither Tucker Carlson nor Ben Shapiro are reporters; they are entertainers/commentators. It's a huge difference.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 04, 2021, 06:55:23 AM
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.
Neither Tucker Carlson nor Ben Shapiro are reporters; they are entertainers/commentators. It's a huge difference.
Commentators, because there’s no such thing as a reporter on cable tv.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on September 04, 2021, 08:51:21 PM
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.

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.”
Source (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/sweetgreen-ceo-criticized-after-connecting-the-pandemic-to-unhealthy-eating-incredibly-fat-phobic/ar-AAO1p1S)

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 04, 2021, 09:15:43 PM
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.

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.”
Source (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/sweetgreen-ceo-criticized-after-connecting-the-pandemic-to-unhealthy-eating-incredibly-fat-phobic/ar-AAO1p1S)

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.

Time to drop that woka~cola

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on September 05, 2021, 04:52:35 AM
"Perfectly healthy 16 year old fighting Covid in both lungs in ICU. It could happen to any totally healthy kid at all"

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-d9tqQWUAYhGp8.jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 05, 2021, 07:56:41 AM
"Perfectly healthy 16 year old fighting Covid in both lungs in ICU. It could happen to any totally healthy kid at all"


Sad to see a kid that sick. Equally as sad that she fills out a bariatric chair like that at 16. Just goes to show that physical reality doesn't give a shit about "healthy at any size".

And as a for the propaganda itself, no surprise given the Joe Rogan "horse de-wormer" crap.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 05, 2021, 03:29:59 PM
Media is straight up lying about Oklahoma.

https://nhssequoyah.com/

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-icDjrVQAMEMiK?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 05, 2021, 03:34:00 PM
I guess the new threshold for American healthy is 250-400 pounds. Don’t you go getting obese now!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 06, 2021, 02:16:22 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 06, 2021, 02:20:30 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 06, 2021, 02:22:59 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 06, 2021, 02:42:59 PM
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.
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.

I can’t help but think I’ll eventually die from Covid. Last week I had to worst anxiety attack of my life while driving. Very difficult to breath, I thought I was a goner for sure. Turns out my caffeine intake was a bit too high.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 06, 2021, 03:13:13 PM
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 06, 2021, 03:32:00 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 06, 2021, 03:39:31 PM
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:
Who exactly is arguing that people without co-morbidities are completely immune to becoming seriously ill or dying from covid?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 06, 2021, 04:22:11 PM
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:
Who exactly is arguing that people without co-morbidities are completely immune to becoming seriously ill or dying from covid?

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 06, 2021, 04:30:01 PM
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:
Who exactly is arguing that people without co-morbidities are completely immune to becoming seriously ill or dying from covid?

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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 06, 2021, 04:35:38 PM
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:
Who exactly is arguing that people without co-morbidities are completely immune to becoming seriously ill or dying from covid?

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.

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?

Actually, panic is a understatement. Covid will trigger mass extinction if left unchecked. 10 million job openings, no workers. Don’t forget they’ll always know more than the general populace. All these variants will never end at this rate. Neither vaccine nor masks seem to be doing that great of a job. This labor day, cases are three times higher than last holiday. Something isn’t right!

Our newest variant, meet Mu.
https://www.foxnews.com/health/fauci-names-new-covid-19-variant-health-officials-are-keeping-an-eye-on
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 06, 2021, 05:55:07 PM
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.

Mass extinction is one way to solve the unemployment crisis I guess.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 06, 2021, 06:31:12 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 06, 2021, 08:12:21 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 06, 2021, 08:30:47 PM

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.

That's pretty much my position.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 06, 2021, 10:34:00 PM
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)

  You mistake my comments about Delahoya to have anything to do with covid.   I would also say, no one, including me says healthy people can not die from covid.  The odds are just EXTREMELY long as to it happening.   My comments are more around me smelling a whiff of bullshit around Oscar maybe deciding fighting a heavyweight in his late 40's is not a great idea.  As in maybe worse for his health than covid. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 06, 2021, 10:44:20 PM
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?

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 06, 2021, 11:07:24 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 06, 2021, 11:09:25 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 06, 2021, 11:21:13 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 07, 2021, 12:12:22 AM
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.
How would suggest doing that?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 07, 2021, 12:21:58 AM
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 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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 07, 2021, 12:23:34 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 07, 2021, 12:25:23 AM
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.
How would suggest doing that?

We would need some kind of ethical and honest reporting system.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 07, 2021, 01:51:30 AM
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!

I'll try to put in some personal insults next time. :)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on September 07, 2021, 06:51:53 AM
Of course a perfectly healthy person under 40 could die of complications from 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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 07, 2021, 07:51:07 AM
Of course a perfectly healthy person under 40 could die of complications from 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'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.

 I hope we can both agree that one person's view of what the "important thing" is can be dramatically different from another's.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on September 07, 2021, 10:15:05 AM
Of course a perfectly healthy person under 40 could die of complications from 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'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.

 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 07, 2021, 10:25:41 AM
Of course a perfectly healthy person under 40 could die of complications from 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'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.

 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on September 07, 2021, 03:07:21 PM
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.
No the chap was married.  That's a serious health condition for men.   ;-)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 07, 2021, 05:47:44 PM
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!?
Considering this turned out to be false, bullshit, fake news, etc, do you plan to retract it?

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 07, 2021, 09:31:20 PM
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!?
Considering this turned out to be false, bullshit, fake news, etc, do you plan to retract it?

1. I almost never agree with Ghostmaker;
2. I agree with Ghostmaker on this - this turned out to be fake news.

When Mistwell and Ghostmaker agree, you're probably terribly wrong :)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on September 07, 2021, 10:45:13 PM
Of course a perfectly healthy person under 40 could die of complications from 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'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.

 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.

Greetings!

Excellent, Pundit! I agree entirely. The whole joy for totalitarianism by elements of the government, business, academia, and other parts of society is disgusting.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 08, 2021, 07:52:23 AM
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.

EDIT: I want to add something here that has been pointed out elsewhere. Observant Jews have been singled out in particular, especially in NYC, where Bill deBolshevik seemed to take great glee in targeting them.

Ergo, the biggest proponents of isolation, lockdowns, etc, could also be easily viewed as anti-Semites.

Just a thought.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 08, 2021, 08:52:01 AM
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.

This is true but deceptive. It's the same technique NPR uses when they talk about anything negative, and then mention it disproportionately affects minorities, with the implication that it's another example of systemic racism. Except it isn't. It's a class thing. Poor people are disproportionately affected by almost everything, from climate change, to economic downturns, to lockdowns, and even things that are supposed to help them, like the rent moratorium. While you can make an argument that there is racial basis for wealth differences (it's another one of those complicated issues), the proximate cause is poverty not race, and it can only be fixed by addressing poverty not by blaming everything on racism.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 08, 2021, 10:02:43 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 08, 2021, 10:04:17 AM
Bernie Sanders agrees with you that class issues subsume racial and other minority and identity issues.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 08, 2021, 10:22:25 AM
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.
Maybe that's why he put "Oops" on the next line?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 08, 2021, 10:35:49 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 08, 2021, 10:36:54 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 08, 2021, 10:38:33 AM
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.
Keep doubling down on your mistake. Your failure amuses me little one.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 08, 2021, 10:39:01 AM
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.
Keep doubling down on your mistake. Your failure amuses me little one.
I defer to your greater experience with being a failure.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 08, 2021, 04:31:14 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 08, 2021, 04:40:02 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 08, 2021, 04:55:01 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 08, 2021, 05:43:29 PM
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.

4) I'd agree.

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 08, 2021, 05:47:01 PM
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.

People are back to wearing masks pretty good across the board in indoor settings here in LA. When I was in Hawaii recently I found they also were wearing the masks pretty good across the board in indoor settings. I think we notice the ones wearing them poorly because they're the exception to the rule and so stand out.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 08, 2021, 05:57:05 PM
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.

Quote
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.

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.

Quote
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.

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.
 
Quote
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.

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.

Quote
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.

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.

Quote
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.

Sounds right to me.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on September 08, 2021, 06:49:39 PM
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.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on September 08, 2021, 07:36:38 PM
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.

Greetings!

I agree with you, DocJones. 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.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 08, 2021, 07:52:16 PM
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.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 08, 2021, 08:32:48 PM
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.

Quote
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.

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.

Quote
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.

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.
 
Quote
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.

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.

Quote
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.

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.

Quote
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.

Sounds right to me.

Too lazy to put responses in the nested quotes...

I don't disagree that vaccines have value/"are working pretty well", but that is not a one-size-fits all proposition. The vax, in general, has more value for older and/or sicker than for younger and/or healthier. And there are unquantified knock-on effects for getting covid and the vaccine. I am guessing that we will have to agree to disagree on this.

I agree, if you are in tight confines, with poor ventilation, with many people who are chronically coughing/sneezing, then even a crap mask likely has some effectiveness. However, I would like to see the study showing the effectiveness of a non N-95 mask vs sneezing or coughing compared to using a tissue or your hand. It would also be interesting to see studies that estimate the minimum mask effectiveness (under the variety of applicable conditions) necessary to have a meaningful effect on covid transmission.

Moreover, as you increase compartment volume, ventilation, and social distancing the average viral concentration decreased, and decreasing the number of people and their source generation (i.e., they are not coughing, sneezing, or talking) reduces the viral source term and hence the average viral concentration (which together with exposure time, determines if you catch/don't catch covid).  In addition, the (relatively) large aerosols settle out (via gravitational settling) relatively quickly (~10 minutes is the value I remember seeing). On the other hand, the (relatively) small aerosols will remain suspended on the order of hours. It is this part of the viral source term that will drive the long-term steady-state viral concentration.

And I don't "know" that the primary purpose of a mask is to protect others from me, if I am unaware that I am contagious. I have heard that proffered, but see it as a technically flawed argument.

I would be in agreement with you if the restaurant guidance required you to wear a mask except when putting food or drink in your mouth. But the restaurant guidance only requires you to wear a mask when not sitting at the table. I put on my mask as I am about to enter and wear it for the 10' to 30' walk to my table. Once I am at my table, I do not have to wear my mask. I only have to wear it when I leave the table. Hence, I have on multiple occasions been sitting in a fully packed restaurant where everyone at a table is not wearing a mask. And hence the guidance is crap. And hence the people making the edicts are stupid and/or have unspoken/ulterior motives.

As for the Fauci gospel, again, I do not see a sound technical basis for non N-95 masks being effective. As for sneezing and coughing, if you are sick, go home, or cover your mouth & nose with your hand or a tissue.

Looking back at the back-and-forth, it also appears that we are going to have to agree to disagree on mask effectiveness.

Regards.




Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 08, 2021, 08:45:02 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 08, 2021, 09:02:58 PM
Stoked to hear a new 6 step plan to curb the spread is on the way. Anyone else super excited!? Sarcasm btw
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 08, 2021, 09:37:09 PM
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!?
Considering this turned out to be false, bullshit, fake news, etc, do you plan to retract it?

You know thats not how this works.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 08, 2021, 10:06:09 PM
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.

Oh look another internet badass.

ICUs being full is an issue for everyone. You too, internet badass, if you get in a car accident or fall off a ladder.

Until we can get a lot more people vaccinated, including some people under the age of 12, we need to keep those ICU counts down for everyone's benefit. So if you want to be an actual badass, persuade people to get vaccinated.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 08, 2021, 10:10:18 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 08, 2021, 10:11:58 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on September 08, 2021, 10:54:02 PM
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.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
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.

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.

Greetings!

Yep, that's right, Pat. I agree. This whole thing is such bullshit. People that are old, fat, and ill, should wear a mask, isolate themselves, do whatever makes them feel safer, as *their choice* There shouldn't be fucking mandates for a fucking thing--not masks, and sure as fuck not untested goddamned vaccines. ARRRGGGHHHH!!! All the power-mad Grima Wormtongues in our society!

People have gotten fucking vaccinated--and many do wear the goddamned mask--and new fucking cases still mushroom everywhere in a mass, hysterical frenzy according to the state media. "Well, SHARK! It's the DELTA VARIANT you fucking Tyrannoaurus Rex!"--Yeah, and three months from now, there will be a fucking Chloe Variant. And after that, six weeks, twelve weeks, some other variant. Always more variants, always more dangers and "What about Grandma?" and on and fucking on. It will be endless, with the government, and the media, and the cock-sucking teacher's unions always demanding more power, more mandatory lockdowns, more vaccinations.

Enough is fucking enough!

Our people everywhere need to wake the fuck up and stop being a society of hysterical pussies. Our land used to have hard-core diseases and dangers, from plagues, to constant natural disasters, famines, floods, bone-chilling winters, mass starvation, bandits, savage Indian tribes. Against all that--we had hard-core people. They resigned themselves to fighting through it all and surviving--or if they died, they died with solemn dignity. That was that.

Our people now are nothing like out ancestors, and it is so sad and pathetic.

I am sick to death of the fucking tyranny, the moral condescension, and the fucking uber-nannies. Geesus!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on September 08, 2021, 11:27:52 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 08, 2021, 11:28:30 PM
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?
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Chris24601 on September 09, 2021, 01:23:47 AM
Quote from: Mistwell link=topic=42126.msg1187162#msg1187162
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.

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 09, 2021, 09:05:56 AM
Quote from: Mistwell link=topic=42126.msg1187162#msg1187162
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 09, 2021, 09:42:58 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 09, 2021, 10:28:51 AM
 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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 09, 2021, 10:30:44 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 09, 2021, 10:44:22 AM
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.
Deliberately exposed to Covid? Where do you get these nonsensical conspiracy theories?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 09, 2021, 10:52:32 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 09, 2021, 12:13:40 PM
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.
Deliberately exposed to Covid? Where do you get these nonsensical conspiracy theories?
It must be nice to have celery in your head instead of braincells. Do the math:

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 09, 2021, 12:32:47 PM
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.
Deliberately exposed to Covid? Where do you get these nonsensical conspiracy theories?
It must be nice to have celery in your head instead of braincells. Do the math:

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.
Never attribute to a conspiracy what can be attributed to incompetence, laziness and CYA.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 09, 2021, 01:19:50 PM
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.
Deliberately exposed to Covid? Where do you get these nonsensical conspiracy theories?
It must be nice to have celery in your head instead of braincells. Do the math:

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.
Never attribute to a conspiracy what can be attributed to incompetence, laziness and CYA.

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.
*shrug*

Whether it's malice or incompetence is irrelevant.

The damage is still being done.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 09, 2021, 01:32:07 PM
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.

I mean, they do. They can purchase a bubble and live in it. I don't see any reason that couldn't be done.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 09, 2021, 01:33:58 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 09, 2021, 01:34:54 PM
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?
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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 09, 2021, 01:44:45 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 09, 2021, 01:48:04 PM
Quote from: Mistwell link=topic=42126.msg1187162#msg1187162
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.

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. 

Quote
According to the numbers from the undertakers, the number of deaths was actually LOWER in 2020 than it was in 2019.

That's not how we count deaths. For fucks sake man, you know this. Deaths in the U.S. (total - from all causes) increased by 18% in 2020 (https://www.advisory.com/en/daily-briefing/2021/04/01/coronavirus).

Quote
Meanwhile in Israel where 90+% are double vaxxed

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.

Quote
a large percentage has had the booster and some even a fourth booster, the majority hospitalized and dying with Covid are vaxxed

"half of Israel's seriously ill patients who are currently hospitalized were fully vaccinated at least five months ago. Most of them are over 60 years old and have comorbidities. The seriously ill patients who are unvaccinated are mostly young, healthy people whose condition deteriorated quickly." "for Israelis above age 60, a Pfizer booster shot reduced the chances of infection by 86% and reduced the chances of severe infection by 92%."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 09, 2021, 01:52:47 PM
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?

Yes, but they want people to get vaccinated. But yes. I think the rapid test is starting to ramp up in production and I suspect we're going to get one of those "test right there at the airport in line" things in coming months. I know when I got to Staples Center to see an NBA game a lot of people do the rapid testing right there.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Squidi on September 09, 2021, 02:09:51 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 09, 2021, 05:19:56 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 09, 2021, 05:45:55 PM
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.
Deliberately exposed to Covid? Where do you get these nonsensical conspiracy theories?
It must be nice to have celery in your head instead of braincells. Do the math:

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.
Never attribute to a conspiracy what can be attributed to incompetence, laziness and CYA.

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.
*shrug*

Whether it's malice or incompetence is irrelevant.

The damage is still being done.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Squidi on September 09, 2021, 06:15:18 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 09, 2021, 06:27:44 PM
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.
Deliberately exposed to Covid? Where do you get these nonsensical conspiracy theories?
It must be nice to have celery in your head instead of braincells. Do the math:

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.
Never attribute to a conspiracy what can be attributed to incompetence, laziness and CYA.

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.
*shrug*

Whether it's malice or incompetence is irrelevant.

The damage is still being done.
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.
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, 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 dirty wreckers kulaks unvaccinated, right?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 09, 2021, 06:39:47 PM
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 dirty wreckers kulaks unvaccinated, right?

A fine time to remind everyone that OSHA disourages reporting of vaccine side effects.

Quote
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 09, 2021, 06:49:10 PM
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.

And yet, here we are. You wanted this.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Squidi on September 09, 2021, 06:50:41 PM
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 dirty wreckers kulaks unvaccinated, right?
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...

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".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 09, 2021, 08:28:50 PM
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.

I think that you are forgetting that Hospitals are not allowed to adjust to situations by increasing their capacities when they have the more sensible option of just refusing to treat patients and letting people die in the parking lots.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on September 09, 2021, 09:04:41 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 09, 2021, 09:18:28 PM
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.

Here's what NPR/Goats & Soda say:
https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2021/08/20/1029628471/highly-vaccinated-israel-is-seeing-a-dramatic-surge-in-new-covid-cases-heres-why

"The country jumped out ahead of all other countries on vaccines, and 78% of eligible Israelis over 12 years old are vaccinated. But Israel has a young population, with many under the eligible age for vaccination, and about 1.1 million eligible Israelis, largely between the ages of 12 and 20, have declined to take even one dose of the vaccine. That means only 58% of Israel's total citizenry is fully vaccinated. Experts say that's not nearly high enough."

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 09, 2021, 09:39:21 PM
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.
Deliberately exposed to Covid? Where do you get these nonsensical conspiracy theories?
It must be nice to have celery in your head instead of braincells. Do the math:

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.
Never attribute to a conspiracy what can be attributed to incompetence, laziness and CYA.

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.
*shrug*

Whether it's malice or incompetence is irrelevant.

The damage is still being done.
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.
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, 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 dirty wreckers kulaks unvaccinated, right?
You're not going to get your wish.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on September 09, 2021, 10:32:45 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 09, 2021, 10:46:34 PM
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?
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.

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?
I don't think masks work.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 09, 2021, 10:56:52 PM
Quote from: Mistwell link=topic=42126.msg1187162#msg1187162
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.

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. 
[citation needed]

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 09, 2021, 11:01:05 PM
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.

And yet, here we are. You wanted this.
To be fair, literally everyone knew they were lying.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 09, 2021, 11:36:29 PM
Quote from: Mistwell link=topic=42126.msg1187162#msg1187162
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.

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. 
[citation needed]

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.
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on September 09, 2021, 11:47:57 PM
Move from the Biden administration is definitely a sign of their own (well-founded IMO) lack-of-confidence in the injections.

Timing of announcing this now, as southern states are beyond the crest of their seasonal peak, is to try and frame the seasonal winter surge that we'll see in the north, etc. Smart politically to get ahead of the game. Also the timing of the mandate taking effect in mid-late November is smart as well. Likely to be the time of steep inclination of case numbers, when we can guess the media hysteria will be at its peak and they'll have the most Us vs. Them mentality when they try to blame the seasonal virus spread on unvaccinated people.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 09, 2021, 11:51:20 PM
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. 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 10, 2021, 12:21:12 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 10, 2021, 12:32:34 AM
Wearing a mask certainly has perks.
It makes it harder for the police to identify you when you start throwing Molotov's!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Squidi on September 10, 2021, 02:00:10 AM
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?

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.
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:

"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".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 10, 2021, 08:05:23 AM
A blatant, unconstitutional, undemocratic power grab, by a senile old hair sniffer.

But no more mean tweets, right?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 10, 2021, 08:20:14 AM
  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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 10, 2021, 10:02:46 AM
Which president is the fascist again?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DM_Curt on September 10, 2021, 10:40:51 AM
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."
Employee #102 of 102 on the seniority list: *starts sweating*
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 10, 2021, 10:48:39 AM
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."
Employee #102 of 102 on the seniority list: *starts sweating*
Sweating is OK...just don't cough.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on September 10, 2021, 11:31:57 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/Lj8SBQo.png)

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Squidi on September 10, 2021, 11:41:49 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/Lj8SBQo.png)

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?
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 10, 2021, 11:55:07 AM
More specifically, the argument needs to rely on Buck v. Bell, not Jacobson.

Assuming, of course, these two faced dog fuckers are willing to talk about 'my body, my choice' out of one side of their mouth, and 'take the jab, deplorable!' out of the other.

Jesus. I'm vaccinated, but this shit should make any sane person's skin crawl. Because if they can force this, what else can they force?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 10, 2021, 02:01:46 PM
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/

Quote
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.
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:

"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".

So when everyone wore a mask around you, even you wore a mask. So the peer pressure works.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 10, 2021, 02:05:33 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 10, 2021, 02:08:30 PM
  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.
Bolded part by me. You do realize that means it's not a vaccine, right? Vaccines do not just make it 'less likely'.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 10, 2021, 02:10:11 PM
  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.
Bolded part by me. You do realize that means it's not a vaccine, right? Vaccines do not just make it 'less likely'.
As usual, you are mistaken.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 10, 2021, 02:18:23 PM
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/
Over and over again, you've claimed that masks work.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 10, 2021, 02:19:29 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 10, 2021, 02:22:19 PM
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'.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 10, 2021, 02:25:19 PM
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'.
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.
Ah, that would be why the CDC stealth-edited the definition of 'vaccine'?

Just because they call it something doesn't necessarily make it so.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 10, 2021, 02:31:53 PM
  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.
Bolded part by me. You do realize that means it's not a vaccine, right? Vaccines do not just make it 'less likely'.

Yes, they do. We've been over this. You THINK the vaccines you've taken in life had 100% stoppage of the virus they were intended for. NONE of them were 100%. You just thought they were and never bothered to look them up. Literally zero vaccines had 100% efficacy. So stop the nonsense. You know better by now. Stop intentionally lying to people about how vaccines work.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Gamecock City Gamer on September 10, 2021, 02:40:41 PM
I am not an anti-vaxxer, but I am against the COVID-19 vaccination. The main reason is the time frame it took to develop it. I just don't believe that they were able to come up with a coronavirus vaccination that quickly, especially when we were still learning how to correctly identify it. And now, when did they have time to produce a vaccine for the Delta variant when the original vaccine had not been fully received yet?

Next, healthy people without medical/health issues had a 99.997% recovery rate with most only showing symptoms for 1-3 days (IIRC), so I'm not totally sure how it was determined that people's natural immunity didn't get them over the virus or the vaccine helped.

If you are one with other health issues, especially if you have something that has weakened your immune system, by all means, get the vaccine. If you don't have any health issues, then perhaps it is okay for you to skip this one.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 10, 2021, 02:41:06 PM
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'.
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.
Ah, that would be why the CDC stealth-edited the definition of 'vaccine'?

Just because they call it something doesn't necessarily make it so.

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/mmr/public/index.html
Quote
One dose of MMR vaccine is 93% effective against measles, 78% effective against mumps, and 97% effective against rubella.

Two doses of MMR vaccine are 97% effective against measles and 88% effective against mumps.
That's not 100%. Are you arguing that the MMR shot everyone had as a kid isn't a vaccine?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 10, 2021, 02:41:13 PM
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/
Over and over again, you've claimed that masks work.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 10, 2021, 02:44:38 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 10, 2021, 02:46:40 PM
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'.
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.
Ah, that would be why the CDC stealth-edited the definition of 'vaccine'?

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".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 10, 2021, 03:01:15 PM
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/
Over and over again, you've claimed that masks work.

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.
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.

Not to mention, your claims about what I've said aren't accurate. I've repeatedly talked about the importance of viral loads. I've talked about how masks block large droplets, but that large droplets don't seem to be a major vector of transmission.  And these aren't imperfect studies, they're either measuring something else (like all the studies prior to the pandemic, which either looked at clinical environments or were focused on non-respiratory diseases), or absolute crap. That was one of the biggest problems at the start of the pandemic. They were literally publishing studies based on 17 patients of one doctor. With an n size that low, you can't draw any conclusions, and that's without accounting for the massive selection bias. These studies were at the very bottom of the ladder of evidence based medicine.

That's why the Danmask study was important, because it's a solid study. And that's why the Bangladesh study is so disappointing, because it's even larger than the Danmask study, randomized, and based on superficial criteria it appears to be a high quality study. But it has a number of critical methodological problems that make it hard to give the study any credence.

It's not "spin" to assess the strength of the evidence. It's essential that we do that. It's how science works. It's the same standard we need to apply to all scientific studies.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 10, 2021, 03:08:03 PM
MIS-C is a thing too.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 10, 2021, 03:16:40 PM
  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.

    No one said it is  the only risk, they ARE BY FAR THE BIGGEST risks.   EXTREMELY rare cases of healthy young people do end up in the hospital.   Respirator or gas mask if you are worried.  The vaccines are MUCH less effective at preventing spread than the "childhood" vaccines because vaccinating for covid is harder than the flu and comparable to the difficulty of attempting to vaccinate for the cold due to rapidity of mutation (which of course Fraudchi said it did not mutate fast).     So sure it is a vaccine, just a very low quality one with regard to shutting down infection. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 10, 2021, 03:36:27 PM
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'.
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.
Ah, that would be why the CDC stealth-edited the definition of 'vaccine'?

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".
Nobody cares what bootlicking fascists like you think.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on September 10, 2021, 04:03:24 PM
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'.
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.
Ah, that would be why the CDC stealth-edited the definition of 'vaccine'?

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Squidi on September 10, 2021, 04:47:17 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 10, 2021, 05:13:30 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on September 10, 2021, 05:28:16 PM
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.

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.

The problem here comes in with the neurotic and insane belief that you can prevent people from all harm from sickness and death. This is not possible. The totalitarian's "If it saves even one life..." rhetoric gives them unlimited authority to do whatever they want, whenever they want. Too many smart people are getting played by basic emotional manipulation.

This is why I think it's important to specifically point towards natural immunity, and why it's so mind-boggling that natural immunity continues to be ignored. The injections people are taking have no mechanism to protect people, at all, without the human immune system response. They are literally synthesizing a harmful pathogen in your body, and hoping that your immune system figures it out quickly enough to negate the harm. Anyone who denies natural immunity is basically like a 40k Ork Boy who thinks a red box with wheels goes fast, even lacking the engine.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Squidi on September 10, 2021, 05:36:11 PM
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.

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Squidi on September 10, 2021, 05:55:37 PM
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.

Quote
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.

Most of the serious diseases were dying off long before vaccinations were introduced, and there's several diseases like scarlet fever and (I think) cholera had all but disappeared without a vaccine at all due to clean water and better diets... and indoor plumbing.

Quote
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!

So, they've been lying about vaccine effectiveness for as long as vaccines have been around. The only difference is that this time, you have an internet which exposes these practices in real time. Imagine if you only had CNN/CDC to get your news from. Imagine how misinformed you'd be on everything COVID.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 10, 2021, 06:39:49 PM
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.

The human immune system is pretty much 100% effective because it is an overlapping system of defenses protecting the 10% of your human cells from the 90% of your bacterial cells.

And even when you do get "sick" that is just the side effects of your immune system continuing to protect you from infection.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 10, 2021, 08:43:23 PM
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'.
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.
Ah, that would be why the CDC stealth-edited the definition of 'vaccine'?

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?

It's more effective than some vaccines and less effective than others. It's pretty good at reducing your risk of hospitalization and death, but it fades quicker than a polio vaccine for example. It does seem more effective than a flu vaccine though. So it's "pretty good" but not "awesome" in terms of vaccines I'd say.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on September 10, 2021, 09:26:14 PM
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.

All of this is a part of my hesitancy and why I'm waiting on Novavax.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Squidi on September 10, 2021, 09:39:21 PM
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.

So, for example 100 people in control group get the disease, 50 in the vaccinated group. (100-50)/100 = 50% effectiveness. But that's the relative effectiveness. What they don't tell you is that 100 people in the control group which was 12,000 people (or 100/12000 = 0.8%) and 50 in the vaccinated group of equal size (50/12000 = 0.4%). This means the absolute effectiveness of the vaccine is actually only 0.8% - 0.4%, or 0.4%. See? Magic. 0.4% turns into 50%. Basically, 1 out of every 240 people who would've got the flu otherwise, is suggested to not get the flu due to the that flu shot.

And that's kind of an extreme example, because most diseases don't tend to have that high a prevalence rate. With the flu (and with COVID), you are more likely looking at numbers in the tens, not hundreds. The reason you can see something like 75% relative effectiveness isn't because the vaccine is stopping tons and tons of illnesses, but because the control group had 4 illnesses and the vaccinated group had 1.

Generally speaking, most flu vaccines have an absolute effectiveness of about 1% to 2% - and that's with fudging some numbers (they don't count people who get the flu within the first few days of getting the flu shot - sound familiar?). Most of the time, flu vaccines aren't even built for the dominant strain of the flu going around, so the actual real world effectiveness approaches 0%. You are more likely to get the flu from your flu shot than prevent it. 'Struth.

And when they tell you stuff like "it doesn't stop the flu, but it makes the symptoms better", they are talking out their ass. You can't actually measure something like that. They can measure hospitalizations and the like, but that's included in the effectiveness number. They aren't sending out questionnaires asking what their symptoms feel like on a scale of 1 to 10. That's basically made up, intended to cover their ass for when people get the flu shot and still get the flu. "Well, at least I had the flu shot to soften the symptoms" - it's all bull. If you watch carefully, you can watch this happen in real time every flu season.

What I've said in the past year is that we have a data problem in this country. Math is presented without context, if they bother presenting it at all. Often, you need to go find the studies themselves and find the data in the chart on page 17, behind the sign saying "Beward of the leopard".

Anyway, the number one thing to watch out for is percentages. They are the biggest way Big Pharma lies, and a large part of why we ultimately ended up locking down. And when they say something like 75% of adults are vaccinated - that's a lie too. Just read an article that said that they believe over a million people have gotten a third shot, meaning that's a million fewer shots that went into an unvaccinated person.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 11, 2021, 06:11:14 AM
  Since people with the vax can get covid...wouldnt it make more sense to test everyone?

Why does it make sense to test anyone at all? The entire premise is nonsense, even before you start to get into how useless the tests are.

My mind boggles how easily people have accepted that the world somehow changed in 2020 and the way we lived before then is now gone.

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.

They had to be "politicised" because wearing a piece of fabric in front of your face does fuck all. It's the only way to get morons who are susceptible to coercion to do as they're told.

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.

Precisely why they're not coming anywhere near my children with this jab. Even aside from the fact that they don't need it.

I'm so glad my children are old enough to have had all their childhood vaccinations, and no one is going to be able to try to sneak a covid jab on them when they're having a genuine immunisation.

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.

Nope, don't own a mask, have never worn one, will never wear one. Not everyone is a spineless coward who does what they're told just because everyone else is doing it. Nor did I "stay at home" because we were told to.

All of this is a part of my hesitancy and why I'm waiting on Novavax.

Why are you "waiting on" any jab at all? Are you over 65 and obese?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 12, 2021, 03:10:24 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Squidi on September 12, 2021, 08:29:50 PM
Went to dinner last night.
How many grandmas did you kill?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on September 12, 2021, 08:41:15 PM
Fucking clown shoes.

Similar deal with airplanes. Everbody wears a mask at all times, except mealtimes - when they all come off at once.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DM_Curt on September 13, 2021, 01:24:26 PM
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.

Hence the meme. "Why don't we replace the school desks with restaurant tables? That way, the kids can take off their masks once they sit down."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 13, 2021, 01:36:02 PM
Alternately, just start each class with a short prayer to St. Floyd. Last year, the medical establishment reassured us that covid is repelled by social justice.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 13, 2021, 03:02:20 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 13, 2021, 04:07:32 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Squidi on September 13, 2021, 04:23:30 PM
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 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.

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. More than the number of actual ICU beds, hospital capacity is defined by the number of nurses. In Houston recently, they fired 150 nurses for not getting vaccinated. Since it's typically one nurse per four to seven patients, that means they lost upwards of 1000 patients capacity. Naturally, a few days later, reports were coming out that Houston hospitals were over capacity. A lack of nurses would absolutely affect emergency room response times - but it doesn't explain the cemeteries (which I'll get to in a second).

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:

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 13, 2021, 04:36:52 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 13, 2021, 05:27:50 PM
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.
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.

I never said "obey the mandate." But hey, you lying about things I say is standard operating procedure for you. You have no response to the things I do say, so you lie and hope nobody calls you on it.

Go ahead, prove me wrong. Where have I said obey the mandate? I've repeatedly said I wish people would get vaccinated, but I'd love for you to show me where I said obey the mandate.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 13, 2021, 05:36:21 PM
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 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.

But it seems to me, the hospital was more likely to be understaffed than overbooked.

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.

Quote
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.

It's bed space. You need a room and a bed and the nurses and doctors assigned to that bed to take an additional patient. They didn't have it, because too many beds are full of existing covid patients.

Quote
There's two potential explanations that I can think of. The first is that, yeah, they are losing nurses due to vaccine mandates.

There was no vaccine mandate at the time.

Quote
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.

Yes I do suspect they've been converting beds to ICU beds. 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.

Quote
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.

I've mentioned before this has been a cascade effect here, repeatedly. They do re-route which then fills other nearby hospitals which rapidly results in essentially a "stay in place."

Quote
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:

Quote
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.

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.

She didn't die of Covid dude.  There is no covid protocol for her burial, it's just a backlog of bodies.

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 13, 2021, 05:39:46 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 13, 2021, 05:54:26 PM
double
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on September 13, 2021, 05:58:48 PM
New Atlantic article points out what I called out weeks ago: More than 50% of hospitalizations are with SarsCov-2, not for SarsCov-2 (https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2021/09/covid-hospitalization-numbers-can-be-misleading/620062/)

Note this also corresponds with UK health data I've seen (sadly don't have the link on hand) demonstrating more than 60% of UK SarsCov-2 positive hospitalizations were non-serious or incidental cases presenting for reasons other than Covid.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 13, 2021, 06:10:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 13, 2021, 06:15:41 PM
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/
Over and over again, you've claimed that masks work.

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 am skeptical of any statistical population level studies, as it is very difficult to properly account for all of the confounding effects in your statistical model(s).

As for the Bangladesh study, along with previously-raised issues, I was surprised that there was no mention of how much of the overall variance was explained by the correlation(s) they found. It could be that while they found a correlation, that correlation may only explain a small amount of the overall variance.

My druthers would be to do a controlled trial with two identical (as possible) groups. Each group is sequestered in identical conditions. Each group wears masks. One group is exposed to the covid virus under various conditions. The other groups goes through the same conditions but w/o the virus. I know that there are human experimentation issues that would have to be resolved. I would imagine that you would look for healthy young adult participants. And you would want the protocols and design-of-experiment process transparently vetted.

Certainly not a trivial task, but if you could get buy-in from both the "masks work" and the "masks don't work" sides, then the results would settle things.

Regards.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 13, 2021, 06:25:32 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 13, 2021, 06:40:30 PM
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."

I'll put it in black and white again, so you can understand.

I don't know if you're lying or not.

Quote
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?

Wrong. Now you're just making shit up.

Quote
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.

I never said you claimed that she died of Covid.

Quote
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.

What the fuck are you talking about?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on September 13, 2021, 07:24:03 PM
Im not gonna play the doubt game, but personal cases make for TERRIBLE policy.


Personal emotional appeals when it comes to large scale policy is a really, REALLY shitty thing to do.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 13, 2021, 07:35:35 PM
Im not gonna play the doubt game, but personal cases make for TERRIBLE policy.
...
Personal emotional appeals when it comes to large scale policy is a really, REALLY shitty thing to do.
Yep.

They also derail conversations. Which I'm sure is a complete shock to anyone reading the last few posts.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 13, 2021, 08:11:53 PM
https://twitter.com/DailyCaller/status/1436411836430262273

Shut the fuck up about vaccines and masking. No, I'm serious. Shut. The fuck. Up.

Raggedy Ann is up there at the podium, gets asked straight up why vaccines are required for citizens but not for illegal aliens and just walks past the question.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 13, 2021, 09:05:20 PM
Hospitals expand their ICUs by conversion of lower acuity inpatient beds, not by conversion of ED beds (which can already support ICU-level care, at least for short periods while awaiting inpatient beds).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Squidi on September 13, 2021, 09:35:16 PM
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.

Quote
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.

Quote
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).

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.

Quote
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.

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 13, 2021, 10:11:04 PM
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.

Quote
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.

Quote
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).

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.

Quote
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.

Quote
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.

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.
There is so much misinformed bullshit in this post that it almost surprised me...but this is theRPGsite.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 13, 2021, 10:26:50 PM
So much misinformation that I am not going to even say which information is wrong.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 13, 2021, 10:50:10 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 14, 2021, 12:08:48 AM
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.

Also, it can be about more than oxygen levels. The CO2 levels are important as well, and rising levels of CO2 can creep up in Covid patients even when O2 sats look good. This can contribute to confusion and "screaming patients that can't breath."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 14, 2021, 12:24:45 AM
Did the Nurses try taking their knees off the screaming patients necks?


Too soon?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Squidi on September 14, 2021, 01:01:29 AM
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.

Quote
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).

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 14, 2021, 09:24:05 AM
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.

Quote
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).

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Squidi on September 14, 2021, 10:59:05 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 14, 2021, 11:15:48 AM
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?
When you stop with spewing dumbass misinformation, I'll stop calling you a dumbass.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 14, 2021, 11:36:54 AM
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?
When you stop with spewing dumbass misinformation, I'll stop calling you a dumbass.

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.
'It's not my job to educate you!' yells the SJW as he demands you 'listen and believe'.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 14, 2021, 12:37:56 PM
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?
When you stop with spewing dumbass misinformation, I'll stop calling you a dumbass.

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.
'It's not my job to educate you!' yells the SJW as he demands you 'listen and believe'.
I have to hope that when they upgrade this level, this particular NPC gets some better dialogue options.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 14, 2021, 01:27:01 PM
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.

This is just too idiotic a take for me to take you seriously on this topic anymore. You're putting your non-medical guesstimate above all known medical practices and just assuming you know better. Your position isn't even well supported among the nutcase conspiracy theorists out there. There isn't a single one-off wacky doctor even who agrees with your view. You've literally just pulled a rando view out of your ass based on nothing meaningful because I guess it's the only thing you can think of which would match your worldview that covid doesn't kill people? But it's so fucking absurd if I didn't see your other posts I'd assume you were trying to be a parody of a nutcase conspiracy theorist.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 14, 2021, 02:02:41 PM
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?
When you stop with spewing dumbass misinformation, I'll stop calling you a dumbass.

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.
'It's not my job to educate you!' yells the SJW as he demands you 'listen and believe'.
I have to hope that when they upgrade this level, this particular NPC gets some better dialogue options.
Fascist patient killer says what?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 14, 2021, 03:35:18 PM
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?
When you stop with spewing dumbass misinformation, I'll stop calling you a dumbass.

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.
'It's not my job to educate you!' yells the SJW as he demands you 'listen and believe'.
I have to hope that when they upgrade this level, this particular NPC gets some better dialogue options.
Fascist patient killer says what?
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 14, 2021, 04:16:59 PM
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?
When you stop with spewing dumbass misinformation, I'll stop calling you a dumbass.

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.
'It's not my job to educate you!' yells the SJW as he demands you 'listen and believe'.
I have to hope that when they upgrade this level, this particular NPC gets some better dialogue options.
Fascist patient killer says what?
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.
Behold, a miracle of modern medicine: a human with neither a brain nor a spine. Are we not awestruck?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 14, 2021, 04:20:21 PM
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?
When you stop with spewing dumbass misinformation, I'll stop calling you a dumbass.

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.
'It's not my job to educate you!' yells the SJW as he demands you 'listen and believe'.
I have to hope that when they upgrade this level, this particular NPC gets some better dialogue options.
Fascist patient killer says what?
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.
Behold, a miracle of modern medicine: a human with neither a brain nor a spine. Are we not awestruck?
Shoddy programming with this one. Likely scrap code that fell out of CP2077.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on September 14, 2021, 04:36:27 PM
I'm not a medical doctor, and I have no opinion per se on how effective or dangerous intubation is. However, I would comment on the argument made against it:

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.

This argument about where people die is completely backwards. Long before covid, people who are gravely ill or injured are taken to hospitals. They don't stay at home when they are dying. That inherently means there are a lot of deaths at hospitals from a wide variety of causes.

For example, my aunt just died last week after being put on a ventilator at a hospital. She was taken to the hospital because she had collapsed on the floor and had trouble breathing. She was 77 and had a neurodegenerative disease to the point that she couldn't walk, speak, or use her right hand. That's not a death caused by the hospital. It's a death caused by her health issues, and the hospital did the best they could to save her.

By this logic, hospitals cause cancer, and gunshots, and heart attacks - because you're far more likely to find people with those problems in the hospital than in the general population. But that's obviously because people who get gunshots are overwhelmingly taken to a hospital. They don't go to the local doctor's office or stay at home.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 14, 2021, 05:07:49 PM
One thing that we can say for sure, Hospitals cause Tiktoks
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 14, 2021, 06:25:44 PM
One thing that we can say for sure, Hospitals cause Tiktoks
The CDC should declare it a public health emergency.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 14, 2021, 06:28:17 PM
One thing that we can say for sure, Hospitals cause Tiktoks
The 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 14, 2021, 07:12:06 PM
The irony of the Chinese-owned TikToks being an epidemic is not lost on me :D
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 15, 2021, 09:47:01 PM
(https://i.ibb.co/gZYztnw/vax.jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 15, 2021, 10:10:52 PM
Patronizing, relies on emotional anecdotes instead of data, draws false analogies, provides no sources, and uses misleading, unsupported, and outright false information.

Yay.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 15, 2021, 10:19:56 PM
Remember when people injected themselves with animal viruses in order to vaccinate themselves? Good times.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 15, 2021, 11:14:51 PM
  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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 16, 2021, 08:04:35 AM
Just a little more propaganda grist for the mill:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/misinformation-killed-her-bride-be-who-hesitated-get-vaccinated-dies-n1279263

Let's start with the falsehood that her getting vaccinated would have stopped her from dying. While it could have reduced the probability of her contracting covid, being hospialized, or dying (depending on the vax she took, when she took it, and what variants she was exposed to), it would not have reduced those probabilities to 0. Begs the question of would they have run the article (Bride-to-be who got vaccinated dies of covid) if she had gotten vaccinated and still died, or if she had not died (Bride-to-be who hesitated to get vaccinated gets covid and survives).

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. 

And what would a piece like this be without:
"Before she was put on the ventilator, Wendell asked doctors in the hospital if she could receive a Covid vaccination, her mother said. “It wasn’t going to do any good at that point, obviously,” Jeaneen Wendell said. “It just weighs heavy on my heart that this could have easily been avoided.”

It makes me wonder if they have a script to follow, or if these articles are written by an AI.

That said, I do believe that due to her comorbidity (obesity) she should have gotten vaccinated so as to have improved her odds.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 16, 2021, 08:09:02 AM
  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.

This was exactly why the CDC guidance pre-covid was for health-care workers to wear masks and for the general public to not wear masks to protect against the flu. And it was exactly the rational that St. Fauci gave in correspondence and in his 60 Minutes interview for the general public to not wear masks.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on September 16, 2021, 05:14:26 PM
smallpox picture
Another lesson to learn from that is just like small pox, those vaccinated for the Wuhan flu can also spread the Wuhan flu.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 16, 2021, 05:19:19 PM
smallpox picture
Another lesson to learn from that is just like small pox, those vaccinated for the Wuhan flu can also spread the Wuhan flu.

  Which is why you vaccinate to save you, and then wear a bit of porous cloth on your face to save others.  Then you are a truly good and wonderful person who saves other people every single day.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on September 16, 2021, 05:19:32 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 16, 2021, 06:09:55 PM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on September 16, 2021, 09:26:41 PM
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!

Oooh.  That was a good one!  :)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 17, 2021, 04:11:39 AM
(https://i.ibb.co/gZYztnw/vax.jpg)

The smallpox vaccination actually works.

Meanwhile, in the real world:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E_Vv6YpWYAQFpSA?format=jpg&name=900x900)

Almost as though the jabs do fuck all...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 17, 2021, 07:28:21 AM
The solution: More freebies, less mandates.
What’s paying $10 on a cup of coffee gonna do? We can always move to America… oh wait…

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 17, 2021, 08:03:50 AM
Meanwhile, the fed suddenly decides to cut back on shipments of monoclonal antibody treatments to states that don't toe the line.

https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2021/09/14/biden-covid-antibody-treatments-511825

"So you say you want a revolution..."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 17, 2021, 09:18:03 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 17, 2021, 09:52:51 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on September 17, 2021, 10:07:20 AM
(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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 17, 2021, 10:28:43 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 17, 2021, 10:42:15 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 17, 2021, 11:40:57 AM
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.

  Dunno if anyone is scared of it.  I do know I got all the shots I wanted in the military.   I never get the flu vaccine, I see no reason to get this vaccine.  Especially for what appears to be a very fast mutating virus.  One thing I feel gets left out when they talk about how people with more serious cases in the hospital are unvaccinated, it seems the only metric they ever mention are vaxxed or un vaxxed.  never mentioning if there is anything else we may need to know about the unvaxxed people's health conditions.   I can believe the vax will help with an infection.  I also know anything you have to present to me, then bribe me with, and then mandate to me with threats...all while I am unable to sue anyone should injury illness befall me from said vax... I think I will pass for now.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 17, 2021, 12:01:04 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 17, 2021, 12:02:44 PM
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.
It's a lingering phobia of his from when his parents tried to get him to stop masturbating.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 17, 2021, 12:46:56 PM
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.
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.

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.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 17, 2021, 12:57:21 PM
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.

Only one, because all detailed data in this country has to be requested on a hospital-by-hospital basis. Ishowed one before from a Birmingham trust, which showed 98% of all covid deaths were actually from underlying conditions.

I don't give a toss about needles, you imbecile, it's what's in the vial that bothers me.

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.

They can remove the liability and it will make no difference to me. I'm not "hesitant", I am completely uninterested. I don't need a therapeutic treatment (that doesn't even work) for the common cold.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 17, 2021, 02:34:48 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 17, 2021, 02:38:03 PM
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.

Once again I present you with evidence the small pox vaccine does not convey 100% immunity just like this vaccine, and once again you just pretend like that never happened and repeat yourself as if this wasn't already debunked right here multiple times directly to you.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 17, 2021, 02:40:03 PM
(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.

So when are you getting the Johnson and Johnson vax for Covid-19?

The other two are not "gene therapy" by the way and that's a truly moronic take. But regardless, your objection doesn't apply to the J&J vax anyway.

Covid-19 is killing some kids (and adults) and they're now finding 1 in 3 who get Covid still suffer from at least one symptom months later. Long Covid is real.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 17, 2021, 02:41:00 PM
  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.   
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 17, 2021, 02:42:10 PM
 So, maybe as you seem concerned about lazy, try to get off your ass yourself.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 17, 2021, 02:46:43 PM
   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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 17, 2021, 02:55:39 PM
  I probably also should have added the qualifier when I mentioned the mask to prevent spitting or sneezing into a wound, that was directly from the orthopedic surgeon who is going to be putting my torn pec back together, I could not help but ask at the MRI referral I met him for 2 weeks ago.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 17, 2021, 04:21:29 PM
  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.   

Yes, and?

Whatever point you think you just made, you didn't.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 17, 2021, 04:23:01 PM
   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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 17, 2021, 04:26:54 PM
   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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 17, 2021, 05:32:31 PM
   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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 17, 2021, 07:21:01 PM
   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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 17, 2021, 09:22:46 PM
   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...

I have never agreed with your contentions. Specifically I have never agreed with the contention that flu and covid spread differently. Both are spread by aerosols (large or small).

According to the WHO (https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/question-and-answers-hub/q-a-detail/coronavirus-disease-covid-19-similarities-and-differences-with-influenza):
Secondly, both viruses are transmitted by contact, droplets and fomites. As a result, the same public health measures, such as hand hygiene and good respiratory etiquette (coughing into your elbow or into a tissue and immediately disposing of the tissue), are important actions all can take to prevent infection.

And the CDC, with respect to flu (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/disease/spread.htm):
People with flu can spread it to others up to about 6 feet away. Most experts think that flu viruses spread mainly by droplets made when people with flu cough, sneeze or talk. These droplets can land in the mouths or noses of people who are nearby or possibly be inhaled into the lungs. Less often, a person might get flu by touching a surface or object that has flu virus on it and then touching their own mouth, nose, or possibly their eyes.

And the EPA, with respect to covid (https://www.epa.gov/coronavirus/indoor-air-and-coronavirus-covid-19):
Spread of COVID-19 occurs via airborne particles and droplets. People who are infected with COVID can release particles and droplets of respiratory fluids that contain the SARS CoV-2 virus into the air when they exhale (e.g., quiet breathing, speaking, singing, exercise, coughing, sneezing). The droplets or aerosol particles vary across a wide range of sizes – from visible to microscopic. Once infectious droplets and particles are exhaled, they move outward from the person (the source). These droplets carry the virus and transmit infection. Indoors, the very fine droplets and particles will continue to spread through the air in the room or space and can accumulate.

That said, I do acknowledge that under certain conditions, even a surgical mask or cloth mask can provide some mitigation. For example, two people standing two feet apart, one with covid. The one with covid sneezes, coughs, or talks, the surgical mask (or a hand or tissue) prevents the other person from getting a face full. So not a bad idea to wear a mask when you are unable to social distance.

Conversely, I am sitting in my 8'x8' cube (with 5' walls and a closed sliding door). My colleague (infected with covid) is sitting in the cube next to me. Our cubes are in a compartment with 10' high ceilings and there is an A/C supply register over each cube. He is not sneezing, coughing, or talking; just breathing normally. Him wearing a surgical mask provides no protection to me. And even if he does sneeze/cough/talk, him wearing/not wearing a mask has little impact on the viral load in my cube. Gravitational settling will relatively rapidly (~10 minutes) remove the large aerosols. The smaller aerosols will remain airborne for longer, but in a well-ventilated compartment they will be diluted and removed.

An argument that I might agree with would be that even the low-quality mitigation provided by a non-N95 mask has an impact on overall population transmission. The problem there is that the modeling done to date that would support that is crap. For example, the UK guy (who wanted everyone locked down, and then snuck out to fuck his mistress) that predicted millions of deaths, nobody else can run his models or when they do (with the same inputs) they get different answers. Moreover, I have yet to see anyone explain how they characterized their input uncertainty and model uncertainty (let alone account for alternative conceptual models), or present verification and validation for their models.

As for "covering this months ago", I have yet to see anyone address my specific issues. I am receptive to someone poking holes in the suppositions I have come to based on my experience in modeling fluid flow, aerosol fate and transport, and probabilistic/risk-based modeling of complex systems. Please feel free to explain where my physical characterizations are incorrect, and what the proper physics-based characterizations you believe are correct in their stead.

We can also add to the list the lack of response my wanting to know why there are are no results in the Bangladesh study that show how much of the overall variance is explained by their correlation with respect to wearing masks. I have a professional interest in this, as if you don't need show such results, I would like to cite that (proper) technical basis for doing so, such that I can ignore it in my work.

Now getting to St. Fauci and his reversal regarding masks, where is this research that dropped between his statements in correspondence and the 60 Minutes interview (March 8, 2020) that led to his Road to Damascus conversion (or that of the CDC on April 8, 2020)?

Regards.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 17, 2021, 09:37:16 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 18, 2021, 08:18:21 AM
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.

That's what the mole people want you to think.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on September 20, 2021, 09:22:27 PM
News from Project Veritas.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 20, 2021, 10:19:49 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 20, 2021, 11:29:26 PM
   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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 20, 2021, 11:37:28 PM
   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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 21, 2021, 12:17:45 AM
   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.

  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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 21, 2021, 06:41:22 AM
   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.

Technically, an N-95 is a respirator. But I understand you were talking about the bigger gear that are typically thought of when one says "respirator".
https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/personal-protective-equipment-infection-control/n95-respirators-surgical-masks-face-masks-and-barrier-face-coverings

While I was on the page, I rolled down to see what the FDA (as of 09-15-2021) says about surgical masks:

Surgical masks are made in different thicknesses and with different ability to protect you from contact with liquids. These properties may also affect how easily you can breathe through the face mask and how well the surgical mask protects you.

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.

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.

And...
For additional differences between surgical masks and N95 respirators, please see CDC's infographic.
https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npptl/pdfs/UnderstandDifferenceInfographic-508.pdf


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 21, 2021, 06:52:29 AM
   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.

  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 21, 2021, 07:57:41 AM
An interesting juxtaposition of very high vaccination rate with covid risk.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dOsB-nWof8

TL:DW = as of Aug 15, 2021, "The country (Gibraltar) has the highest vaccination rate globally with 116% fully vaccinated population, yet has the highest Covid cases risk level." It is notable that covid deaths are greatly reduced from the previous spike in covid deaths (Jan to Mar 2021, as vaccines were being initially rolled out). And the >100% vaccinated is due to counting vaccinated non-residents.

It's a month old, but you can use the links to see the current state (they have gone from red to orange).

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 21, 2021, 08:37:59 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 21, 2021, 08:48:53 AM
   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.

  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.

 Yeah we had to wear em to tour the reactor compartment onboard the ship as well when I was in the Navy.   I have one that is not visor, but with the sweet shop glasses, it avoids the fogging to a degree, but nothing to be done about basic comfort on face.   But we are talking our lives here, right?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 21, 2021, 08:50:23 AM
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.

  So Covid takes a lengthy period of time to spread?   Wouldnt the humanitarian thing to do to inject them all to save them?  Even if they are only going to be here for a few days?   I would also say there are millions and millions of people here illegally that maybe were not going to stay for a long time either.... so forgive me when I think she is full of shit.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 21, 2021, 02:40:38 PM
Kill me.

https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/family-guy-covid-video-1235070231/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on September 21, 2021, 02:43:37 PM
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.

Oh man what a shame. Think of all the great Haitian food we are missing out on now.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 21, 2021, 03:19:50 PM
   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.

  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 21, 2021, 03:29:09 PM
Kill me.

https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/family-guy-covid-video-1235070231/

What is your objection to that video?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 21, 2021, 04:06:24 PM
   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.

  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.

  Yes, because of the filter that actually keeps airborne things from entering your body.  Just wearing one is not great, and working with one on is miserable, but then working with anything over your face is pretty miserable.  A whole subsegment of bro science hypoxic training took off a few years ago around training with a respirator like training mask on.  Fucking fighters will do ANYTHING to avoid putting in road miles.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 21, 2021, 04:50:17 PM
Kill me.

https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/family-guy-covid-video-1235070231/

What is your objection to that video?
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 21, 2021, 05:10:38 PM
Of course the looneys didn’t miss their chance to capitalize on some vax virtue signaling!

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on September 21, 2021, 05:28:02 PM
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.

How in the hell does someone get away with a PSA or advertisement of a medicine like the Pfizer, Moderna, or J&J vaccine without including disclaimers about the side effects?



Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 21, 2021, 08:09:29 PM
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.

Because even in the extremely rare instance of myocarditis from the vaccine, almost all of them clear up without much trouble? Or are you playing the game of "Most people survive Covid just fine, but I am going to misrepresent the vaccinated as often dying from the vaccine?"
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 21, 2021, 09:56:34 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 21, 2021, 11:16:47 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 22, 2021, 12:52:29 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 22, 2021, 01:39:27 AM
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?

Hear what?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 22, 2021, 07:11:37 AM
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.
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.

Tucker Carlson isn’t an entertainer, he’s a journalist. For entertainment I’ll go to CNN.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 22, 2021, 08:01:16 AM
  LOL at alt right on you tube.  Not happening.  Not on Susan's watch.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deathknight4044 on September 22, 2021, 08:12:50 AM
What a difference one year makes

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1440626289048621061?s=19


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 22, 2021, 08:59:55 AM
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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deathknight4044 on September 22, 2021, 09:07:37 AM
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.
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.

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.

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-viewers

Quote
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."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 22, 2021, 09:34:00 AM
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.
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.

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.

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-viewers

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deathknight4044 on September 22, 2021, 09:42:42 AM
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.
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.

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.

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-viewers

Quote
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.

It's a boomer take to have an expectation of objectivity from any of these TV personalities. Tucker is no different than Don Lemon or Brian Stelter, but at least has the decency not to masquerade as being impartial.

As for you not believing it's a zinger, you might not have intended it as such but you're certainly parroting the talking point from people who think it is.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on September 22, 2021, 01:31:19 PM
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 22, 2021, 02:12:50 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 22, 2021, 02:33:08 PM
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.
Yeah, the "in-hospital course" section tells the story in terms that anyone with any clinical knowledge can clearly see are generally unremarkable.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 22, 2021, 03:20:22 PM
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.
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.

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.

True fact. Both him and Rachel Maddow.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 22, 2021, 05:33:47 PM
Have to agree with lolling the Boomers watching TV.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on September 22, 2021, 06:22:23 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 22, 2021, 07:19:29 PM
BLM ORGANIZER SAYS DE BLASIO VACCINE MANDATE WEAPONIZED AGAINST BLACK COMMUNITY (https://www.yahoo.com/now/black-lives-matter-greater-york-200600400.html)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 22, 2021, 08:33:34 PM
It’s really pathetic how double standards became so natural.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on September 22, 2021, 11:35:31 PM
He issues forth project blow dart and I will issue project beatdown on his weak ass.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 23, 2021, 01:21:40 AM
Fuck any guy abusing the holocaust yellow star of david for their idiotic modern political cause.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 23, 2021, 07:30:40 AM
He issues forth project blow dart and I will issue project beatdown on his weak ass.

Less impressed with the second video because they didn’t do credential check on this dude. You know, like the first lady. He could be anybody. At first glance he only seems to be going along to get some booty.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 23, 2021, 07:34:01 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 23, 2021, 07:42:26 AM
Fuck any guy abusing the holocaust yellow star of david for their idiotic modern political cause.

   I am guessing he thought the symbol  for the Armenian genocide was going to be way too obscure. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 23, 2021, 08:20:39 AM
A chubby misfit who happens to work for a federal agency but appears to have no real authority jokes about drone darts at a bar? That's nothingsauce. Half the posters in this thread post more extreme stuff. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 23, 2021, 09:29:46 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 23, 2021, 09:46:01 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on September 23, 2021, 10:10:56 AM
I was scared shitless from January to about April or May 2020.  First the psy op coming out of China with all those "leaked" videos and secondly with the knowledge that every really bad influenza outbreak has disproportionately affected the eldery and the young.  I was worried that something would happen to my daughters.  Then the numbers started coming out of Wuhan West (Northern Italy) and it pretty clearly didn't affect the really young.

I'm ready to quit my job in the finance industry to stay home and homeschool my children to make sure they don't get these "full of shit" vaccines.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 23, 2021, 10:14:29 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 23, 2021, 10:16:26 AM
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.

Call me back in a few months when we know the kids with heart inflammation haven't been permanently damaged.

Nope, in order to reduce covid-19 in society, we ignore it like the irrelevance it is. You can go fuck yourself if you think my kids are being injected with that shit.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 23, 2021, 10:35:16 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 23, 2021, 11:11:30 AM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 23, 2021, 12:08:33 PM
  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.

  Oh I will look at the data on it after 5 years of use.  I am open to data.  I am very curious as to what that data will look like.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on September 23, 2021, 01:35:27 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 23, 2021, 01:39:06 PM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 23, 2021, 04:32:00 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 23, 2021, 04:33:24 PM
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/).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 23, 2021, 05:27:35 PM
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.   
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 23, 2021, 07:13:26 PM
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)

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 23, 2021, 09:03:56 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 23, 2021, 10:23:13 PM
All this vax panic going on in here. Guys, what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger. Let me know how it goes.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 23, 2021, 11:24:37 PM
Guys, what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.
This is certainly not true in regards to a great variety of health conditions.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 23, 2021, 11:45:28 PM
Deleted
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on September 24, 2021, 01:10:04 AM
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)

Do not post blind links. Consider this a warning.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 24, 2021, 07:00:47 AM
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.
Except that I wouldn't trust the current junta to not go full retard and demand dishonorable discharges from objectors.

Remember, dissent cannot be tolerated.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on September 24, 2021, 12:30:59 PM
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/).

A good resource to check is: https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/hospitalization-7-day-trend (https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/hospitalization-7-day-trend)

You can select an individual state and see how they are doing.  It will show their total ICU capacity, how much is occupied by COVID cases, non-COVID cases and open beds. 

So, for example, Montana has a total ICU capacity of 240 beds.  They are at 77% capacity as of this past week with 56 unoccupied beds, 107 being used for COVID patients and 77 with non-COVID cases in them.

Granted, that's looking at the state level and certain counties may be worse off than others.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deadDMwalking on September 24, 2021, 12:45:58 PM
Normally Tennessee records ~200 deaths per day. 

Lately we've had +100 extra deaths per day. 

In a surprising twist, the mass shooting event yesterday did not register as a blip in the mortality rate. 

If this rate held steady for a full year, it would be the #1 cause of death in Tennessee counting for more deaths than Cancer and Heart Disease combined. 

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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on September 24, 2021, 03:09:42 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 24, 2021, 03:25:46 PM
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.
Except that I wouldn't trust the current junta to not go full retard and demand dishonorable discharges from objectors.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 24, 2021, 05:24:58 PM
Do not post blind links. Consider this a warning.

Sorry, fixed that.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 24, 2021, 06:03:19 PM
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.
Except that I wouldn't trust the current junta to not go full retard and demand dishonorable discharges from objectors.

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.
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.

I have ZERO confidence they are smart enough to not pull the lever on this.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 25, 2021, 05:46:29 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 25, 2021, 11:02:55 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 25, 2021, 11:13:11 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 25, 2021, 11:23:20 AM
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.
It doesn't suppress the immune system, you lying fucktard.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 25, 2021, 11:24:04 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 25, 2021, 11:25:35 AM
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?

LOL you think I am a rich white guy?

That's a good one!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 25, 2021, 11:27:45 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 25, 2021, 11:30:16 AM
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.

We are at the "SHOW ME THE MONEY" stage here.

Show me the risk of hospitalization and death from the vaccine. And then show me the risk of hospitalization and death from Covid to someone roughly your age and health. You will find you are incorrect in your risk assessment, which you're doing on instinct rather than with real numbers (and which of course ignores you passing the virus on to someone else, but we can leave that point aside for now). But hey you are the one that keeps making this absurd claim over and over so fine let's see you back it up with anything other than some nutcase conspiracy theory website.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 25, 2021, 11:41:10 AM
If you want to contemplate just how a disease 'wanders' out of Chinese labs (don't spin moonbeams to me about how it's natural), consider the Chinese concept of 'cha bu duo'.

This roughly translates to 'eh, good enough'.

Some thoughts on that here: https://www.sourcingallies.com/blog/cha-bu-duo

Who needs lab safety protocols? That's for prissy Westerner capitalist dogs.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 25, 2021, 11:47:44 AM
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?
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?

There's no need for a conspiracy, when so many people live in a world of alternate facts generated by the sycophantic media.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 25, 2021, 11:51:22 AM
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?
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?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 25, 2021, 12:02:55 PM
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.

Oh my! Your bravery is legendary.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 25, 2021, 12:08:37 PM
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?
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?

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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on September 25, 2021, 02:17:32 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DM_Curt on September 25, 2021, 03:08:35 PM
I dunno, Shark.
I mean, if "Health Professionals", as an industry could donate $26.3M, Hospitals/Nursing Homes could donate $17.57M and Pharmaceuticals could donate $13.6M to just one candidate in one election and get some kind of return on their investment, wouldn't that be kinda sketchy?

I'm sure the government would immediately investigate for possible wrongdoing.

I mean, if Internet companies were to do something similar, like donate $25.4M, what kind of kickback would they expect? The right to censor people who disagree withSESSION EXPIRED
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 25, 2021, 04:25:13 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 25, 2021, 05:20:20 PM
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.
Wait... Trump was behind the vaccines?

<temporarily exists in a superposition between "you MUST take the jab" and "oh noes Orange Man bad therefore his vaccines are bad!", just like Schrodinger's kitty, but then realizes it's 2021 and what happened in 2020 is the distant politically incorrect past that must be erased>
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 25, 2021, 05:51:55 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 25, 2021, 06:00:44 PM
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?
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?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 25, 2021, 06:56:35 PM
Oh my! Your bravery is legendary.

You're a child. Barely even that, my kids have more nous than you do, credulous lapper-up of bullshit.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 25, 2021, 06:57:43 PM
Yes the ivermectin stories were not correct.

Ivermectin is the reason why Indian states that are making widespread use of it have fuck all "cases" of covid (Uttar Pradesh, Goa), but the commie states who banned it (Tamil Nadu) have no control whatsoever.

So fuck off, narrative shill.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 25, 2021, 08:10:07 PM
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?
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?

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.
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. 

Quote
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.

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.

Quote
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.

Yes, be skeptical of the media. Not the hospitals themselves though. They're telling the truth. Just like they told the truth about their ICU NOT being full of ivermectin overdose patients. When they say their ICUs are full, their ICUs are full. It's not "the media" that I am saying you should believe, it's the actual hospitals I am saying you should believe. Who have not lied about Covid.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 25, 2021, 08:11:44 PM
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

Shark if you can't be bothered to read the thread you're responding to, why respond to it?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 25, 2021, 08:15:49 PM
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.

What is the difference in your mind between hospitals reporting (over and over again, in all the Covid hot spots) that their ICUs are full, as a "narrative" and hospitals reporting that as a grand conspiracy? You think hospitals are falsely reporting their ICU numbers to be one of the cool kids or because they heard other hospitals were full on TV and just wanted to be in with the in crowd?

What level of nonsense are you willing to spew to continue to pretend the hospitals are legitimately actually experiencing ICU overflow? I mean come on man, there has to be a limit even you are willing to stretch things to, to continue to pretend the hospitals are not overfull with Covid patients when they are.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 25, 2021, 08:18:44 PM
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. 

Quote
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.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 25, 2021, 08:19:08 PM
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?
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?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 25, 2021, 08:20:58 PM
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. 

Quote
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.

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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 25, 2021, 08:26:59 PM
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.

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.
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?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 25, 2021, 08:32:12 PM
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. 

Quote
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.

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.
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.

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.
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.

The mainstream news didn't do any fact checking, didn't check with any nurses or doctors, and completely ignores anything that comes from the alternate mediasphere. No nurses or doctors were given a national platform on mainstream news, until the press release.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 25, 2021, 08:37:45 PM
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?
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?

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.
If a hospital is reporting that they are overcapacity then it's unlikely they will be open for casually inquisitive visitors.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 25, 2021, 08:39:43 PM
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.

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.
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?

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 25, 2021, 09:06:02 PM
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.

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.
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?

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.
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.
You on the other hand are a reasonably credible source on this topic.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 26, 2021, 06:48:05 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on September 26, 2021, 11:49:04 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 26, 2021, 01:12:44 PM
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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on September 26, 2021, 01:20:32 PM
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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 26, 2021, 01:57:28 PM
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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 26, 2021, 02:01:16 PM
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 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.
You just insulted their national religion.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on September 26, 2021, 02:02:58 PM
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 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.

Peasants all mixing together and breathing all over the place.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 26, 2021, 02:03:08 PM
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 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.
You just insulted their national religion.
I didn't call it soccer...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on September 26, 2021, 02:05:42 PM
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 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.
You just insulted their national religion.

As religions go free healthcare at the point of delivery seems pretty good. Less paedo problems than Catholicism although there was the whole Jimmy Saville thing.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 26, 2021, 09:18:50 PM
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.

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.
Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on September 26, 2021, 09:44:28 PM
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.

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.
Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 26, 2021, 09:47:39 PM
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.

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.
Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?

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.
Just block him. He's not worth your time and energy.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 26, 2021, 09:50:11 PM
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.

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.
Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?

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.

Where have I ever lied about what you said?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 26, 2021, 09:50:46 PM
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.

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.
Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?

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.
Just block him. He's not worth your time and energy.

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.

LOL you reply to me all the time.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on September 26, 2021, 10:08:54 PM
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.

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.
Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?

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.

Where have I ever lied about what you said?
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 27, 2021, 02:14:48 AM
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.

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.
Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?

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? You just made a broad accusation, without any supporting evidence, or even a vague description. If you can't back it up, then you're lying.

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.

And that last sentence is kind of ironic, because you're the one who just stops responding when I provide detail reasoning and numerous sources to counter your claims, and then you just bring up the same old tired claims again much later, as if I never replied. And you're the one who's been been behaving like a miserable shit.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on September 27, 2021, 01:15:15 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 27, 2021, 01:17:42 PM
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.

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.
Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?

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.

Where have I ever lied about what you said?
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...

LOL I was not lying, I mistook you for the other poster (who you agreed with by the way as a matter of course - your positions were the same) and apologized for mistaking you for him. That's not a lie, that's just a mistake mostly due to the fact it was like 5 on 1 that day.  But hey if you need to hear it again, I am sorry for mistaking you for that other poster. It was not intentional, and I will try to be more careful in the future to not mistake you for someone else. I appreciate your avatar by the way, which also helps distinguish you from others at least in that it's memorable and distinct, even when your arguments are not.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 27, 2021, 01:22:12 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 27, 2021, 01:27:12 PM
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.

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.
Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?

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.

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 27, 2021, 02:39:09 PM
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.

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.
Aren't you the same person who claimed the entire nation's hospital system was overwhelmed, when only two cities were having capacity problems?

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.

Quote
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.

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.
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.

I stated what happened. I gave specifics. I haven't linked back, because I don't care. If you want to prove me wrong, then the burden of proof is on you. On the other hand, you haven't given any specifics. You've just accused me lying, without any evidence. It's your turn to provide evidence.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 27, 2021, 02:47:27 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 27, 2021, 03:04:03 PM
Welcome to Australia. Papieren, bitte.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/09/23/australia_police_goes_door_to_door_are_you_aware_of_any_planned_protests_or_events_coming_up.html

https://www.news.com.au/world/coronavirus/australia/australia-covid-news-live-confusing-detail-in-new-nsw-outdoor-pool-freedom/news-story/cf9025e2ccfb935e10c7f54ded7d0a44

This is absolutely ridiculous, not to mention appalling. But hey, any sacrifice that has to be made to stamp out Covid, right comrades?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on September 27, 2021, 03:33:27 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 27, 2021, 07:26:30 PM
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.
Please, tell me what kind of people get blood clots after two days in a hospital. I want to hear it in your words.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on September 27, 2021, 07:40:45 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on September 27, 2021, 08:30:22 PM


Here is another video.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 27, 2021, 11:28:01 PM
Bloomberg: Covid Cuts Two Years Off the Life Expectancy of U.S. Men (https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/covid-cuts-two-years-off-the-life-expectancy-of-u-s-men/ar-AAOR8PW)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 27, 2021, 11:28:52 PM
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.

I agree the AZ vaccine (and the China and Russian vaccines) are not so good. Fortunately we don't use any of those here.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 27, 2021, 11:35:38 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 28, 2021, 12:39:28 AM
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?
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 28, 2021, 06:48:43 AM
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.

"Rare".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 28, 2021, 07:09:49 AM
An interesting summary of numerous data points about the covid scam: https://off-guardian.org/2021/09/22/30-facts-you-need-to-know-your-covid-cribsheet/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 28, 2021, 07:19:55 AM


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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 28, 2021, 07:54:45 AM
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 manufacturers are all immune from prosecution, what do they care?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 28, 2021, 08:02:49 AM
They were already arrogant to start with. Immunity* from prosecution and civil action makes them more so.

* I really hope they got their waivers in something far more binding than a mere government promise.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DM_Curt on September 28, 2021, 09:33:39 AM

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 28, 2021, 09:56:59 AM
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)

When I got Covid in 2020 and spent weeks in the hospital, it was harrowing. But it was nothing compared to what my family is dealing with now—also as a result of Covid.

This is a Covid horror story in which no one actually gets Covid, and it could still happen to anyone.

In August my dad was living independently in rural New Mexico, as he has for years, in a beautiful place with a view of the mountains. He got vaxxed against Covid as soon as it was available, wore masks, and was waiting out the pandemic like the rest of us.

Then, he had a fall.

When I called and he admitted that he was in the hospital, he was more annoyed than anything else. He tripped, he hurt his leg, couldn't go home for a week or so. How irritating. How dumb. He blamed himself. He loved me, hoped I was well, he was fine, etc. That was the last call.

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.

My dad was not in the ICU, but in a physical rehab unit of the hospital to help him with his leg. They now say they did not know he had pneumonia at that point. He collapsed on the floor in his room and was left there, unnoticed, for six hours.

When they found him he was blue and had an oxygen level of 50. He did not have Covid. He was taken to the ER and put on a ventilator, but they had to put him in *a storage room* because there physically not enough space due to all the unvaccinated Covid cases.

Twenty-four hours later, he was off the vent and his oxygen levels were restored. My siblings, who live closer, flew in. I spoke to him, and he was out of it but okay. Surely he would get treatment now. We thought that was the worst of it. It was not.

It was later explained to me that this hospital decided to *re-intubate my father* due to a lack of hospital resources. They couldn't manage. He could not see a cardiologist or a pulmonologist, they were all busy. They could not run the needed tests. So they kept him on the vent.

In normal circumstances, they simply would have transferred my dad to a larger hospital. There were several close by. It would have been routine. But due to Covid, it was impossible—so impossible, they thought, that they didn't even tell me he needed to be transferred.

A few days later, while I had thought my dad was improving—I kept being reassured by the nurses when I called—I finally called and got an exhausted, angry nurse who said bluntly: "we are tapped out and because of that your father is going to die. Maybe today. I'm sorry."

I demanded to speak to the doctor and he said more or less the same thing. The state was maxed out. My dad needed a cardiac ICU bed, or at least a cardiologist, and there was nothing for him. There was no hope, and no point even trying. Everywhere was full of the unvaccinated.

Now, there have been other stories like ours in the news over the past month or so. There was the father who was turned away from 43 ICUs and sadly passed away. People were being flown across state lines to try to save them, their families in terror, the health systems in chaos.

My dad's doctor said that New Mexico's ICU bed planning was centralized, so there was no point calling NM hospitals, but I could try ICUs in CO, AZ, TX, UT, CA—even though, he said, they had already tried all those. He would try again. I could call. I think he was humoring me.

The doctor said to "send him any leads" so when I called the hospitals, I said I was calling on his behalf. I never said I was his assistant or medical staff, but they talked to me. They were all maxed out. Nothing they could do.

After about five panicked hours of contacting every hospital, every person I could think of, and screaming my helplessness into the maw of the internet to see if anyone, anyone at all could help us, we finally reached a doctor in an ABQ hospital ICU who agreed to admit my dad.

So that was two weeks ago. If he'd gotten to that ICU even hours later, we would have lost him. They had to perform heroic acts to stabilize him. In a week his pneumonia had been brought under control, and he was starting to heal. They talked about a full recovery. However.

By that point my dad had been on a vent for more than ten days, simply because of a lack of access to care. If you're a med professional, you know why this matters. All signs looked good and so they decided to extubate him. At first he tolerated it, and then...he didn't.

Three days later, they had to intubate my dad for the third time. They said that doing this could result in a permanent disability. He could fully recover, but he also might not ever be independent again.

They gave me the option of "making him comfortable" instead, and you know what that means. But I'm my dad's PoA and he'd been clear that he wanted people to fight for him in a circumstance like this, so I said no. I told them to fight and do whatever they could to save him.

To save my dad, they had to perform a tracheostomy for long-term weaning from the ventilator. That means making a hole in his windpipe. "Like Stephen Hawking," someone said. It might be temporary, it might not. They didn't know if it would save him, but so far at least, it has.

I think of my dad before all this happened, still working, living in his own (rented) home, looking out at the mountains, calling his children in California and in France.

The doctors and nurses say that a full recovery and getting off the trache is possible, but will be hard.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 28, 2021, 10:11:52 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on September 28, 2021, 12:11:05 PM
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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 28, 2021, 01:35:18 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 28, 2021, 01:37:25 PM
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.

You think a third of ICU beds being occupied with Covid patients who normally would be occupying zero ICU beds is nothing for capacity issues?

You think Summer is just lying here? I mean, if that's what you're saying then just fucking say it. Are you saying you know better, and you think she is lying?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 28, 2021, 02:13:22 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 28, 2021, 02:25:34 PM
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 28, 2021, 02:34:47 PM
"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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deadDMwalking on September 28, 2021, 04:11:19 PM
False cause fallacy. Your worst performing states are doing so because so many of their population are overweight.

No. 

You are 100% wrong here.  Setting aside vaccines and government policy, that is NOT how that works. 

He listed the following States, and I've added their rank from most obese (1) to least obese (51). 

California (35)
Colorado (51)
Connecticut (38)
Georgia (17)
Maryland (29)
Michigan (16)
Minnesota (33)
New Mexico (31)
New York (46)
Ohio (14)
Oregon (43)
Tennessee (13)
Utah (40)

None of those states are in the top 10 for obesity, and Colorado rates thinnest (including District of Columbia).  If obesity was driving this, you'd expect to see Mississippi, West Virginia and Alabama driving this.  But they're not even in the data set.

And let's just say that you had this data and it was from the top 10 fattest states.  It still shows a difference between hospitalizations of vaccinated and unvaccinated people.  Unless only skinny people get the vaccine, ANY DIFFERENT YOU SEE should be attributed to the vaccine.  You'd have to be arguing that even within the fattest states, there is a meaningful difference in who chooses to get the vaccine, but only in bizzaro world do people MOST LIKELY TO GET SICK also choose to be LEAST LIKELY TO GET THE VACCINE.  The vaccinated people that show up in this data include OLD PEOPLE (who were first eligible for the vaccine) and IMMUNOCOMPROMISED PEOPLE. 

The people who are unvaccinated are self-selected to be HEALTHIER than the average population - if they were less healthy they wouldn't have trusted in their impressive immune systems to keep them safe.

Turns out, even healthy people with good immune systems are getting hospitalized at an alarming rate. 

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.  :)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 28, 2021, 06:10:02 PM
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 their throat. At least that part is accurate.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 28, 2021, 06:37:12 PM
"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.

It wasn't a measure of states. And why would overweight people magically also be the same ones who are unvaccinated?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 28, 2021, 06:39:50 PM


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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 28, 2021, 06:51:43 PM
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.

That would be a real problem if the Wuhan Corona virus was just a little more lethal.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 28, 2021, 07:26:47 PM


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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 28, 2021, 07:27:47 PM
People still locked down? Lol
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 28, 2021, 07:44:45 PM
People still locked down? Lol
Australia has turned into a giant prison with drop bears.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 28, 2021, 07:49:40 PM
People still locked down? Lol
Australia has turned into a giant prison with drop bears.

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/nKqgRGurk-U/maxresdefault.jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 29, 2021, 07:11:32 AM
Biden losing Americans’ trust on COVID-19 (https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/axios-ipsos-coronavirus-index?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 29, 2021, 11:12:57 AM
I mean, how could anyone lose trust in...

(https://theconservativetreehouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/biden-shot-1.jpg)

...Oh.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 29, 2021, 04:50:21 PM


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.

Say what now?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on September 29, 2021, 06:14:06 PM


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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on September 29, 2021, 06:57:26 PM


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.

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.

Ha! Probably right.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 29, 2021, 07:50:41 PM
So it was just another shitty manipulative story.

Typical.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 29, 2021, 08:21:06 PM
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.

Just some grist for the mill:

New Mexico ended its covid lockdown on July 1. New Mexico's ICUs are normally almost-full.

That said, ICU bed capacity was exceeded in August and the majority of hospitalized covid cases were unvaccinated.
https://www.krqe.com/health/coronavirus-new-mexico/local-hospital-leaders-give-update-on-covid-19-hospitalizations/
https://www.abqjournal.com/2423069/as-nm-hospitals-fill-50-patients-awaiting-icu-space.html
https://www.abqjournal.com/2421352/19-of-nms-new-virus-cases-were-vaccinated.html


It is a sad story. Very similar to the stories of people that were unable to get proper care during the lockdown and have died/will die due to the lack of care.

I agree that those at most risk from covid (60+ year-olds, people with comorbidities) ought to get the vaccinated. Not sure about the risk/reward for the healthy and young.

And as for masks, we all know where I stand on that. But I am always open to discussing the fluid mechanics and aerosol physics regarding masks, or the obvious logical inconsistencies in mask mandates.

Regards.




Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 29, 2021, 09:05:25 PM
Meanwhile, NSW is bracing for another Covid surge.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on September 29, 2021, 09:57:58 PM
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".

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 29, 2021, 10:09:49 PM
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".
to what degree was the vax/anti-vax divide politicized in Uraguay?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 29, 2021, 11:28:17 PM
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".

Well, I tend to agree. But moderate positions don't get clicks on the interwebz.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 29, 2021, 11:33:41 PM
I think every reasonable person can agree:

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 29, 2021, 11:54:38 PM
  • 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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 30, 2021, 12:07:48 AM
  • 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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 30, 2021, 01:01:10 AM
  • 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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 30, 2021, 01:41:42 AM
  • 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.

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.
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.

Yes, the public in general had poor information, and from their perspective the actions may have been reasonable. But the people in power and key positions either had the information or had access to the information, and they ignored it. Just look at all the documentation from 2019 and earlier on how to handle pandemics, and how it was universally against lockdowns. They were literally ignoring the best practices they themselves had put in place. Or look at all the press conferences, where they trotted out public health officials, but there was never an economist. They focused on the disease, because it was immediate, visible, and made for lots of sensational stories. And they focused on the short term possible results of their own actions (more intent than reality), and ignored the long term or secondary consequences, which are very real but easy to ignore because they're abstract and will mostly take effect beyond the next election cycle. All the politicians wanted to position themselves as grand leaders taking decisive action. Saying nah it's okay or it's not recommended or we don't know or these long term things will happen in the distant future to a vague someone isn't nearly as forceful and election-worthy as certain answers and clear actions.

But I am willing to stipulate it's reasonable to think the first two weeks may have been justified.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 30, 2021, 05:55:41 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 30, 2021, 05:57:08 AM
The vaccines aren't very good at preventing infection, but they do substantially reduce the chance of serious effects like hospitalization or death

I agree with most of your list bar this - that's not what is very evident in highly vaccinated countries.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 30, 2021, 07:08:36 AM
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
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 30, 2021, 07:11:31 AM
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.
You ignorantly attribute this to the vaccine rather than the changing charactersitics of viral variants. You truly live in a different world from realtiy.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on September 30, 2021, 07:20:03 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 30, 2021, 07:41:49 AM
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
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).

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+


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 30, 2021, 08:04:30 AM
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.

Quote
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.”

For those of you wondering, this is former Obama HHS apparatchik Kathleen Sebelius.

DOES THE FUCKING VACCINE WORK OR NOT?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 30, 2021, 08:18:19 AM
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.

Quote
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.”

For those of you wondering, this is former Obama HHS apparatchik Kathleen Sebelius.

DOES THE FUCKING VACCINE WORK OR NOT?

By that same token, I can argue that the speed limit should be reduced such that nobody can die in a car crash, that everyone has to get the flu vax, and that I must be protected against catching a cold from the jabroni in the next cube.

I believe that the answer to your question is that the vaccine reduces your risk of catching covid, spreading covid, the severity of symptoms, and the chance of death. That reduction is not to zero, and it is dependent on your specific age, health, variants you are exposed to and under what circumstances, vaccine type and time since last dose. Also, nobody knows what the long-term side effects will be.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 30, 2021, 08:28:02 AM
So if Covid is this serious thing, why is no testing being done on the people crossing the southern border?

Before you say, 'but it is!'... well, no, no it's not. In fact, the R's tried to introduce a bill to require any migrant released from INS/CBP custody to have a negative Covid test. Bill was killed by the Dems.

Once again: the messaging is schizophrenic, and only makes sense if you assume the whole thing is a dodge and an attempt to gather more power via the ongoing crisis.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 30, 2021, 08:34:16 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 30, 2021, 08:35:19 AM
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
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).

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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 30, 2021, 09:04:22 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 30, 2021, 01:26:18 PM
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.

There's been a big rise in children being hospitalised with RSV in Stalag New Zealand. Something that wouldn't happen if they were mixing with others.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on September 30, 2021, 01:28:35 PM
Mystery rise in heart attacks from blocked arteries (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/mystery-rise-in-heart-attacks-from-blocked-arteries-m253drrnf)

Gosh, I can't even imagine what the cause of this might be...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on September 30, 2021, 01:37:06 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on September 30, 2021, 02:07:38 PM
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.
Please clarify: Are you arguing for or against the fallacy?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on September 30, 2021, 05:12:35 PM
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
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).

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 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.

Indeed. I would love to see death and hospitalization data in terms age, comorbidities, etc.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on September 30, 2021, 06:30:05 PM
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".
to what degree was the vax/anti-vax divide politicized in Uraguay?

It was somewhat. As the Opposition Socialist/Communist Coalition party along with the Public Servants and Unions all tried to demand forced Lockdown, they have also been trying somewhat to push for Vaccine Passports.

On the other hand, the conservative-libertarian/Populist-conservative Coalition has stood firm.

We do have a tiny cadre of very weird anti-vaxxers, like the old school type, that are occasionally holding events or protests. Some of these are from the far left fringe ("The Radical Animalist Party", I kid you not that's their real name, they're a party composed of people too far left for either the Communists or the Intransigent Green Party), and some of them are from the far right (mainly some alt-right type conspiracy-theorists Anti-Semite/Anti-mason nut jobs who think this is the NWO implanting mind control chips on people).


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on September 30, 2021, 06:31:56 PM
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

Yup.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on September 30, 2021, 06:34:45 PM
  • 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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on September 30, 2021, 06:46:39 PM
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.

What the fuck? First: Uruguay (and the rest of south america) is a third world country. It has far more people in the poverty line than the US or any 1st world nation. It has far less resources.
Second: The weather here oscillates between 1-17'C(33-62'F) in the winter and an average of 30-35'C(86-95F) in summer (sometimes getting as high as 45C/113F). But a huge percentage of housing here has no insulation, or indoor heating or AC. So while no one is probably going to freeze to death (except maybe some street people in the worst overnight chills), the climate and its variations can be harsh.

Third: while Uruguay has no starvation, some poorer people do have very bad diets or go hungry. And at all classes diet is at most a mixed bag: while the food we eat is healthier than most Americans, being organic and local for the most part, Uruguayans have a diet that incorporates all the least healthy parts of the mixed Spanish and Italian backgrounds, and leaves out all the best. Hardly any seafood in spite of being a coastal nation, but tons of pasta and rice and bread. Very little in the way of eating veggies. On the other hand, lots of sweets (Dulce de Leche!).
Physically, Uruguayans have higher than average levels of diabetes, heart disease and cancer. Psychologically, in spite of being one of the best off economies in Latin America (especially now), Uruguay has a very high suicide rate.


In Uruguay, the government rolled out its vaccines all at once, in massive numbers, to the entire country. So the whole nation went from 0% vaccinated to 70% vaccinated in like 4 weeks.
That made it uniquely useful for tracking purposes, and you can see that right after the vaccination starts, the Covid infection rates start to plummet. And have stayed there since then.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on September 30, 2021, 07:11:52 PM
  • 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?

Of course. But at the time, I was thinking, if the CCP was covering up some kind of viral disaster, and these were the leaks, how bad was it really?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on September 30, 2021, 08:04:49 PM
Keep in mind that China is held together with duct tape due to a number of things. Agricultural issues, the Three Gorges Dam, the rotting fruits of Communism, etc, etc.

Now, let's add something FUN to the mix. https://www.sourcingallies.com/blog/cha-bu-duo

'Cha bu duo'. Roughly translates as 'eh, good enough' or 'close enough' from Chinese.

Now, imagine that mentality applied to any kind of work where precision and process are important.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on September 30, 2021, 10:18:33 PM
  • 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on September 30, 2021, 10:43:15 PM
  • 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.
Whatever it was, it worked. China's had zero cases.

(Please ignore the pooh bear standing behind me and pressing a knife against my back.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 01, 2021, 12:33:33 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on October 01, 2021, 06:27:40 AM
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.

From:
https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations?country=PRY
2-dose = 26% of total pop
1-dose = 10% of total pop

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

I wish they would report the median number of co-morbidities associated with the groups discussed in the Israel article.



Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 03, 2021, 12:44:16 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on October 03, 2021, 03:29:03 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 03, 2021, 04:00:39 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on October 03, 2021, 04:47:22 PM
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.

Equal parts "1984" and "Brazil".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 03, 2021, 08:23:48 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on October 03, 2021, 08:44:06 PM
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.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on October 04, 2021, 10:12:05 AM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 04, 2021, 10:21:50 AM
The totalitarian face of New South Wales resigned over the weekend, but it was over some stupid affair rather than the covid response. So probably not.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 04, 2021, 10:39:14 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on October 04, 2021, 04:29:05 PM
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

I believe that you are over estimating the NZ Government.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on October 04, 2021, 05:54:30 PM
   I guess the problem is regarding vaccines, why would anyone trust the same people who have fucked this whole thing up the whole way?   Huge corporations have a very vested interest in getting people vaccinated, and if possible making the shot ongoing, in perpetuity if possible.  Seeing how married corporations and government is makes anyone with a brain question how much data is represented honestly and completely.   I have no doubts a vaccine may help with an infection.  I also have no doubt the government and corporations will do everything they can to cover up any problems from the vaccine, and in every way push fear for those not vaccinated. 

   I have been long at odds with trusting the government, and when in this case I need to accept what a bunch of talking heads and corporate fat cats who are immune from litigation say, because it is a "trust the science" moment, I take a pass.  I see everyone passing studies and stats back and forth.  I think at this point stats presenting both cases are so tainted with bias and fudging the best thing is to talk with your own doctor, and make the best decision for you.  Period. 

    I scratch my head and wonder when the wrap kids in bubble-wrap became the norm. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on October 04, 2021, 06:18:34 PM
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.

Cannot see behind the NYT pay-wall.

Given that the Israel data is broken down into fully vaccinated and 1-dose vaccinated, I do not believe that your supposition is correct -- for the Israel data. Here is what OWIN say about their data:
https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/10339795?p=cvd19_vaccine_stats&hl=en&visit_id=637689819035556759-2190985902&rd=1

Regardless, the latest OurWorldInData numbers for Israel are fully vaccinated = 61.3%. Also, I was able to find CNN data with fully vaccinated = 64.3%
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2021/health/global-covid-vaccinations/

The CNN data shows that you are correct (scroll down to "The race to get fully vaccinated"), in terms of total population, Israel is middle of the pack. However, as ~27% of their population is 0-14 years old, the best they can currently get is 73% total pop vaccinated. It would be interesting to see now the countries stack up in terms of % of eligible pop vaccinated.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 05, 2021, 06:15:11 AM
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.

No, I'm in the UK. Everything I said is right, the jab does nothing. More people are being hospitalised and are dying of covid now, than a year ago when hardly anyone was jabbed. The majority of those people are double jabbed.

Here's a wonderful added bonus: since the jabbination started, deaths amongst teenagers are up 56% (https://dailysceptic.org/2021/10/01/deaths-among-teenagers-up-56-since-vaccine-rollout-began/?fbclid=IwAR0oPE592CHlJRdPV1FXHbF2SKUwbxV9XaIRmvvvfkaNnQ5YWOCxGKo8BrU) (from the ONS, which is the official source of UK statistics). Surely a coincidence, though?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 05, 2021, 08:15:46 AM
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
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.

His commentary so far seems to back it up: https://twitter.com/RitaPanahi/status/1445182322039422976

Of course, words are cheap. We'll see what he does. But it's a good first impression.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 05, 2021, 09:59:48 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 05, 2021, 11:38:59 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on October 05, 2021, 01:11:43 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 05, 2021, 01:15:39 PM
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.

And... It's still bullshit.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 05, 2021, 01:41:55 PM
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.
Does the conspiracy involve Boris, Bernie, and Trump exchanging hair styling tips?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 05, 2021, 01:49:24 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on October 05, 2021, 01:55:03 PM
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.

So who is in control? That would help define his role an a'hing.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Reckall on October 05, 2021, 02:46:19 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 05, 2021, 03:19:24 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 05, 2021, 03:38:03 PM
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.

Christ, we're lucky we didn't get Captain Trips or a fuckin' zombie plague.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on October 05, 2021, 03:43:05 PM
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.
Does the conspiracy involve Boris, Bernie, and Trump exchanging hair styling tips?

It could be the barbers that are in control.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Tubesock Army on October 05, 2021, 04:16:46 PM
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?

"Forget it, Jake. It's therpgsite dot com."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Tubesock Army on October 05, 2021, 04:30:15 PM


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?

About the people in the latest Project Dumbass grifting video:

Brandon Schadt is (or was lol) a regional delivery lead. Not a scientist, never worked on vaccines in any capacity. At least not according to his own Facebook page.

Justin Durrant doesn't work for J&J, according to his own LinkedIn.

Not sure about Nick Karl.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Tubesock Army on October 05, 2021, 04:40:44 PM
One other "insider", Rahul Khandke, is a web developer in India.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on October 05, 2021, 07:51:23 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 05, 2021, 08:04:58 PM
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?
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on October 05, 2021, 08:50:10 PM
Even more Project Veritas.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 05, 2021, 09:00:03 PM
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?

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".

Regardless, he's literally arguing the vaccine is causing the virus to spread more, because the virus is bad right now. As if "things would be even worse right now without the vaccine" never entered his mind.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 05, 2021, 09:06:14 PM
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".
Mussolini got the trains to run on time, so fascism was totally justified!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 06, 2021, 08:52:54 AM
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").
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on October 06, 2021, 09:29:31 AM
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").

Bah, you don’t know that.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 06, 2021, 09:30:31 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 06, 2021, 12:55:10 PM
I've seen a lot of contradictory data on the Delta infectiousness. The CDC came out with the graph where they (stole a NYT infographic and pasted "Delta" on top) erroneously compared it to Chickenpox, but from what I've seen in actual UK data, Delta's infectiousness is estimated to be pretty comparable to the Alpha, maybe ~25% more transmissable, but not dramatically so.

Almost any way you slice it, the data we're seeing doesn't add up to tell the story that CDC & Pharma wants to tell. Having a reasonable discussion is difficult because not only is there a lot of confusion (understandably) on data, but you have to peel back the onion on layers of lies purposefully introduced by these bad faith actors.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 06, 2021, 02:59:41 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 06, 2021, 07:56:34 PM
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.
That uptick corresponded with Delta, not the vaccinations you moron.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Snowman0147 on October 06, 2021, 08:19:37 PM
Holy shit...



Say hello to aborted fetus cells.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 06, 2021, 08:54:20 PM
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".
Mussolini got the trains to run on time, so fascism was totally justified!

You suck at this asshole schtick.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 06, 2021, 08:59:14 PM
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".
Mussolini got the trains to run on time, so fascism was totally justified!

You suck at this asshole schtick.
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.

You on the other hand are deliberately trying to be an asshole.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 07, 2021, 08:04:51 AM
Shut up and die, they explained.

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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 07, 2021, 08:09:05 AM
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 07, 2021, 08:46:38 AM
Shut up and die, they explained.

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...
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on October 08, 2021, 10:43:12 AM
Shut up and die, they explained.

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...
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.
If you read the original article, you will find that the guy's primary care doctor prescribed ivermectin, not the judge.
"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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 08, 2021, 10:51:16 AM
Shut up and die, they explained.

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...
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.
If you read the original article, you will find that the guy's primary care doctor prescribed ivermectin, not the judge.
"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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 08, 2021, 12:03:19 PM
Are we in an epidemic or not?

You see, if we are, then we do not need to be turning up our nose at ANY approach to the virus. We should be throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks, metaphorically speaking. Which is why the hardline, vicious resistance to HCQ and ivermectin strikes me as so peculiar.

(Also, if Merck's new Covid pill turns out to be some form of ivermectin, I will laugh myself into madness.)

And if we're NOT in an epidemic, then why was it necessary to shoot the economy?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on October 08, 2021, 12:52:43 PM
Shut up and die, they explained.

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...
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.
If you read the original article, you will find that the guy's primary care doctor prescribed ivermectin, not the judge.
"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.
There is no evidence that they did not have privileges.   
News10NBC Investigates: Families suing local hospitals to administer Ivermectin to dying COVID patients  (https://www.whec.com/coronavirus/news10nbc-investigates-families-suing-local-hospitals-to-administer-ivermectin-to-dying-covid-patients/6261160/)
Same hospital back in January - also Buffalo.   Back before big pharma and the CDC began waging a full scale war against horse paste.
Court orders Rochester General to give experimental COVID treatment to patient  (https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/court-orders-rochester-general-to-give-experimental-covid-treatment-to-patient/ar-BB1d4Ax4)
Some hospitals are dead set on ensuring patients die rather than allow very safe drugs to even be tried. 
It looks more like hubris or possibly there is some financial or other pressure involved.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on October 08, 2021, 04:14:53 PM
Did the prescribing doctor have privileges at the hospital in question? If not, his orders/scripts mean nothing in that hospital.

Whereas if you just took the Doctors script to the Pharmacy then the patient could have his medicines and lived no problem.

Come on Hospital, you had one job.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 08, 2021, 04:34:52 PM
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".
Mussolini got the trains to run on time, so fascism was totally justified!

You suck at this asshole schtick.
That's because I'm not being an asshole.

"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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 08, 2021, 04:36:24 PM
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 should publish that setting you're working on. It's extremely high fantasy on the Alice In Wonderland level but I am sure there is an audience for it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 08, 2021, 05:22:51 PM
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".
Mussolini got the trains to run on time, so fascism was totally justified!

You suck at this asshole schtick.
That's because I'm not being an asshole.

"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.
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?

It's a lot easier when the victims barely dare to breathe or achoo, isn't it?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 08, 2021, 11:48:16 PM
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.

Why one standard of care for Congress, and another one for everyone else?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 08, 2021, 11:49:31 PM
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.

Why one standard of care for Congress, and another one for everyone else?
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 09, 2021, 06:34:34 AM
As I keep saying, the "vaccines" cause the variants. They've proliferated, mutating at a faster rate since the jabbing began:

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 09, 2021, 12:59:16 PM
As I keep saying, the "vaccines" cause the variants. They've proliferated, mutating at a faster rate since the jabbing began:

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 09, 2021, 01:53:04 PM
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 09, 2021, 01:57:42 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 09, 2021, 05:00:53 PM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 09, 2021, 05:11:15 PM
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...
I don't usually look at any of your nonsense. Can you answers my questions, or not?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 09, 2021, 09:41:36 PM
Quote
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.

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.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146280621002267 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146280621002267)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 09, 2021, 09:55:58 PM
As I keep saying, the "vaccines" cause the variants.

As I keep saying, you're an idiot.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 10, 2021, 03:58:38 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 10, 2021, 04:56:13 PM
Pfizer have just started phase 4 trials of their jab: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/10/world/pfizer-vaccinate-entire-city-toledo-brazil.html?smtyp=cur&smid=tw-nytimes

I remember when that used to happen before general release of a treatment...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 10, 2021, 06:12:19 PM
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.

Myocarditis, and the error was a simple mathematical error caught by online commenters. FWIW what's your source on the actual incidence rate? Given the estimates such as 1/4500 figure cited from the Israeli MOH actually lines up pretty well with the (now-retracted but AFAIK uncorrected) paper estimates.

Worth reading (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1420798/) why Peer Review is a poor alternative to actually reading and critiquing (aka the Scientific Method), from former editor of the BMJ:

Quote
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.
Quote
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.

The latter bit here is particularly interesting, because with the Covid-19 situation there's been a number of extremely strong critiques of papers emerging from "non-peer" sources. In other words, what's predicted in the article is really creating a very strong and useful resource for critiquing research. (Unfortunately, in most cases it looks like the establishment corruption & money-interest is overriding reasonable critique, but that wasn't apparent to most until last year.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 10, 2021, 06:19:53 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 10, 2021, 06:38:24 PM
Being fat is harmful to you. But being fat is also harmful to other people: Source (https://www.pnas.org/content/118/8/e2021830118#:~:text=In%20our%20observational%20cohort%20study,of%20magnitude%2C%20with%20exhaled%20respiratory)

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on October 10, 2021, 08:29:29 PM
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.

Peer review is so good that somehow this still managed to get through the sniff test:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FAC9inOXEAAlLXx?format=jpg&name=900x900)

Just releasing everything and letting the combined power of the Autist Internet community go to work may be the best way to fact check
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 12, 2021, 05:45:21 AM
What a mystifying correlation this is:

CDC chart (https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e129e9acf193ce8223f7fe58d0ca8d56ea3b3f8ef9df05e2e67ee0cfb6519713.png)

Deaths by mysterious causes follow the jab rollout.

Almost as though people are afraid they'll be fired if they report that the jab was the cause of death. Also seems to be a roughly four month time lag between jab and death. All from official CDC figures, reported here (https://theexpose.uk/2021/10/12/cdc-data-shows-shocking-increase-deaths-abnormal-mystery-causes-since-covid-vaccinations/).

There are apparently 269 known adverse drug interactions with the Pfizer jab (https://theexpose.uk/2021/10/11/covid-and-flu-vaccine-administered-same-time-is-not-safe/) - but it's OK almost all of them are only "moderate" (source data here (https://www.drugs.com/drug-interactions/sars-cov-2-mrna-tozinameran-vaccine,pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine-index.html)).

This is all fine, I'm sure...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 12, 2021, 08:42:45 AM
Something jumped out at me regarding the Southwest cancellations.

The reason SW's corporate office is pushing the jab mandate so hard is that:

Quote
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.

(Bolding mine)

Would these be the same Afghan refugees that Jen 'Circle-Back' Psaki admitted weren't being tested for Covid (or for that matter, anything else)?

Good fucking grief.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 13, 2021, 10:43:51 AM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 13, 2021, 12:33:09 PM
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
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 13, 2021, 12:52:53 PM
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 13, 2021, 02:47:25 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 13, 2021, 05:15:32 PM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 13, 2021, 05:45:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 13, 2021, 05:48:28 PM
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...

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."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 13, 2021, 05:52:31 PM
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.

More like a little static shock, given how minor covid is to anyone who's healthy.

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."

Of course, it's all because of the 0.3%...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on October 13, 2021, 06:00:11 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 13, 2021, 08:44:07 PM
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 14, 2021, 10:47:32 AM
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)
Got one showing hospitalization and death rate comparisons? Those are far more meaningful.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 14, 2021, 12:23:45 PM
Got one showing hospitalization and death rate comparisons? Those are far more meaningful.

The important context here is whether taking an injection can be used to conclude that you're a lower risk for spreading an infectious disease. e.g. the justification for highly discriminatory measures by government and govt-corporations.

I think there's a good amount of data for at-risk (age 65+) populations to suggest getting an injection is worthwhile. But push for universal injection is reckless, especially in conjunction with the widespread dismissal of safe & effective early treatments.


Some more UK data:

(https://nitter.net/pic/media%2FFBqZi49XEAMeFga.png%3Fname%3Dsmall)

(https://nitter.net/pic/media%2FFBqZvKLXIAI1Oja.png%3Fname%3Dsmall)

(https://nitter.net/pic/media%2FFBqaXsMXEAM2mgQ.png%3Fname%3Dorig)

(https://nitter.net/pic/media%2FFBqazPsXIAIBjxd.png%3Fname%3Dorig)

(https://nitter.net/pic/media%2FFBqbPjpUYAMrjHI.png%3Fname%3Dsmall)

Note I think this kind of presentation is also misleading for various reasons (e.g. no age groupings, lack of presentation of pop%, etc). But you'd expect a stronger general trend of protection to emerge from the big picture, and it's really not.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 14, 2021, 01:29:24 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on October 14, 2021, 01:36:24 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DM_Curt on October 14, 2021, 01:52:15 PM
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.
Our congresspersons have probably bought more Monsanto stock 2 days before this went public.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 14, 2021, 02:13:45 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on October 14, 2021, 03:41:01 PM
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.

Hell, they can do better than that...

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/12/health/aspirin-heart-attack-stroke.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur

 ;)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on October 14, 2021, 05:07:30 PM
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.
Veterinarians prescribe aspirin for dogs, like they prescribe Ivermectin for horses.
Latest FDA tweet on using aspirin to treat Covid: 'You Are Not a Dog.  Seriously, y'all. Stop it.'

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on October 14, 2021, 05:17:30 PM
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.
Veterinarians prescribe aspirin for dogs, like they prescribe Ivermectin for horses.
Latest FDA tweet on using aspirin to treat Covid: 'You Are Not a Dog.  Seriously, y'all. Stop it.'

  You know what else?  Horses and dogs drink water.  I hope no one out here thinks they are a horse or a dog and go around drinking water.  Like out the toilet.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 14, 2021, 05:19:38 PM
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.
Veterinarians prescribe aspirin for dogs, like they prescribe Ivermectin for horses.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on October 14, 2021, 05:27:41 PM
Lol… just rofl here.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on October 14, 2021, 05:36:58 PM
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.
Veterinarians prescribe aspirin for dogs, like they prescribe Ivermectin for horses.
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.
It's a parody of the childish tweet the official @US_FDA did make on August 21st:
"You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it."
When literally billions of humans have been prescribed Ivermectin.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 14, 2021, 08:00:27 PM
Lol… just rofl here.

That's hilarious.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Trond on October 14, 2021, 09:02:40 PM
There's also this. CNN is a f**king joke at this point.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 14, 2021, 11:02:46 PM
https://accadandkoka.com/episodes/episode175/
Quote from: slightly edited to remove some repetition and well, uhs
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 15, 2021, 12:26:55 AM
The serious, symptomatic cases of Covid=19 have been declining for the past 3-4 weeks in central Florida.  I was averaging 4-5 per shift the previous month, now it's down to 1-2 per shift and I even had one shift caring for 0 symptomatic Covid-19 patients. That's not to say we didn't have some in the ED on those shifts under the care of others, but it's definitely on the decline. From my own sampling, those that are still coming in with symptomatic infections have almost entriely been the unvaccinated.

But, looking back, we get this information that contradicts the idiots' narrative that Covid-19 is just the sniffles: https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/brief/covid19-and-other-leading-causes-of-death-in-the-us/ (https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/brief/covid19-and-other-leading-causes-of-death-in-the-us/)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 15, 2021, 02:47:28 AM
In the Movies and Inspiration forum, we've talked about films where Rotten Tomato's critic consensus differs drastically from the audience rating, by up to 30 points or so. It sometimes just reflects a film school graduate's appreciation for technical merits vs. people just wanting a fun story, but a lot of the more extreme examples are clear censorship by the Powers That Be Red and Round, where they delete or ignore negative reviews in slavish service to the big government statist side of the culture wars.

But there's a new film that blows every last record out of the water: As of this post, the critics give it a whopping 92% ... and the audience score is 2%. No, I didn't drop a digit. It's a 46-fold difference.

Why am I posting this in the covid thread? Oh, that. It's the Fauci documentary.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 15, 2021, 04:44:03 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 15, 2021, 07:41:04 AM
Latest official data from the UK, see Table 5 as usual: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1018547/Technical_Briefing_23_21_09_16.pdf

Two third of covid deaths are "fully vaccinated". But if they hadn't been jabbed, it would have been worse!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: martinjpayne on October 15, 2021, 07:53:46 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 15, 2021, 08:25:03 AM
So how exactly do you know you've actually had covid, not just the cold you said its symptoms were like?

Because someone else ill at the same time was dumb enough to get tested.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: martinjpayne on October 15, 2021, 08:27:38 AM
Guess their symptoms must've been a lot worse than yours then, to make them take a test. 🤷‍♂️

but YOU DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW you had it!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 15, 2021, 08:36:01 AM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deadDMwalking on October 15, 2021, 10:41:00 AM
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!

I don't think anyone has claimed it is the most infectious disease, ever.  But it doesn't have to be. 

Here's a list of infectious diseases (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_human_disease_case_fatality_rates)

What's telling is that diseases that are highly transmissible and have an associated mortality rate have also been addressed.  Smallpox is worse that Covid - so we eliminated it.  Polio was probably about as bad as Covid, so we created a vaccine and have been close to wiping it out. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 15, 2021, 12:20:55 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 15, 2021, 12:51:57 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 15, 2021, 01:22:28 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 15, 2021, 02:18:02 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on October 15, 2021, 02:26:37 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 15, 2021, 02:41:00 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 15, 2021, 04:57:32 PM
How does the scam work? By this I mean who are the scammers, how are they implementing the scam and what's their endgame?


Meanwhile:
Quote
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.

Quote
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on October 15, 2021, 05:12:54 PM
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:
Quote
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.

Quote
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

But Kiero says the bioweapon is the sniffles so it's an awful bio weapon. Who are they and what do they have to gain? How are they coordinating this with so many governments with the only world leader coming out about something being the Belarus president? If it's all so coordinated why the wildly varying reactions of different governments?

More for Kiero though, how does the scam work with the random mess made by the UK government?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on October 15, 2021, 06:38:35 PM
Scottish Parliament: Making the UK Government look good since 1999
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on October 15, 2021, 06:43:00 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on October 15, 2021, 09:23:57 PM
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 can the Scottish Parliament be the secret masters?

They can not even stop the scottish white suffragette supremacists.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 15, 2021, 11:01:54 PM
For what it's worth, my money has always been on an accidental/unintentional release, not a deliberate or calculated one.

Mostly because 'good enough' has been a watchword in Chinese process for a while.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 16, 2021, 05:21:51 PM
How does the scam work? By this I mean who are the scammers, how are they implementing the scam and what's their endgame?

Billions pissed away on useless tests that don't work. Billions pissed away in furlough graft schemes. Billions on completely unnecessary PPE procured through mates. Billions on uncontested contracts to mates for plenty of other stuff, including £37bn magicked away on Track and Trace. And let's not forget billions on a "vaccine" that doesn't even fucking work, but they're desperate to get into everyone before the emergency use authorisation runs out. It's a massive transfer of public money into private hands on a scale no one was audacious enough to try before.

The government and their cronies know the whole thing is bullshit, but look how many idiots they have lapping it up out of their hand and complying. The fake state of emergency and gross abuses of normal due process and democracy all support the theft.

The test is the scam, the PCR test was never designed for this use, and run at 40+ cycles is worthless. The LFT is even shittier. That creates the myth of "cases" as well as supporting the bollocks of "died of any cause within 28 days of a positive test" which is then called a covid death. Even though 95%+ of the people recorded in that way died of something else entirely.

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.

What, the 5% or less who actually died from covid, not from some other underlying cause, or nothing related at all, you mean? I've seen the repeated Freedom of Information requests submitted to hospitals here, people killed by covid, rather than dying and happening to have "tested positive" within the last month are a tiny minority.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on October 16, 2021, 05:33:06 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 16, 2021, 07:06:49 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 16, 2021, 08:05:57 PM


(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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 16, 2021, 11:46:23 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Horace on October 17, 2021, 01:54:11 PM
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.

I would be happier if there were real pushback and accountability. The employees of these mega-corporations should be suing their employers for causing them undue stress over the vaccine mandates. And they should be calling for the resignation of the executives involved. "Punch back twice as hard," as a wise man once said. Standing one's ground is not enough.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on October 17, 2021, 05:38:21 PM


(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).

Greetings!

Yeah, Zelen! They are a bunch of corrupt bastards! Hopping about from the FDA to then go and work a plush gig at a gigantic Pharmaceutical company.

Yeah, there's no corruption and fuckery going on there. ;D

Fucking corrupt scum.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 17, 2021, 10:31:02 PM
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.

I am in favor of a policy which says if you've had covid you don't need the vaccine. But that's not the point I was replying to. He IS in fact advocating that society just get covid, deal with it, and move on. Kiero is just that guy.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 17, 2021, 10:34:26 PM
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 17, 2021, 10:58:05 PM
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"?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on October 18, 2021, 01:51:33 AM
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.

Naw, the extra graft and ineptness is because we have an especially corrupt and inept government due to Boris getting rid of all the competent tories.

The governments treating of the virus has been incredibly inconsistent because there's no central conspiracy. Instead there's been varying levels of taking it seriously, blind optimism and tory infighting. You count furlough as part of the scam but Rishi Sunak is also one of the peeps who pushed against lckdowns.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 18, 2021, 05:13:30 AM
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"?
Look at the full text of the report. They give a poor explanation for the results of table 4:

The rate of a positive COVID-19 test varies by age and vaccination status. The rate of a
positive COVID-19 test is substantially lower in vaccinated individuals compared to
unvaccinated individuals up to the age of 39, and in those aged greater than 80. In
individuals aged 40 to 79, the rate of a positive COVID-19 test is higher in vaccinated
individuals compared to unvaccinated. This is likely to be due to a variety of reasons,
including differences in the population of vaccinated and unvaccinated people as well as
differences in testing pattern

Of greater importance is the data in the rest of the report that clearly shows reduced morbidity and mortality for the vaccinated in tables 5 (a & b) and 6 along with Figure 2 (b, c, & d).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 18, 2021, 01:33:11 PM
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 am saying the people who conducted the study give a summary and their summary concludes exactly the opposite of this meme.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 18, 2021, 02:46:00 PM
Colin Powell passed away from Covid complications. He was 84. My condolences to his family.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 18, 2021, 03:25:49 PM
Colin Powell passed away from Covid complications. He was 84. My condolences to his family.

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.
People that talked smack here, or people that talked smack elsewhere (like Twitter)?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on October 18, 2021, 03:36:44 PM
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.
:-(


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on October 18, 2021, 03:38:08 PM
People that talked smack here, or people that talked smack elsewhere (like Twitter)?
Twitter is a cesspool of hatred.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: TNMalt on October 18, 2021, 03:43:23 PM
Colin Powell passed away from Covid complications. He was 84. My condolences to his family.

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.
Most of them are more concerned that anti-vaxxers will use his death as ammunition.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 18, 2021, 04:07:36 PM
Colin Powell passed away from Covid complications. He was 84. My condolences to his family.

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.
Most of them are more concerned that anti-vaxxers will use his death as ammunition.
Kind of like how the Branch Covidians used Herman Cain's death?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 18, 2021, 04:09:38 PM
People that talked smack here, or people that talked smack elsewhere (like Twitter)?
Twitter is a cesspool of hatred.
We are in total agreement on something.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: TNMalt on October 18, 2021, 04:28:48 PM
Colin Powell passed away from Covid complications. He was 84. My condolences to his family.

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.
Most of them are more concerned that anti-vaxxers will use his death as ammunition.
Kind of like how the Branch Covidians used Herman Cain's death?
Herman Cain did promote anti vaccine views and didn't take reasonable precautions against covid.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 18, 2021, 05:32:11 PM
Herman Cain did promote anti vaccine views and didn't take reasonable precautions against covid.

Given that he died on July 1st 2020, did he also violate the temporal prime directive?
Oh right, another person who mindlessly repeats talking points they hear from propaganda outlets. Carry on.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 19, 2021, 06:33:06 AM
Most of them are more concerned that anti-vaxxers will use his death as ammunition.

Because the jab did precisely fuck all, you mean?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: TNMalt on October 19, 2021, 08:28:59 AM
Did what it was supposed to. Powell had blood cancer which reduced the effectiveness.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 19, 2021, 10:40:23 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 19, 2021, 10:42:20 AM
Did what it was supposed to. Powell had blood cancer which reduced the effectiveness.
Citations needed for cancer reducing the effectiveness of the jab.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 19, 2021, 10:42:43 AM
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.
The report covered in the last page of the thread shows you are quite wrong. So much disinformation you are peddling...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 19, 2021, 10:48:42 AM
Did what it was supposed to. Powell had blood cancer which reduced the effectiveness.
Citations needed for cancer reducing the effectiveness of the jab.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 19, 2021, 05:25:39 PM
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."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on October 19, 2021, 05:52:17 PM
Cant believe you guys are arguing about exactly why an old guy with Cancer died.

He was an old guy with cancer.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 19, 2021, 07:40:43 PM
Cant believe you guys are arguing about exactly why an old guy with Cancer died.

He was an old guy with cancer.
You should talk about the first black president with more respect.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on October 19, 2021, 07:45:42 PM
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."

Greetings!

*BOOM!* Damn right, Zelen! ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on October 19, 2021, 08:02:09 PM
Cant believe you guys are arguing about exactly why an old guy with Cancer died.

He was an old guy with cancer.
You should talk about the first black president with more respect.

I did love him in Star Wars.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 19, 2021, 09:07:00 PM
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."
Have a look at all of the data, not just one table.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deadDMwalking on October 20, 2021, 02:38:58 PM
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? 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DM_Curt on October 20, 2021, 02:59:16 PM
Cant believe you guys are arguing about exactly why an old guy with Cancer died.

He was an old guy with cancer.
You should talk about the first black president with more respect.
No, our first black president was released from the hospital (UC Irvine in Socal) this week after having an infection.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DM_Curt on October 20, 2021, 03:00:56 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Chris24601 on October 20, 2021, 03:16:31 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 20, 2021, 04:02:30 PM
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.

Imagine if he ran, and won? The first black president would have been someone with dignity and reserve, like Obama. But unlike him, Colin Powell was a war hero, and a Republican. Which would have added gravitas, and bridged gaps. And even more importantly, this would have been more than a decade before culture wars were even a flaming pile of shit on the horizon. It would have united the country, instead of dividing. It would have proved that race is not the most essential element of someone's character, instead of becoming the most important aspect.

But no, that didn't happen. Colin Powell left behind a long legacy of service, but he was never president. And I think we lost something. Because instead of moving toward a post-racial society and unity, stark polarization and virulent racists like you dominate our world.

But in a better world, the first black president just passed away.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 20, 2021, 04:14:41 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 20, 2021, 04:16:06 PM
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.
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.
I'm outraged at your lack of a sense of humor!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 20, 2021, 04:19:15 PM
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.
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.
I'm outraged at your lack of a sense of humor!
:P
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on October 20, 2021, 04:24:57 PM
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 think my favourite Nelson Mandela quote is appropriate here

(https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/400x/73121206/hes-right-you-know.jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 24, 2021, 03:39:38 PM
(https://nitter.net/pic/media%2FFCZ4RTNXEAgZaba.jpg%3Fname%3Dsmall)

Everyone ready for the definition of "Fully Vaccinated" to change to 3rd & 4th shots?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 24, 2021, 03:45:23 PM
(https://nitter.net/pic/media%2FFCZ4RTNXEAgZaba.jpg%3Fname%3Dsmall)

Everyone ready for the definition of "Fully Vaccinated" to change to 3rd & 4th shots?
Sure am. How bout u?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on October 24, 2021, 03:57:49 PM
(https://nitter.net/pic/media%2FFCZ4RTNXEAgZaba.jpg%3Fname%3Dsmall)

Everyone ready for the definition of "Fully Vaccinated" to change to 3rd & 4th shots?

<snark>
In the limit, you will have to be continuously "jabbed"  to be considered "Fully Vaccinated". I only hope that the dispenser is more beer-hat rather than butt-plug -- YMMV.
</snark>
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on October 24, 2021, 06:54:06 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/jzIsYTA.jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 24, 2021, 07:54:29 PM
(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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 25, 2021, 07:54:29 AM
(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.
Which makes it not a vaccine, really.

I mean, the whole point of vaccination and herd immunity is that it limits disease spread so significantly that it can't 'get to' members of the population that can't be vaccinated. Immunocompromised persons, children too young to have that vaccine, etc.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on October 25, 2021, 01:43:28 PM
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. There will always, always be more "Mutations" requiring more booster shots, always more vaccines.

A convenient, perpetual "crisis" that is used by the government powers to seize and exercise ever more authority over the population, and to become increasingly invasive against individual rights and freedoms.

But supporters an cheerleaders of all this Carona BS just want to keep on embracing it. Like several politicians have implied, "Just shut up, wear a mask, and get vaccinated"

Yeah, this isn't fucking tyrannical at all.

Fucking morons.

This BS should be resisted everywhere, by everyone, at every opportunity.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DM_Curt on October 25, 2021, 02:03:33 PM
Local school district is under a vaccine mandate for the staff and fired a coach who supposedly had a medical condition where she couldn't get the jab.  Every Monday since, protestors gather on the sidewalk near a school or the district office, waving flags and signs. Support is overwhelmingly positive. In 1.5 hours, you might get flipped off once, two thumbs down but hundreds of people waving and honking their horns (even school employees, like bus drivers).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 27, 2021, 10:46:40 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on October 27, 2021, 06:49:15 PM
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.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34318930/ (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34318930/)

I'm not sure about the sniffles but it's not quite clear how efficacious it is against covid.

Frankly I'd love this to be the answer to the problem. Quick and easy sounds great and I'm pretty sure the British government will be all over this. Unless it's all a big conspiracy that's manipulating the sheeple.

I'm still waiting for a better explanation on that than your vague tory mates profiting from a crisis one. Can you explain this lockdown happy governments putting off the initial one until after the last minute? How about eat out to help out? The desperation to not cancel last Christmas until it all went tits up?

Give me a narrative of a somewhat reasonable conspiracy within government to do something because all I've seen is a cascade of fuck ups by a party that sacrificed their best leaders on the altar of Brexit. Start in February 2020 and explain the master plan.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 27, 2021, 07:05:06 PM
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.

I am not sure to what extent we can attribute India's success to Ivermectin vs. seasonal variation. Either way, it wasn't masks & lockdowns that did it, nor injections.

As should be common knowledge by now, Ivermectin is being used to treat Congressvillains and their families & staff, so it's worth considering letting the slave class also have access to medication that our lords and ladies use.

Japan recently began officially recommending use of Ivermectin as well.
(https://nitter.net/pic/media%2FFCAV8OEVgAAgKS2.jpg%3Fname%3Dsmall)

I'm curious to learn whether this is the normal seasonal pattern for Japan or if the steep dropoff can be attributed to better treatment.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 27, 2021, 07:33:51 PM
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".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on October 27, 2021, 07:45:13 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 27, 2021, 07:58:21 PM
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.
"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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on October 27, 2021, 08:18:22 PM
I'm not as knowledgeable...
You could have stopped there and been equally as accurate.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 28, 2021, 07:56:35 AM
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.
Ah, a bongland inmate. That explains a bit.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 28, 2021, 04:45:57 PM
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."

You mean like a meme?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 28, 2021, 04:49:38 PM
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.
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.

Zing! The entire theme of this message board and almost every topic in this sub-forum is super serious exaggerated outrage
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 28, 2021, 04:52:03 PM
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 :)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on October 28, 2021, 05:08:20 PM
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.



Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 28, 2021, 07:53:19 PM
Reminder:

(https://nitter.net/pic/media%2FFC0dqZyaIAAsJvJ.png%3Fname%3Dorig)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 28, 2021, 07:57:52 PM


Was Sars-Cov-2 or related virus circulating before 2019?
I don't know if there's enough evidence to draw this conclusion, but it's really hard to understand how Sars-Cov-2 achieved worldwide spread in about 1 month in 2020 but Delta has taken ~12+ months to do the same thing, despite being claimed as significantly more transmissable.

(https://nitter.net/pic/media%2FFBQ5jRoWEAUfgBr.jpg%3Fname%3Dorig)

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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 28, 2021, 08:21:35 PM
From serological studies, we know there was widespread community transmission in the US by late 2019. There's a good argument that there was an outbreak of covid-19 in October 2019 at the Military World Games in Wuhan, which excluding the mine in 2012 would be the earliest known outbreak. It seems unlikely it was spreading before 2019. Natural immunity in SE Asia seems like a strong hypothesis, but it's probably cross-immunity from other coronavirus strains. We know that Sars1 provides a degree of immunity against Sars2, after all. Delta was spreading in a more competitive environment, and remember it goes in seasonal waves.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on October 28, 2021, 08:30:06 PM
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!

Ahh, yes. And if somehow, the people rise up and force the regime of the petty tyrants to shut the fuck up and back down in retreat, then the rest of the country gets to return to something like a happy normal...that would greatly please me, an make me happy. I hope it does happen! 

I just also believe that there is a chance that it won't, and the tyranny will continue.

Here where *I* am, though, everyday life is pretty normal, and has returned to being normal. There are no fucking lockdowns and no fucking mask mandates. The only people that you typically see wearing masks are nurses and staff working inside hospitals and medical clinics.

Here, if people tried to demand that people wear masks like they do in California and other places, well, they would likely get fucking shot and killed. People here are armed to the teeth, and believe in guns, the Bible, and freedom. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on October 28, 2021, 08:48:39 PM

"1 eternity to flatten the curve"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPuAG07-5Yo
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 28, 2021, 09:45:57 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on October 28, 2021, 09:59:13 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 28, 2021, 10:24:52 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on October 29, 2021, 06:49:31 AM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 29, 2021, 07:18:53 AM
Mask mandates will never end, they're too useful a signal of compliance.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 29, 2021, 08:18:42 AM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on October 29, 2021, 10:22:10 AM
In the US, my proffer is that there may be one more lockdown, likely invoked by the spread of the next variant.

Dude there's a mid-term election in 2022.  Unless tons of people start going to jail for violating election laws there will guaranteed be a new variant late next spring/early summer that will require a lockdown and mail in voting.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 29, 2021, 10:44:19 PM
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...

You are the undisputed dumbest fucker on this message board.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 29, 2021, 10:46:41 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 30, 2021, 10:09:13 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on October 30, 2021, 10:26:44 AM
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.

And that's why it is called gambling.   :D

I am betting that we will keep getting new variants for the foreseeable future, and that this will result in a continuation of the summer and winter peaks in cases at effectively the same magnitude. I am also betting that the vaccine has an effectiveness* more like the influenza vaccine rather than like the measles or smallpox vaccine. Hence, rounds and rounds of mask mandates and, to a lesser extent, lockdowns.

I acknowledged that there is the potential for my Dear Leader to keep us masked indefinitely/forever. But I am betting that she won't, as that could negatively impact her chances of reelection.

* anecdotal story: Colleague of mine and his wife (both vaccinated, one with Pfizer, one with Moderna) have now had covid twice since getting vaccinated. Second case was worse. Fortunately in neither instance were they even close needing hospitalization; just laid up like they had a bad cold or the flu.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on October 30, 2021, 12:08:27 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 30, 2021, 12:19:36 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 30, 2021, 12:39:09 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 30, 2021, 01:00:25 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 30, 2021, 01:51:20 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 30, 2021, 02:01:55 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 30, 2021, 02:47:43 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 30, 2021, 02:51:48 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 30, 2021, 03:30:38 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on October 30, 2021, 03:39:22 PM
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.

No one agrees with Mistwell.

Kiero good on ya for giving it a go mate.  The incoming flak means that you are over the target
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on October 30, 2021, 03:42:07 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 30, 2021, 04:22:07 PM
Because posters here are a representative sample of what exactly?

Already cavilling, are we? Scared I might be right?

They're representative of the vaxxed majority. Who roll the dice on a >rare adverse reaction each time they get jabbed. Someone I work with had a brain aneurysm a couple of weeks ago. I'm sure that was nothing to do with his jabs. Nor is the unprecedented rise in heart attacks, strokes and other vascular emergencies this year.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on October 30, 2021, 04:43:04 PM
Greetings!

STAND TALL, Kiero!

Fuck the Mask Tyrants and all the sniveling wankers that shriek about everyone getting jabbed with the phony vaccine!

A vaccine for a virus that...has a 98% recovery rate, or higher.

This is all a fucking psy-op scam, aimed at exploiting a minor virus into being a crisis so that the government and petty tyrants everywhere can jerk themselves a soda with seizing more power, and telling other people what to do.

Fucking RESIST! Tell them all NO! Tell them to all to get fucked!

More Fauci lying scandals have come out. More corruption, more bullshit, more lying and cock-sucking deeption all around, from the government, from cock-sucking "medical professionals", from the Pharmas, the media, yeah. So much lies and corruption, profit-mongering, an lust for power, control, and authority. A week doesn't go by that there isn't some new scandal of corruption, lying, profit-mongering, hypocrisy, and on and on going by with these people.

There are so many contraicting studies and research, so many silenced and cancelled medical experts and doctors, so many medical, media, and government scandals and corruptions going on, lies and bullshit, from MULTIPLE articles, multiple sources, every week! I don't even bother posting them here or even referencing them, there are so many. If anyone hasn't caught on to how this whole virus crisis has been manufactured and exploited for the seizure of power for the elites, and to villify anyone that resists and doesn't bow down to the narrative, well, they are just brainwashed, blind sheep. Some people yearn to be on their knees, and to be slaves.

But TRUST SCIENCE! Bow down an do what the fuck you are told!

Fuck them. Fuck them all. Don't trust them. Don't believe them. Don't obey, if you can. Resist as much as you can.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on October 30, 2021, 05:34:58 PM
I don't worry about the Wuhan flu because my T-cells are ripped.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on October 30, 2021, 06:46:00 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on October 30, 2021, 08:28:56 PM
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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on October 30, 2021, 09:12:26 PM
Mask mandates will never end, they're too useful a signal of compliance.

Compliance to what?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on October 30, 2021, 09:40:42 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on October 30, 2021, 09:41:01 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on October 30, 2021, 09:47:42 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on October 30, 2021, 10:43:38 PM
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.

Greetings!

My answer is a piece of nonsense?

No, sir, it isn't. It is based solidly on actual statements, policies, edicts, and other official pronouncements made by local governments, state governments, and the US Federal Government, as well as elements of all of the other institutions I mentioned, from "medical experts" to media types, celebrities, various officials, corporate CEO's in public statements o policies, and school district pronouncements.

From what I have read and heard, the political and social environment over there in Britain is, while not exactly the same as here in America, is none the less similar.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 31, 2021, 06:27:47 AM
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?

Newsflash, dumbass, no you're not healthy. Don't worry, your poor lifestyle choices will catch up with you one day.

Compliance to what?

Are you really that dim? Compliance to the bullshit narrative of the last 20 months. That you accept there's something you should be afraid of.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on October 31, 2021, 12:38:27 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 31, 2021, 01:38:36 PM
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.

You sure do drink an awful lot of Kool Aid though.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on October 31, 2021, 01:44:30 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on October 31, 2021, 02:28:41 PM
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!"
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on October 31, 2021, 03:58:21 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on October 31, 2021, 04:52:15 PM
You sure do drink an awful lot of Kool Aid though.

I only drink water, thanks.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 01, 2021, 01:33:48 PM
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!"

Is Michael Tracey someone you trusts on topics like this?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 01, 2021, 01:36:13 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 01, 2021, 02:03:13 PM
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.

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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 01, 2021, 02:24:59 PM
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.

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 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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on November 01, 2021, 03:44:48 PM
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.

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 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.

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.

Greetings!

Baahaa! Baahaa! Hail to the God Emperor! ;D

Mistwell, would you believe that I own--and have often proudly worn--a bright red, proud Trump/MAGA hat?

I also have a "Veterans For TRUMP!" bumper sticker on my Mercedes. ;D

As for the tweet you referenced, no, I didn't specifically research it. I like Zelen, and I trust Zelen. He is the member here who found the tweet and posted it. Or whatever it is. I don't do Twitter, Facebook, Instagrab or whatever the fuck. Is the guy in the quote a Sanders supporter? I don't know. What does that have to do with him talking about his experience? You know, I am not surprised that there are some Liberals that are also flaming the SJW retards. There's is a significant opposition to the SJW's, the government, the Mask Mandates, the Vaccine Mandates, and all of the bullshit being pushed and promoted by the Junta in Washington, DC, and their Grima Wormtongue supporters elsewhere. That opposition isn't just from Conservatives, such as myself, or the fabled and dreaded members of the "Alt-Right!"--there are more centrists, mushy-moderates, Democrats, and a few reasonable Liberals that are also standing in opposition.

Like a ship hold full of rats, I am also not surprised that various members of the cult, other socialists, fucking Communists, and so on, also become opposed to other members of the Rat's nest, and bite them, and seek to trample them. I fully expect vicious hate campaigns, scandals, back-room affairs and fuckery going on--all designed to embarrass and bring down the enemy of the moment, or whatever the current fat rat that is gobbling up the cheese the most. Hell, there are two Democrat Senators--I think that's what they are--that have seemed to make it their life-mission to absolutely fuck Biden and Kamala in the ass, and oppose them at every opportunity. No! NO! NO! They fucking hammer down anything and everything that comes their way, much to the Liberal sheep's REEING!!! REEE!

I told some friends of mine, "Hey, if some Democrats or Liberals choose to wake up to the real problems and threat that this Junta presents to America, and they choose to oppose it and fight, and resist, I say God bless them. We should be grateful and appreciative for every friend that comes to fight shoulder to shoulder in the line, even if they decided to join us late in the fight." They, in turn, admitted that it was refreshing, and good to see. There's a few Liberals and Democrats waking up, and choosing to fight, resist, and speak out. I don't suppose that gains them any friends amongst the Liberal Herd though, but I wish them well. The culture war is not an easy or pleasant fight, but it is none the less necessary, and righteous, as well. We must fight and resist, to preserve America's soul and heritage, passed down to us from our forefathers.

As for the narrative, and questioning it, well, Mistwell, contrary to your assertions that I must now be an "Alt-Right" Sheep!--my own conclusions come from my own seeing the evidence; the video, hearing the audio, seeing the quotes, the televised news conferences, reading what the MAINSTREAM NEWSPAPERS have actually quoted officials, like Cuomo or Newsome; I've heard and seen the quotes from teachers and school board members, the bullshit statements and contradictions from various Hospital people, as well as people like Doctor FAUCI. It's all there, Mistwell. I didn't make any of it up. It isn't like I said to myself, "Well, I need to imagine myself a bunch of contradictions, terrible policies, absolute smugness and arrogance. Yes, I need to make all this shit up in my own head, so I can tell this to others!"

As an example, just recently, the black Surgeon General of the state of Florida said masks were bullshit. I'm paraphrasing, but that's what I think he meant, and he said it pretty clearly.

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?

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?

Well, obviously, the Virus's actual, real threat then must actually be entirely overblown and exaggerated. In other words, yeah, we are being LIED TO, and FUCKING CONNED, Mistwell.

I will tell you something else. I have some experience with NBC stuff. Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical warfare. I KNOW what some real deadly shit can do, and it's no joke. Break some of that shit out, and you wouldn't see anyone laughing about a fucking thing. People dropping dead left and right in minutes or hours. BOOM. Fucking dead, by the truckload. Whole buildings, offices, schools, everything, wiped the fuck out.

We aren't dealing with a virus that is a real threat to 98% of the population, Mistwell, and that fact seldom seems to be brought up or discussed by any of these government jackasses, or eve the fucking medical officials. Even though it is a KNOWN FACT. That's real scientific evidence for you, Mistwell. Doesn't that GULF between the very real scientific fact, and the hysteria surrounding the virus, and the official narrative concerning it, doesn't that HUGE INCONSISTENCY bother you?

It has bothered me, Mistwell, and I didn't need Rush Limbaugh or Dan Bongino, or Sean Hannity to tell me that it should bother me. I came to that conclusion all on my own, my friend. My knowledge of history has me entirely suspicious of everything the current government Junta has been saying. Just like my knowledge of history, economics, business, and politics, has me deeply suspicious of how the Big Pharma companies act, the HMO's, the gigantic Health Systems, the Giant Tech Companies--I know they are all in bed, fucking each other. I know that they have dinner together, and that their kids get together and fuck. They go to the same schools, the same parties, and play golf together. And they also write checks to each other, and smoke cigars, and wink and nod, and ensure that the table is set just right for themselves and their friends.

That all bothers me, too, Mistwell. I know ths whole set up is corrupt as fuck.

So, yeah, in many ways, some small-town journalist, or a local city councilman, or some local doctor, who stands up and says this, and this, and this, is corrupt bullshit!--yeah, I think they have *at least* as much credibility as someone more official or whatever may have. That isn't saying much, because I don't give anyone from the official narrative much above absolutely zero credibility, so some local guy has considerably more, in my eyes. Maybe I have become also more locally-minded, Mistwell. I no longer live in the big city, in Orange County!--like I used to. I live on the edge of nowhere, now, where most people are *REAL*. My state representative, she lives three blocks over from me. My local police department? A handful of them are my neighbors. They invite me to their yard barbecues, man. My local city councilman? He gets his haircut at the same barber I go to. Another local government official--he is a member of my church. All of these people are trustworthy. Why? Because they are Christians. They believe in the Bible. They believe in GUNS. They believe in traditional America. And they fight, publicly, and stand against Communism, both here locally, and on the national scene, as appropriate. They go on record, put their families on the line, their careers, whatever. They back up what they say with what they believe and how they live, Mistwell. None of them support fucking mask mandates or vaccine mandates, or anti-gun laws, or "Critical Race Theory" or BLM, or any of the bullshit being promoted by the official narrative. All of these local folks around me, Mistwell, they talk themselves about the absolute corruption they see, the lying, the deceit, the back-room fuckery going on. THEY don't trust the official narrative, either. There are parts of it they cooperate with or allow to varying degrees, like getting vaccinated or whatever, but everything is guided by respect for YOU and YOUR RIGHTS. for God, for our Bible, for our Guns, and for our country. The Federal government, the giant corporations, the media? No. They don't have the right to impose tyranny on any of us, Mistwell. They all must be viewed with suspicion. And always, always, Mistwell, we are a free people, armed, and with dignity. We have our rights, and need to bow before no man.

So yeah, I do come to my own conclusions, Mistwell, from my own convictions, and my own values. I base many of my positions on evidence that I have seen and heard with my own eyes and ears.

And you know where I sit. I sit at the right hand of Genghis Khan, and to my right is a Tyrannosaurus Rex. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 01, 2021, 03:47:36 PM
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.

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 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.

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.

And no, you're not addressing facts. You're attacking the person and attacking the credibility of sources, without providing a justification.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 01, 2021, 04:20:13 PM
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?

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?
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on November 01, 2021, 04:50:34 PM
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?

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?
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.

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.

Greetings!

I mostly agree with you, Pat. I'm probably a bit more harsh and unforgiving though. In the Marines, true *Leaders* lead by example, with absolute integrity. Platoon Commanders never order you to do anything that they themselves can't also do, or are also doing alongside you. Many things they tell you to do, such as running, whatever, they can do better and faster than you can, or 95% of your brothers.

Gov Newsome and Cuomo made edicts and laws *punishing* and *fining* ordinary citizens that didn't wear the fucking mask. Businesses and churches were fined, closed, or threatened to be closed down if they didn't impose mask wearing and all the other bullshit. How come Cuomo and Newsome and others didn't at least immediately lose their jobs?

Grace Community Church in California led by Pastor John MacArthur told the city of Los Angeles and the state of California to go fuck themselves. Court judges agreed, and the corrupt city bureaucrats had to shut the fuck up and sit down.

Individual business owners, however, I suspect, don't have a dedicated church membership of 25,000 people standing behind their pastor and telling the government to go fuck themselves.

Or the gym in New jersey, how they got fined and shut down by the city government. But gay bathhouses and sex shops? They can stay open just fine! BLM riots? They don't need to social distance or worry about wearing masks!

Yeah, the hypocrisy and lying and bullshit is all over the place from the government, from the health industry, and from the media. It's gross, sickening, and infuriating.

But God damn you for being skeptical of the mask mandates and the vaccine mandates, right? How dare you believe that there is a fuck load of corruption and bullshit going on here with all of this! You must be a "conspiracy theorist!" You embrace MISINFORMATION! ;D

It makes me wonder why many MORE people aren't screaming and standing against all of this tyranny and bullshit.

Yeah, "Rules for thee, but not for me!" is right, Pat. And it is despicable and an injustice.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 01, 2021, 05:28:15 PM
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?

And it continues to today. Quite literally, because Pelosi's back in the news for insider trading. Which is apparently only illegal for people in the private sector. If you do trades based on the inside knowledge you get because you're a member of Congress, all you have to do is report it within 45 days. Hell, there's a company that takes advantage of those disclosures, and will send you push notifications of all of Pelosi's trades, so you can hitch yourself to the insider trading train (with a lag, because you're just a peasant hanging onto the cow-catcher while she has an entire first class car to herself). The scandal isn't even the insider trading; it's that they're not even bothering to report it like they required to.

And it's all of them. Fuck, Rand Paul, is guilty. And it's not just Congress, it's also the Fed.

These are despicable human beings. All of them, with no exceptions.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 02, 2021, 11:09:34 AM
Yeah, "Rules for thee, but not for me!" is right, Pat. And it is despicable and an injustice.

Standard issue hypocrisy for all of this bullshit. Notice at the G7 earlier in the year and everything subsequently that our elites only pretend to be concerned about covid theatre while the cameras are running? However, they're fine with all their menials (guards, servants, etc) being permanently masked up and maintaining the charade.

They know it's bollocks and are laughing at how compliant all the sheep are following along with it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: deadDMwalking on November 02, 2021, 02:47:06 PM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 02, 2021, 03:10:50 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 02, 2021, 03:37:02 PM
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.
Oh...winning like Charlie Sheen?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 02, 2021, 03:48:56 PM
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' :)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 02, 2021, 06:10:27 PM
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on November 02, 2021, 06:19:29 PM
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)

(https://24.media.tumblr.com/c610ccb8d9adf6b5901d4d51aa67e005/tumblr_mimq9qezIB1r71gs5o1_500.gif)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on November 02, 2021, 07:26:54 PM
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?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 02, 2021, 07:42:02 PM
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?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 02, 2021, 07:44:05 PM
This is what pure evil looks like: https://twitter.com/WFKARS/status/1455246886135386124/photo/1

A totally unnecessary intervention, with unknown risks (but very worrying outcomes so far) for a cohort at zero risk from covid. No upside, all downside.

Fuckers aren't going anywhere near my children with that poison.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 02, 2021, 08:12:59 PM
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)
I keep getting error messages when I try that link. Is it available anywhere else?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on November 02, 2021, 08:18:29 PM
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?

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.

My apologies for making assumptions about your mental health. Physically you're fabulous of course so you have that.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 02, 2021, 08:28:38 PM
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)
I keep getting error messages when I try that link. Is it available anywhere else?
Works fine for me. But if you want to see if it's anywhere else, here's the full citation:

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

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on November 03, 2021, 01:16:58 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 04, 2021, 07:22:02 AM
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?

So they can shift the balance of risk away from vulnerable children with pre-existing chronic conditions, towards perfectly healthy children. Only sick children are at any risk whatsoever from covid. But all children are at risk of adverse reactions from the jab.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 04, 2021, 07:39:26 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 04, 2021, 09:56:43 AM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on November 04, 2021, 07:33:34 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FCMW8IAVIA0mxV0?format=jpg&name=small)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 04, 2021, 07:52:15 PM
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)
I keep getting error messages when I try that link. Is it available anywhere else?
Works fine for me. But if you want to see if it's anywhere else, here's the full citation:

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 04, 2021, 07:54:31 PM
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.

Someone forcing you to work at a company under those regulations?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 04, 2021, 08:23:25 PM
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)
I keep getting error messages when I try that link. Is it available anywhere else?
Works fine for me. But if you want to see if it's anywhere else, here's the full citation:

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on November 04, 2021, 08:53:16 PM
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.

I'm fine sweety pie. I only worry about the mental.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on November 05, 2021, 12:08:08 AM
Someone forcing you to work at a company under those regulations?

Actually yes.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 05, 2021, 12:36:07 AM
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)
I keep getting error messages when I try that link. Is it available anywhere else?
Works fine for me. But if you want to see if it's anywhere else, here's the full citation:

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 05, 2021, 12:37:27 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 05, 2021, 01:24:45 AM
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.
If there was internet back during the Jim Crow era, I'm sure there would have been posters who sounded exactly like you.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on November 05, 2021, 02:40:03 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 05, 2021, 04:33:07 AM
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)
I keep getting error messages when I try that link. Is it available anywhere else?
Works fine for me. But if you want to see if it's anywhere else, here's the full citation:

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.

I'm sure it was just this ONE of their several sub-contractors. There's no reason to be concerned. [/s]
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on November 05, 2021, 06:58:22 AM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DM_Curt on November 05, 2021, 09:34:06 AM
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".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 05, 2021, 10:15:47 AM
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.
No. It is a literal application of physical force.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on November 05, 2021, 10:23:53 AM
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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DM_Curt on November 05, 2021, 12:16:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on November 05, 2021, 12:29:42 PM
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.

I agree. I was being snarky.  :P
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on November 05, 2021, 01:38:46 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 05, 2021, 04:22:24 PM
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.

Precisely, every measure is a calculated form of coercion to make people get jabbed. It's a little more transparent in this country, where they keep moving the deadline of vaccine mandates every time they meet concerted resistance.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 05, 2021, 08:01:22 PM
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."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 05, 2021, 08:27:20 PM
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."
So all the people who called Nazis evil over the last 70 years are the real totalitarians?

That logic seems about as solid as swiss cheese to a neutrino.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 05, 2021, 08:31:30 PM
China's pulled slightly ahead in the race towards coronatotalitarianism: China Central Television had a lawyer who said that people violating quarantine are endangering public safety, which is a crime that carries the death penalty.

Time to step it up a notch, Australia! Death camps when?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 05, 2021, 09:58:38 PM
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.
If there was internet back during the Jim Crow era, I'm sure there would have been posters who sounded exactly like you.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 05, 2021, 10:00:56 PM
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?

There isn't going to be a mandate for small companies. And it's a vax OR a weekly test. It's not divide and conquer - it's pretty standard to apply some business regulations to 100+ employee size. That's one of the bigger bright lines for employment regs.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 05, 2021, 10:02:38 PM
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.
No. It is a literal application of physical force.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 05, 2021, 10:03:39 PM
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.

Or spit in a jar once a week.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 05, 2021, 11:08:25 PM
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.
If there was internet back during the Jim Crow era, I'm sure there would have been posters who sounded exactly like you.

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.
It's not exactly the same, but is the closest equivalent.

I was being nice, but you're literally supporting segregating society into classes based on their medical status, and forcing people to reveal their medical information. This is the same type of division used by the fascists to cement their hold on society in the middle of the last century, by targeting undesirables for exclusion. Read Hannah Arendt's On Origins of Totalitarianism. The resemblances are uncanny.

Once again you're being hostile and irrationally lying about me, because your feelings got hurt when I pointed out you never backed up your false claims.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 05, 2021, 11:09:49 PM
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.
No. It is a literal application of physical force.

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.
Pointing out that government edicts are enforced is a conspiracy theory?

manwut
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 05, 2021, 11:59:02 PM
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.
If there was internet back during the Jim Crow era, I'm sure there would have been posters who sounded exactly like you.

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.
It's not exactly the same, but is the closest equivalent.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 06, 2021, 12:30:34 AM
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.
If there was internet back during the Jim Crow era, I'm sure there would have been posters who sounded exactly like you.

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.
It's not exactly the same, but is the closest equivalent.

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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on November 06, 2021, 01:43:01 AM
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.
No. It is a literal application of physical force.

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.
Pointing out that government edicts are enforced is a conspiracy theory?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 06, 2021, 02:21:15 AM
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.
No. It is a literal application of physical force.

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.
Pointing out that government edicts are enforced is a conspiracy theory?

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.
That's not an argument, that's just Mistwell screeching because of hurt fee fees.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on November 06, 2021, 06:19:37 AM
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

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on November 06, 2021, 10:02:52 AM
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

I believe that we are on the cusp of what the founders envisioned as a need to disintegrate existing government and start over.  Actually, I'm betting that they would have done it already if they were still around...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on November 06, 2021, 08:09:19 PM
I do agree that nobody should be forced to get vaccinated. I may think that people should get vaccinated but forcing anybody to have something invasive is wrong.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on November 06, 2021, 08:26:05 PM
The US 5th circuit court has issued an emergency block of the OSHA mandate.
They will decide by Nov. 8th whether to make it a permanent injunction pending the resolution of the
 suit filed on Nov. 5th by Texas, Utah, Louisiana, many employers, etc.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 06, 2021, 08:37:32 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on November 06, 2021, 09:57:03 PM
I know people that have seriously suffered because of COVID (some died even). I am jabbed, my family is jabbed, and I can support (some) people getting jabbed).

But it is not in any way a conspiracy theory the basic fact that government almost never gives away power willingly.

Coercion is softer force: Its still force.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 07, 2021, 12:10:50 AM
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.

'My body, my choice'? Dead.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on November 07, 2021, 08:28:29 AM
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.

'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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 07, 2021, 08:34:38 AM
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.

'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.
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'.

You can't have both. Either women (and by extension, people) have that penumbral right to privacy, in which case the mandate is illegitimate; or the mandate is legitimate in which case Roe vs Wade is overturned.

So what's it gonna be, leftards and Branch Covidians? Mandate, or abortions? I look forward to this Sophie's Choice.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on November 07, 2021, 10:32:59 AM
... disintegrate existing government and start over...

Restoration is clearly necessary, but I think it's a huge cope expecting it to come about (esp. through actual conflict).
Most of the people who you would rely on to actually carry out such an act are (1) obese or (2) unwilling to make even basic sacrifices like turning off the NFL or CoD game.

So what's it gonna be, leftards and Branch Covidians? Mandate, or abortions? I look forward to this Sophie's Choice.

Roe v. Wade was a beyond-awful decision that invented garbage reasoning to get whatever the ruling class wanted. The exact same thing will happen here. The only principle that will be followed is that the ruling class will use their power to manipulate & intimidate ass-lickers into supporting whatever agenda they desire.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 07, 2021, 10:59:43 AM
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.
If there was internet back during the Jim Crow era, I'm sure there would have been posters who sounded exactly like you.

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.
It's not exactly the same, but is the closest equivalent.

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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on November 07, 2021, 12:56:24 PM
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.
If there was internet back during the Jim Crow era, I'm sure there would have been posters who sounded exactly like you.

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.
It's not exactly the same, but is the closest equivalent.

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.
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.

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, moron, the federal mandates (on government and contractors) have no provisions for weekly testing.  You get the jab or lose your job.  Period.  That's not spitting in a tube; it's segregation based on religion, medical status, or personal health history, depending on why someone can't take the shot.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on November 07, 2021, 01:18:10 PM
Executive Order on Ensuring Adequate COVID Safety Protocols for Federal Contractors:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/09/09/executive-order-on-ensuring-adequate-covid-safety-protocols-for-federal-contractors/

I saw nothing in it for any exemptions. However...

https://www.saferfederalworkforce.gov/faq/vaccinations/

Q: Are there exceptions to the requirement for all employees to be fully vaccinated?

A: Federal employees must be fully vaccinated other than in limited circumstances where the law requires an exception. In particular, an agency may be required to provide a reasonable accommodation to employees who communicate to the agency that they are not vaccinated against COVID-19 because of a disability or because of a sincerely held religious belief, practice, or observance. Determining whether an exception is legally required will include consideration of factors such as the basis for the claim; the nature of the employee’s job responsibilities; and the reasonably foreseeable effects on the agency’s operations, including protecting other agency employees and the public from COVID-19. Because such assessments will be fact- and context-dependent, agencies are encouraged to consult their offices of general counsel with questions related to assessing and implementing any such requested accommodations.

So it looks to me like there is a "...sincerely held religious belief, practice, or observance" exception. Of course, what will count as legally required will likely be very narrow (answer to question 5):

"In some cases, the nature of the employee’s job may be such that an agency determines that no safety protocol other than vaccination is adequate. In such circumstances, the agency may deny the requested accommodation."


If you get an exemption, you will most likely have to get periodically tested; I am guessing at your expense.
 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 07, 2021, 03:04:28 PM
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.

Aren't you good, little, compliant Citizen Units! I'm sure you'll get excellent Social Credit scores for your submission to authority.

My kids have never been tested, never been masked and won't be jabbed. My eldest is exempt from muzzles and tests at secondary school. Because we, her parents, said so.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 07, 2021, 07:10:54 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on November 08, 2021, 08:45:03 PM
What's your over/under on # of shots? To keep it simple, lets only consider 18+ year-olds. And we will ignore the J&J vaccine. So that puts the current count at either 2 or 3, depending on whether your employer is requiring boosters.

I am setting the line at 9.5 (3 + two boosters a year until after the 2024 election) . I will take the under at 9, as I am betting that the Ds will lose to the Rs in 2024. But then the conventional wisdom was that the bad orange man had no chance of winning, so one never knows.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 09, 2021, 12:12:42 PM
(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?

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on November 09, 2021, 02:52:36 PM
(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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on November 09, 2021, 05:39:27 PM
Dr Peter Doshi, on Capitol Hill last week…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8ShvWc0_kw

"How would you feel about mandating COVID vaccines if we didn't call them vaccines? What if these injections were called drugs instead? So here's the scenario, we have this drug, and we have evidence that it doesn't prevent infection nor does it stop viral transmission. But the drug is understood to reduce your risk of becoming very sick and dying of COVID. Would you take a dose of this drug every six months or so for possibly the rest of your life, if that's what it took for the drug to stay effective? Would not just take this drug yourself, but support regulations mandating that everybody else around you take this drug?"

"The point is, just because we call it a vaccine, doesn't mean we should assume these new products are just like all other childhood vaccines which get mandate."


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 09, 2021, 05:47:43 PM
Where is her citation to the source for the 80% number?

We don't need evidence, Comrade, just believe!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DM_Curt on November 09, 2021, 06:37:13 PM
Where is her citation to the source for the 80% number?

We don't need evidence, Comrade, just believe!
The Checkmark is Truth! The Checkmark is Power!

Believe in The Power Of The Checkmark! (from the makers of justtrustmebro dot com)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 10, 2021, 05:11:32 AM
UK official stats don't paint a flattering picture of the effectiveness of the jabs, not even when they try to obfuscate by only showing the last month: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1031157/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-44.pdf

See Table 4 as usual, the majority of deaths are double-jabbed. That proportion increases every time they release the report, almost as though they do absolutely fuck all. I mean I'm sure they would have been even dead-er if they hadn't been jabbed!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on November 17, 2021, 05:46:48 PM
Pfizer's own 6-month (actually 4-month, since Pfizer aborted it early) trial last year was falsified to suppress excess deaths in the injected cohort.

All Cause MortalityDeaths among InjectedDeaths among Uninjected
Falsified Data1514
Actual Data2117

Data disclosed by the FDA (https://www.fda.gov/media/151733/download) revealed what we must assume are the true figures.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 18, 2021, 08:06:13 AM
Awkward: https://www.cato.org/working-paper/evidence-community-cloth-face-masking-limit-spread-sars-cov-2-critical-review#

Facemasks do fuck all. Great device for virtue signalling your compliance to authoritarians, though.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on November 20, 2021, 01:01:01 PM
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

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 20, 2021, 01:09:03 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 20, 2021, 02:41:49 PM
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.

Scott Alexander put together an interesting article about Ivermectin and parasites.

https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-than-you-wanted

"Treatment of worm infections might reduce the negative effect of COVID-19! And ivermectin is a deworming drug! You can see where this is going…"
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on November 20, 2021, 04:29:17 PM
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.

Not to mention the lack of rampant obesity and diabetes.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 20, 2021, 06:08:41 PM
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".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on November 20, 2021, 06:21:20 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 20, 2021, 06:31:21 PM
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.

Just wait until your vaccination rates reach ours. Note Israel, Gibraltar and all the other highly-vaccinated nations follow the exact same pattern the UK does.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on November 20, 2021, 08:15:41 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 21, 2021, 06:58:07 AM
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 more people who are jabbed, the more apparent it will be that their immune systems have been fucked, with the consequences in hospitalisation and death of those apparently "vaccinated".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 21, 2021, 07:22:17 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 21, 2021, 08:53:47 AM
The deepest irony imaginable: our health and immune system is now based on microtransactions.

Not mine.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on November 21, 2021, 10:13:56 AM
Me neither.  I'm just worried about my wife who bent the knee in the hopes she could travel to the US (spoiler alert she wasn't allowed to travel to the US).

Also reading up on homeschooling in preparation for the eventual vaccine mandates for children.  That's the day I leave the finance industry and become mister mom.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on November 22, 2021, 05:44:22 PM
Death rates for the under 60s by vaccination status in the UK, according to official government statistics:
--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".
It's possible that those who choose to be unvaxxed are younger and healthier.
It would help if the mean ages of both groups were shown.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on November 26, 2021, 01:15:36 PM
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.



Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on November 26, 2021, 01:34:59 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 26, 2021, 01:58:34 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on November 26, 2021, 03:57:08 PM
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.

You are correct.  It's well known that history only started when the first Harry Potter book was published.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Neoplatonist1 on November 26, 2021, 04:58:17 PM
A fresh take: number of life-years cost by COVID-19 versus life-years cost by lockdown:

Quote
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.

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/)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 26, 2021, 06:53:57 PM
Austria has been in strict lockdown for almost a week. Meanwhile two days ago, this was their political elite: https://twitter.com/BernieSpofforth/status/1464292714485362697

It's all about public health, though...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on November 26, 2021, 08:32:06 PM
It is never going to end.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 26, 2021, 08:48:06 PM
It is never going to end.
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on November 26, 2021, 09:00:19 PM
It is never going to end.
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.
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.

Followed by Omega Mu...   :)

Btw, I believe that I am going to lose my #-of-local-mask-mandates "bet". I am now revising it to we will be wearing masks until our Dear Leader is voted out. Not a big fan of the Rs, but the Ds are fucking clown shoes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1Dmj1OArD0

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on November 26, 2021, 10:13:29 PM
Big bad Omicron is on the loose!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on November 26, 2021, 11:32:08 PM
Big bad Omicron is on the loose!
The next wave of the virus will remake Megatron into Galvatron!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 27, 2021, 12:54:35 PM
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.

(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/814f3d67b394d8eb68a04410a59a7b26b78a99dbff3d63a27f13f6e69cb54e4b.jpg?w=600&h=555)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Neoplatonist1 on November 27, 2021, 05:23:27 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 27, 2021, 05:27:42 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on November 27, 2021, 05:50:51 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 27, 2021, 06:07:47 PM
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.

I'd be perfectly happy with that situation, but the authoritarian cunts in government and their supporting Karens can't possibly allow people to make their own choices and not join them in their fear delusion.

This is the unfortunate truth that prevented my own government joining the rest of Europe in lockdowns:

(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b28462d49d30ee2151f29668020504095fbff2a851ff56657c362bb47cee8ed2.jpg?w=600&h=83)

Even by their own bullshit, confected stats, they can't show a worsening situation that would justify tightening restrictions. So they hope to have appropriately massaged them in three weeks time.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on November 27, 2021, 06:42:26 PM
In Australia we're basically at 90% vaccination nationally. So here, I say let it rip.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Neoplatonist1 on November 27, 2021, 07:22:35 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 27, 2021, 07:25:01 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Neoplatonist1 on November 27, 2021, 07:51:58 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 27, 2021, 07:53:46 PM
Hmm. Do you eschew the regular influenza vaccine as well?

Pointless waste of time and not a vaccine. Harmless, but useless. Never had it, never seen any need.

I should note I am fully up to date with all my childhood vaccinations (we have many fewer vaccines on our "necessary" list in the UK than you do in the US), as are my children. I voluntarily got the hep B vaccine. I'm not an "anti-vaxxer".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on November 27, 2021, 09:10:02 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Neoplatonist1 on November 27, 2021, 09:39:50 PM
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/)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on November 27, 2021, 09:47:50 PM
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?


I am an anti-social fuck-wad, so I am always social distancing.

Covid isn't notionally spread by touch. So other than normal hand washing, I would put it into the hygiene theater category. 

Other than a properly-fitted, properly-worn, clean, N-95 or a respirator (half or full-face), a hard NO.

One good thing that has come out of this is that people (at least where I work) have stopped coming into work when they are sick. That's something that I have tried to be mindful of over my career.

Can anyone point me to where contract-tracing did fuck-all anything? If not, then "bullshit" it is.

I could see situations where testing is appropriate. But the current testing is bollocks. Moreover, it begs the question of why stop at covid? For example, let's say you want to visit your granny in the nursing home. So you get tested for covid, 'cause you don't want to be killing granny. But what about flu, pneumonia, etc. that could also kill granny?

All that said, I would let everyone make their own choices. You want to take the vaccine and booster ad nauseum, wear two masks, wear a 3' radius QE collar, get tested every week, and log in with the state everywhere you go, have at it.

YMMV.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on November 27, 2021, 09:54:58 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on November 27, 2021, 10:12:05 PM
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/)
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.

Grounding airplanes might slow the spread of new strains, but wouldn't solve the fundamental problem: The US, and probably much of the world, had widespread community spread in late 2019, long before the pandemic was recognized as a pandemic. Border controls don't work when you have invisible networks of people spreading the disease, and contact tracing only works when there are a very limited number of cases. Once you have community spread (cases popping up that you can't trace back to previous known cases), contact tracing is pointless except as a monitoring tool.

And curiously, there have been no superspreader events on airplanes. While airplanes have been a vector to bring infected people into new areas where they can start spreading the disease once they debark, they haven't been spreading the disease to other people on the airplanes. The ventilation systems and directed air really seem to work.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on November 28, 2021, 12:29:50 AM
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/)

I was under the impression that they tried to stop air travel already but gave up because of the inherent racism.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 28, 2021, 06:32:57 AM
The case of the Diamond Princess right at the start of the "pandemic" burst the notion that this is some hyper-virulent plague we should be terrified of.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_on_Diamond_Princess

Long before jabs or any so-called infection control measures, hardly anyone was infected, a tiny number died and most weren't even that ill.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 28, 2021, 12:57:03 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on November 28, 2021, 01:24:39 PM
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.

Don’t worry bud, if it doesn’t go away, we sure will.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on November 28, 2021, 05:13:53 PM
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."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on November 28, 2021, 06:41:37 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 28, 2021, 07:13:02 PM
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.

Aw, yeah!

(https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/f/73b7bdcb-d396-4147-8b43-bc4d7970776a/dc49s74-d63a565c-6ab2-4bb0-bfd5-3d4481df4048.jpg/v1/fill/w_600,h_929,q_75,strp/omega_supreme_by_dan_the_artguy_dc49s74-fullview.jpg?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.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.zoqQsLxKbYWXP8tH3DWFJIJ_O5eNIEwbDkvFe8lLBZ0)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 28, 2021, 07:13:44 PM
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."

A fan of Return of the Sith, I see!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on November 29, 2021, 12:38:09 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on November 30, 2021, 06:37:27 PM
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.

 BROUGHT TO YOU BY PHIZER!!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 01, 2021, 07:34:36 AM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 01, 2021, 10:39:38 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 01, 2021, 04:23:13 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 02, 2021, 06:17:29 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 02, 2021, 06:24:00 AM
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 02, 2021, 06:37:05 AM
And the sick (e.g. the sugar, the pressure, auto-immune conditions, cancer).

See "people with broken immune systems". Either way, they are a tiny minority.

No one can help being old, but fatties have no excuse. We've known for two years now that being overweight significantly impacts your risk factor, that's more than enough time to get a grip of your eating and activity choices and sort yourself out.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on December 02, 2021, 07:13:43 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 02, 2021, 07:16:52 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 02, 2021, 07:56:05 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: ThatChrisGuy on December 02, 2021, 12:16:16 PM
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.

I somewhat doubt Donald Trump putting black people in concentration camps would have gone over well.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on December 02, 2021, 01:21:46 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 02, 2021, 01:36:58 PM
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?
Tell us more about your hatred of the Australian natives.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 02, 2021, 01:54:29 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 02, 2021, 01:57:27 PM
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?

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.

True.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on December 02, 2021, 02:09:21 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 02, 2021, 02:48:56 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 02, 2021, 03:01:14 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 02, 2021, 03:15:42 PM
"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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 02, 2021, 03:23:23 PM
"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.

I wonder how that whole "let's give up our firearms" is working out for them...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 02, 2021, 03:29:37 PM
"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.

It's for your own safety dude, you wouldn't want to get lost on the Australian wilderness. /S
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 02, 2021, 03:51:48 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on December 02, 2021, 03:56:33 PM
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?

  Define actual risk.  I would have serious concerns if it was more than 1 percent of cases of healthy people.  I think that would create the idea of risk for me.  I think the total case fatality rate is under 2 percent, and lots of those are cases of died *with covid*.  Not that I do not doubt for a second that a case of covid certainly hurried the grim reaper along for a person who had 6 months to live from cancer, it is not always the best metric for just how dangerous the infection is or is not.   
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 02, 2021, 04:03:11 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 02, 2021, 04:19:32 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 02, 2021, 04:39:04 PM
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.

That makes me FEEL much safer, thank God the Fascist Australian Government is on the case, you wouldn't want to live ina hellhole like México wehre the commie El Presidente already said there'll be no Vaccine mandates!

Brrrrrr, I tremble just to imagine having all that freedom and having to be responsible for MY own health!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on December 02, 2021, 04:44:17 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 02, 2021, 04:45:31 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on December 02, 2021, 04:47:38 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 02, 2021, 04:50:16 PM
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. There is no political "opposition", because they were all bought, too. The judiciary are corrupt as fuck, and in on it. Wake the fuck up.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on December 02, 2021, 04:52:35 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 02, 2021, 04:54:39 PM
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

Why would the corporate media report on this? It goes against their narrative and desired result. See the reports of white men getting shot by police in the USA, or the anti-semitism ranpant between their black population, and lets not forget the "Asian" hatred the same population shows.

Where are the articles?

Who is really talking about the kungflu being made in a lab in Wuhan?

Radio silence because it might hurt their masters in the CCP.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 02, 2021, 04:55:43 PM
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.
 

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 02, 2021, 04:56:53 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 02, 2021, 04:58:37 PM
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.

But if they released THAT data then how would they scare most of the population into demanding their rights and freedoms be taken away?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on December 02, 2021, 05:01:18 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 02, 2021, 05:08:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 02, 2021, 05:19:05 PM
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.

You never see a huge deal, because you're a fucking moron who can't see further than his own nose.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 02, 2021, 05:38:13 PM
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.

So he stoped claiming it was "Voluntary" and now is arguing for the fascistic concentration camps?

So it wasn't just denial, but he honestly doesn't see anything wrong with locking people up against their will for a not really that dangerous virus...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 02, 2021, 05:54:32 PM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 02, 2021, 06:31:19 PM
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!

Protect the NHS!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 02, 2021, 06:40:08 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on December 02, 2021, 07:22:37 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 02, 2021, 07:27:56 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on December 02, 2021, 07:35:50 PM
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…
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 02, 2021, 07:48:19 PM
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.

Men can get pretty stupid when it comes to pussy. That's why grandmas can sell their used panties online and pretend they're some kind of hot barely legal chick by grabbing some rando internet porn for their photos.
Which is what all this "hot quarantine chicks!" thing makes me think of.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 02, 2021, 08:12:54 PM
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…

"You can't criticize the Chinese Government for genociding the Huygur! It's their culture!"

Fuck that noise, human rights are universal, and their government is fucking them in the ass because they were stupid enough to disarm themselves.

It's not a good look on the fascists puting people on concentration camps, I'll keep on criticizing them because, ironically, our El Presidente (the one everybody keeps crying wants to be a dictator) turned out more pro freedom than most European leaders, any "Democrat" politician in the USA and the government of Pierre Trudeau's wife's son put together.

And this includes the fucking "I'm a conservative!" tories, our "right wing" parties and most of the Spanish politicians too.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 02, 2021, 09:34:36 PM
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.

Thanks for answering a question I didn't ask.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 02, 2021, 09:37:21 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 02, 2021, 09:38:39 PM
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?

You have my attention.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 02, 2021, 09:41:29 PM
Biden orders "free" covid tests for all (https://news.trust.org/item/20211202202255-46xyj) (except Pat, who has to pay through the nose).

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 02, 2021, 09:48:59 PM
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…

We here in the west?

Since when is Australia not in the west?   :o

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 02, 2021, 09:58:26 PM
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.

You are correct, I mis-read the question.

The risk of covid to people outside of those categories is invariant with respect to the number of people in those categories that that are hospitalized, ICUed, or die.

Not sure where you are going with this.

And what do you mean by "actual risk"? Covid is an "actual risk" to everyone, but it is a relatively small risk to young healthy people compared to its risk to old sick people.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 03, 2021, 02:20:03 AM
Biden orders "free" covid tests for all (https://news.trust.org/item/20211202202255-46xyj) (except Pat, who has to pay through the nose).

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 03, 2021, 02:29:12 AM
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!"
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 03, 2021, 08:53:33 AM
Amazing how many people here seem to be getting aroused at the prospect of putting people in camps.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 03, 2021, 10:02:22 AM
Spot the "pandemic":

(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/82a4706b2fe0356b5d1dbdb4d6822936d19f3bc402ff4e92da6169e460cad126.png?w=600&h=306)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 03, 2021, 10:05:11 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on December 03, 2021, 10:09:17 AM

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.

Well I mean we're in a society where telling someone to lose weight is being pushed as a hate crime.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 03, 2021, 10:09:39 AM
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.
Exactly. I don't remember all these champions of public health demanding we lock down in the 2017/18 flu season.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 03, 2021, 10:20:34 AM
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.
Exactly. I don't remember all these champions of public health demanding we lock down in the 2017/18 flu season.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 03, 2021, 10:24:51 AM
Welp, Germany has locked down the 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?

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 03, 2021, 10:31:08 AM
The view from an Australian gulag: https://twitter.com/_evelynrae/status/1466712921266814977 (https://twitter.com/_evelynrae/status/1466712921266814977)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 03, 2021, 10:39:37 AM
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.
Exactly. I don't remember all these champions of public health demanding we lock down in the 2017/18 flu season.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 03, 2021, 11:09:06 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 03, 2021, 11:15:09 AM
Welp, Germany has locked down the 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?


The 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.

(https://gunfreezone.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/51267703-10268907-image-a-8_1638474896222.jpg)

(https://gunfreezone.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/266627137-646x431-1.jpg)

(https://gunfreezone.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/260475013-1-634x431-1.jpg)

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 03, 2021, 11:22:31 AM
And to think Remaincunts would ridicule Brexiteers for calling the EU the 4th Reich...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on December 03, 2021, 12:03:53 PM
Flu disappearance is due to being outcompeted in the same niche as Sars-Cov-2. When flu returned to India (as well as other places, such as FL) it's an indication of herd immunity (through natural immune response).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: King Tyranno on December 03, 2021, 12:09:41 PM
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.

They know you're right. They just don't like you pointing it out because it interferes with their doctrine.

Also I still haven't seen anything that convinced me that voting Brexit was a bad thing. And lots of things from the EU that have convinced me I made the right choice to vote Brexit.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 03, 2021, 12:19:10 PM
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?

Oh wait.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: King Tyranno on December 03, 2021, 12:23:55 PM
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?

Oh wait.

You're almost there. Keep going.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 03, 2021, 12:27:02 PM
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:

Quote
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

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 03, 2021, 12:39:34 PM
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?

Oh wait.

You're almost there. Keep going.
Almost where? I Insistonusingmyprivatedefinitionsforeverythinginsteadofacceptinghowwordsareusedbyeveryonelseland?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 03, 2021, 12:41:16 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 03, 2021, 01:02:42 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 03, 2021, 01:10:41 PM
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.
No, it's not. Do a little more research.

https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/Typhus.aspx
Quote
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 03, 2021, 02:19:18 PM
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.aspx
Quote
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.

So putting this together with the Texas health report I mentioned earlier,

Quote
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

it seems like typhus is overall almost extinct, but it is still endemic in two counties in California, plus five or more counties in Texas, and likely in some areas of Hawaii.

You also cited bubonic plague, and I did find a map of plague risk areas in the U.S.:

(https://patch.com/img/cdn/users/22859473/2015/12/raw/20151256842448a9fe5.jpg?width=726)
Source: https://patch.com/california/culvercity/where-expect-plague-united-states-2016-study

The concentration areas are in Arizona, New Mexico, and Colorado - along with the northern border of California with Oregon and Utah. I do think this suggests we need to do a better job with public health and disease nationally.

Neither of these singles out California, though.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 03, 2021, 03:22:51 PM
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:

Quote
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

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.

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.

So comparing that with a shithole country on it's shitiest communities where people live in dirt floor "houses" and have no clean water seems a bit dishonest to me.

Further more, from the second link:

Quote
"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."

Sources:

https://old.com.fundacionio.es/2020/06/22/junio-2020-fiebre-tifoidea-en-mexico-destacan-tamaulipas-y-sinaloa/ (https://old.com.fundacionio.es/2020/06/22/junio-2020-fiebre-tifoidea-en-mexico-destacan-tamaulipas-y-sinaloa/)

http://clinicadeviajero.unam.mx/?p=3237 (http://clinicadeviajero.unam.mx/?p=3237)

While in California they are talking of a different type of Typhus, source:

http://www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/acd/vectortyphus.htm (http://www.publichealth.lacounty.gov/acd/vectortyphus.htm)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 03, 2021, 03:29:59 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 03, 2021, 03:41:51 PM
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.

Maybe because we don't have such a homless population even in the cities? Nor the feces in the sidewalks* or the rat problem?

*Except for the few homless that do shit wherever and the assholes that don't pick up their dog's feces.

But then again we don't have the very compassionate leftists that instead of allowing lower cost housing allow tent cities and give away "free" hypodermics so the homless can shoot up their drugs. Not even our current El Presidente and the governor of México City (Yes, that's the name of the state, it's retarded) who are both fecking woke commies have gone that low.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 03, 2021, 04:34:40 PM
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?

Everyone knows that when you get the tetanus vaccination that you can still get tetanus.

It says it right there on the data sheet.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 03, 2021, 04:53:50 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 03, 2021, 05:08:31 PM
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.
Good catch, I didn't even look at the legend on Kim's map.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 03, 2021, 05:20:39 PM
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.

I would love to see the data used to make that map, I can't find ANY news of black plague in México. Doesn't mean they don't exist, just I haven't been able to find them.

It's not in the PDF, it doesn't give data per country/year and I would also love to see WHERE in México those cases were.

Wonder if they aren't also mostly in  places where people "live" in dirt floor "houses" where the dog/cat can leavw some fleas that later will bite a human?

In my GreatUncle's house in Campeche this was the case, dirt floor, dogs, hammocks, yours trully bitten by fecking fleas. Still I got nothing but the sting and the rash, no disease connected with it and got bitten several times.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 03, 2021, 05:22:37 PM
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.
Good catch, I didn't even look at the legend on Kim's map.

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.

The new map he posted is from 2011, I can't find any confirmation elsewhere mentioning Black Plague in México, think the most recent is from beginings of the 20th century.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 03, 2021, 05:37:30 PM
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.

As far as I can see from search, there was one human plague case in California in 2020 which was the first in five years. More recently, there was one in Colorado and one in Wyoming as well.

(Aug 2020) https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/california-confirms-first-human-case-bubonic-plague-5-years-what-n1237306
(July 2021) https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/07/23/colorado-plague-child-death-reported-diseased-animals-found/8073521002/
(Sep 2021) https://www.ktvq.com/news/local-news/wyoming-reports-rare-case-of-human-pneumonic-plague


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:

2016: Texas 364, California 103
2017: Texas 519, California 101
2018: Texas 738, California 174
2019: Texas 591, California 145
2020: Texas ??, California 137
2021: Texas ??, California 71

The numbers for Texas are from this report: https://www.dshs.texas.gov/IDCU/disease/typhus/Typhus-2008-2019.pdf

The Texas cases follow a similar pattern peaking in 2018 and decreasing in 2019.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 03, 2021, 05:42:08 PM
accidental double-post
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 03, 2021, 07:17:48 PM
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.
 
You're being deliberately obtuse and keep bringing up Texas in an attempt at deflection.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 03, 2021, 10:04:23 PM
Prior infection may not offer good protection against Omicron infection. (https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-africa-south-africa-2e44bbbd4f6e46447a17638580647a52)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on December 03, 2021, 10:24:03 PM
Just read an interesting paper claiming that UK ONS Data is Systemically Erroneous (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356756711_Latest_statistics_on_England_mortality_data_suggest_systematic_mis-categorisation_of_vaccine_status_and_uncertain_effectiveness_of_Covid-19_vaccination)

Quote
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 03, 2021, 11:06:31 PM
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.

I think for assessing any outbreak, it's important to have context of other outbreaks, so one can compare and contrast - hence my comparison of California and Texas. As I understand it, you're implying that the typhus cases in California are more concentrated and thus more dangerous than in other states. Can you suggest any links that show this? I don't see data to suggest that the cases are less concentrated in Texas. Like any infectious disease, the cases will tend to cluster. Here's a map of Texas outbreaks with numbers:

(https://dshs.texas.gov/uploadedImages/Content/Prevention_and_Preparedness/IDCU/disease/murine_typhus/Flea-borne%20Typhus2.jpg)

In Texas, the highest concentration is in Hidalgo County, while in California the highest concentration is in Los Angeles county. From the county data:

https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/CDPH%20Document%20Library/Flea-borneTyphusCaseCounts.pdf
https://www.dshs.texas.gov/IDCU/disease/typhus/Typhus-2008-2019.pdf

In 2018 (the peak in both states), there were 152 cases within Hidalgo County TX, and 149 cases in Los Angeles county. That's roughly equal total numbers - but Hidalgo County is one-third the geographical area of Los Angeles county (4,100km3 vs 12,310km3).

When I search, I see more news reports about Los Angeles typhus cases - but I think that's media bias rather than medical reality.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 03, 2021, 11:43:35 PM
Prior infection may not offer good protection against Omicron infection. (https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-africa-south-africa-2e44bbbd4f6e46447a17638580647a52)

From your link:
Quote
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.

I swear I'm terrified and just resisting demanding my government locks ups 14 days to slow the spread by the skin of my teeth. Really, I'm literally shaking  ::)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 04, 2021, 02:15:01 AM
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.

On the other hand, early reports suggest it may be less deadly. Christian Lindmeier, spokesperson of the WHO, said they have "not seen reports of Omicron-related deaths". Which is very good news, and perfectly in line with expectations. Zoonotic viruses are often unusually deadly immediately after they jump from animals to humans, but become progressively less deadly (though more transmissible) as new variants emerge and become the dominant strain.

We won't be sure for a couple weeks, though.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 04, 2021, 05:46:21 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 04, 2021, 05:58:32 AM
I find it incredible that anyone believes bullshit like this. This in the news today: https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/health/covid-coronavirus-hospital-aled-davies-22305317

With the headline "Young man with clean bill of health left 'hours from death' in hospital after catching Covid".

Look at the state of him:

(https://i2-prod.walesonline.co.uk/incoming/article22308156.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/0_MSR_MAI_291121aled_04.jpg)

Did the 'rona give him that belly? He was also double-jabbed, so thought he was safe. Great protection offered there!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 04, 2021, 06:06:20 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 04, 2021, 06:08:40 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 04, 2021, 06:14:24 AM
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?

It's not even "new", they've known about it for a year.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 04, 2021, 06:15:43 AM
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?

It's not even "new", they've known about it for a year.
O RLY
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 04, 2021, 06:54:04 AM
Prior infection may not offer good protection against Omicron infection. (https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-africa-south-africa-2e44bbbd4f6e46447a17638580647a52)

Assuming that is correct, it is of no surprise. Similar to having the flu or a cold one year do not protect you against having the flu or a cold the next year.

It will be interesting to see how the vaccines do again Omicron, et al.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 04, 2021, 01:04:48 PM
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?

It's not even "new", they've known about it for a year.
O RLY

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 04, 2021, 01:57:07 PM
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?

It's not even "new", they've known about it for a year.
O RLY

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on December 04, 2021, 08:31:47 PM
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".

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 05, 2021, 09:03:18 AM
You're going to love wearing a mask forever...
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 05, 2021, 10:11:25 AM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 05, 2021, 11:29:11 AM
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?

"The better to control you with, my dear",
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 05, 2021, 11:32:54 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 05, 2021, 11:51:50 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 05, 2021, 12:06:57 PM
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.

I didn't get covid, even when one of the neighborgs in the building died from it (diabetic). Or if I got it I didn't notice any sympthoms (is that the correct spelling?) so I wouldn't know, Due to the lockdowns, etc I didn't even get a cold since the start of it.

But I got a cold before the pandemic broke (officially, since we don't really know when the virus escaped from the lab) that sent me to bed for about 3 days. Which isn't rare for me, I don't really get colds but 1 maybe 2 times a year but when I get it boy do I get it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 05, 2021, 12:50:29 PM
You're going to love wearing a mask forever...
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.
Because if you don't, you're attacking SCIENCE!

(/sarc)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on December 05, 2021, 01:05:49 PM
Just want to say I kinda dig the mask. I see it as a fashion accessory. Even better on winter.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 05, 2021, 01:35:25 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 05, 2021, 02:14:47 PM
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.

This.

There is so much that is correct about the *idea* of wearing masks or social distancing - specifically as source control by *known* infected. The problem is two-fold:

1. Execution - who wears a properly-fitted mask correctly, with a tight-enough weave?  Who takes the mask they've been wearing for three days in a row, swarming with bacteria or virii, and continues to wear it thinking they're protected or protecting others?

2. Inconsiderate scumfucks who (even before covid) would go out and about coughing, hacking, sneezing, with hands covered in virii touching everything.

Masks as protection by the uninfected is dubious at best.

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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 05, 2021, 02:46:32 PM
Just want to say I kinda dig the mask. I see it as a fashion accessory. Even better on winter.

That is your culture.  Western people dont really need to understand.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 05, 2021, 05:58:48 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 05, 2021, 06:37:43 PM
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?

I think it's just a matter of the maths - there are so many jabbed in the UK, that they'll be the majority of those hospitalized.  You need to look at total QTY of infected and then % of those that are hospitalized as a ratio of jabbed vs. not jabbed. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on December 05, 2021, 07:00:18 PM
Germany to force vaccinate?  Couldn't resist this meme.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FF4HAUDWQAorgBf?format=jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 05, 2021, 10:05:49 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2021, 12:09:33 AM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 06, 2021, 06:15:49 AM
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?

Oh, you think logic matters in the official narrative? The answer to every question asked of them is "more jabs". They've been lying out of both sides of their mouths, telling the jabbed that they need a booster because two jabs isn't enough, even while telling the unjabbed that they will only be "protected" if they get jabbed.

I'm not the inconsistent one, you moron, the official narrative is.

Prior infection offers the same protection it always did against all the variants - better than the anemic and useless response of the jabs. Not that it really matters because Omicron is even more trivial than Delta was. You get over it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 06, 2021, 06:16:21 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 06, 2021, 06:16:55 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on December 06, 2021, 07:39:27 AM
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.

Ancient Greece, Rome, Mayans. All these great empires collapsed. Slowly but surely, we seen to be going in the same route. This time tough we may be looking at an unavoidable global collapse. This all points to the Anunnaki and the Bible.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 06, 2021, 10:29:27 AM
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2021, 10:57:35 AM
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.

Now listen here you two bigots! If the price of the stocks of Pfizer, etc. (except Moderna, developing and producing for 2 years non-profit? Puagh!) crashes that causes REAL WORLD HARM! Won't somebody think of the stock holders!? And what about the people working in media and fact checking organizations! You don't hate black people do you?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2021, 10:59:01 AM
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)

Just like, somehow the virus is responsible for the economic downturn world wide. Except China who didn't destroy their economy. They just welded people inside their homes to die in Wuhan.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2021, 03:30:12 PM
Womp, womp.

Quote

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

https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1466845934428504072 (https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1466845934428504072)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on December 06, 2021, 04:26:43 PM
Womp, womp.

https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1466845934428504072 (https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1466845934428504072)

Nice!

(Dude, you might want to add to your post.  Pundit doesn't like blind links...)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 06, 2021, 11:34:52 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FF7ZlHJXMAErnaw?format=jpg&name=small)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FF9Vz7-XoAswMux?format=jpg&name=small)

I'm sure this is all just a coincidence. If it were Covid, they'd be beating that drum like Animal.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 07, 2021, 09:34:39 AM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 07, 2021, 07:55:27 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 07, 2021, 08:12:06 PM
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 07, 2021, 08:25:08 PM
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)

Yep - those are the 89 unproductive % propped up by the other 11...  To keep them is of no benefit.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on December 07, 2021, 09:22:20 PM
89% of NYC adults have had at least one dose.  (https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data-vaccines.page)

How much do you feel these statistics are fake?
I'm pretty confident the statistics are overstated by at least 10%, probably more. We already know Blacks & Hispanics weren't particularly thrilled with the shot and I can't imagine these velvet-glove-steel-hand tactics have won any hearts and minds. Faking the data on the individual side is pretty easy, and there are strong incentives. Similarly, faking the data on the government side is also pretty easy, and there are strong incentives.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 08, 2021, 05:51:23 AM
Rumours that we'll be moving to "Plan B" tomorrow - meaning lockdown and vaccine passports. Even though there's no justification whatsoever from the UK statistics (hospitalisations and deaths are flat) and Omicron is even more of a nothingburger than Delta was.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 08, 2021, 08:12:52 AM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 08, 2021, 12:28:43 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 08, 2021, 01:32:52 PM
No lockdown for now, just an extension of the mask mandates that I'll carry on ignoring and vaccine passports for public venues. Along with work from home guidance.

Lies about the jabs being effective against Omicron (it isn't) so to try to push more boosters. All their paid press monkeys reinforcing the "get boosted" bullshit.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 08, 2021, 01:57:55 PM
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.
'Indefensible' is the word that springs to mind.

Because holy shit. On what planet would it be acceptable to give a minor a vaccination and encourage them to not tell their parents?

There is so much wrong with this thought process. Liability issues. The fact that this is a tactic used by child molesters to groom victims. Contempt for parents and parental authority (well, we saw that shit in Virginia so I shouldn't be too surprised). 

Jesus fucking Krypton. And I'm sure Misty will be along to tell me all about how I'm just a doo-doo head for opposing the science.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 08, 2021, 03:12:58 PM
Don't violations of the Numerberg code carry the death penalty?

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 08, 2021, 03:50:19 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 08, 2021, 04:19:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on December 08, 2021, 04:21:03 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/4RZgYU8.png)

Hmm.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 08, 2021, 05:09:19 PM
It's all about being on the right side of history.

Funny that they always claim euroskeptics are "swivel-eyed loons" for making Nazi allusions when it comes to the EU, then they pull shit like that.

(https://i.imgur.com/4RZgYU8.png)

Hmm.

Just a few vaccidental coincideaths...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 09, 2021, 02:16:18 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/08/health/covid-fat-obesity.html

"The research may help explain why people who are overweight and obese have been at higher risk of severe illness and death from Covid."

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on December 09, 2021, 05:50:20 PM
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 09, 2021, 05:56:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on December 09, 2021, 06:25:44 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 09, 2021, 07:36:22 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on December 09, 2021, 07:55:39 PM
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"?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 09, 2021, 08:08:32 PM
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.

You mean like this?
Delta drives surge in US cases before omicron gains foothold; 75% of US infections by new variant among vaccinated: Latest COVID-19 updates
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/12/08/omicron-covid-variant-vaccines-mandates/6425346001/

Worst...vaccine...ever...

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 09, 2021, 08:09:11 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 09, 2021, 08:16:20 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 09, 2021, 08:29:10 PM
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...)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 09, 2021, 08:48:44 PM
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 agree that you did not say that vaccines are providing protection from infection or transmission. And that there are other confounding factors that could be the cause of there being a disparity in the vacced/unvacced and vacced covid cases/unvacced covid cases.

That said, St. Fauci, et al. were proffering the vaccines as sterilizing (e.g., vax or mask, herd immunity) up until practically yesterday.

As a layman, other than the flu vaccine, I was unaware of the non-sterilizing/sterilizing categorization, nor that there were many vaccines that are non-sterilizing.

That said, I am still sticking with: worst...vaccine...ever...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on December 09, 2021, 09:44:20 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 10, 2021, 05:39:47 AM
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...)

If they're non-sterlising, they're not vaccines. They're therapeutic treatments.

These are shitty therapeutic treatments which don't even do what they were designed to do.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on December 10, 2021, 06:28:09 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 10, 2021, 07:28:43 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 10, 2021, 07:33:46 AM
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 I'm questioning the data and the conclusions and putting out there a different potential set of conclusions *is* science...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 10, 2021, 07:48:48 AM
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.

Er, no. Taking the clotshot suppresses at least temporarily and possibly causes permanent damage to the immune system.

Covid zealots are much more likely to abide by all the theatre of masking and distancing than people who don't give a shit about the jabs.

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.

The issue isn't that the medical bureaucrats and scientists aren't as smart as they think they are. It's that they're corrupt as fuck and in the pockets of Big Pharma.

We'll never "get rid of COVID-19" because coronaviruses have always been endemic. You can't get rid of something that's always been there and always will be.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 10, 2021, 10:10:24 AM
Kiero is not going to like this one, though it's accurate:

(https://i.ibb.co/DWYWHqh/image.png)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 10, 2021, 10:23:54 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on December 10, 2021, 10:25:17 AM
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.

That's a hypothesis, but it's a weak one IMO. There's little evidence that any NPIs had any meaningful impact on transmission rates. The evidence is pretty clear at this point that masks are ineffective. They have failed in every RCT to demonstrate any statistically-significant positive impact (even the Bangladesh study), and the real-world data actually suggests that masks have a negative impact.

Social distancing and hygiene behaviors may have a positive impact, but I think it's unlikely that a higher infection rate among the injected is accounted for by these behavioral factors. In UK HSA all age groups over 30 have between 25% to 130% higher infection rates. I'm not aware of any data that would suggest we could expect this degree of difference based on behavior, especially since (IMO) the injection-free cohort is much more likely to not care about social distancing or masking or other aspects of pandemic theater.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 10, 2021, 04:03:16 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 10, 2021, 04:17:42 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 10, 2021, 04:25:27 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 10, 2021, 04:59:47 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 10, 2021, 05:16:48 PM
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.

Not only that, but people who are not vaccinated are less likely to suffer from climate change induced clotting problems which further skews the data.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 10, 2021, 05:40:57 PM
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.

Yeah. Vaccination by age group in the UK looks like this:

(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/14625/production/_122039438_optimised-uk_vax_by_age_9dec-nc.png)

The biggest group of unvaccinated is in people age 0-11, unsurprisingly. Comparing deaths among the much-younger unvaccinated population versus the vaccinated population isn't showing causality.

From quick search, this report has age-standardized mortality rates for the UK:

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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 10, 2021, 06:37:33 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 10, 2021, 07:13:20 PM
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.
Go back to what I wrote and try to understand it without your redefining of words to manipulate the truth.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 10, 2021, 07:18:57 PM
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.

Kiero, you don't seem to be acknowledging the point about age. For the UK, in the 65 and older category (about 9 million), the vaccination rate is over 90%, while for those 11 and younger (also around 9 million), the vaccination rate is 0%. But covid doesn't kill equally across ages. It is almost never fatal in 0-11 year olds, while it is more often fatal in those 65 and older.

With 90% vaccination of the vulnerable vaccinated, the unvaccinated elderly can die at a much higher rate - and they'd still be the minority because they are less than 10% of the vulnerable population. Exactly how much higher the rate is varies, but it is generally higher.

Here is a Texas government study of covid deaths in the state, for example:

https://dshs.texas.gov/immunize/covid19/data/vaccination-status.aspx
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 10, 2021, 07:25:52 PM
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.

Yes, they would. I just showed it to you in incredible simple to understand numbers and it was so beyond you that you called that simplistic rendition "mental gymnastics." No you weak minded fool, that wasn't the4 gym for your mind, that was getting your mind up off the coach to get a soda from the fridge level exercise. If that simple level of basic comprehension, which literally was at the level my daughter learned in 3rd and 4th grade, is "mental gymnastics" to you, then you must truly be as dim as you come across.

Yes, you dumb motherfucker. If for example 19% of double jabbed people got Covid while 50% of unvaccinated people got covid, the vaccinated would make up well more than the majority of cases because so few people are unvaccinated. How you cannot wrap your tiny fucking brain around that basic easy math I truly don't understand.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 10, 2021, 07:28:27 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 10, 2021, 07:45:24 PM
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.

Reading his chart, the leftmost bars look like they're saying 69% of the population are vaccinated and 31% are unvaccinated.

(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/16beafd944d34095ce36e3809e28b4433836b43298733261909ae90a4c14fbd7.jpg?w=600&h=309)

It is a little confusingly presented, because read literally by color, it implies that 69.0% of vaccinated people are vaccinated, and 31.0% of unvaccinated people are vaccinated. I think that's just a problem in presentation. When I look elsewhere, that seems like roughly the full vaccination rate among the whole population - like this site that currently reports 68.38% fully vaccinated:

https://ycharts.com/indicators/uk_coronavirus_full_vaccination_rate

That would be counting the ~7% who have only received a single dose as "unvaccinated", but that seems like a minor point. And of course, that's of all people, including the 9 million or so people under age 12.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 11, 2021, 08:03:17 AM
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)?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on December 11, 2021, 12:28:15 PM
Myocarditis incidence 1/2680 among young men, based on hospitalization following injection with Pfizer. Study (https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciab989/6445179?login=true)

Seriously criminal.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 12, 2021, 08:52:49 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 12, 2021, 01:15:31 PM
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/health/post-pandemic-stress-disorder-heart-conditions-covid-london-physicians-b969436.html

"Up to 300,000 people facing heart-related illnesses due to post-pandemic stress disorder, warn physicians"

Maybe they can come up with a vaccination for PPSD...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 12, 2021, 01:47:13 PM
Look at how Omicron is ravaging South Africa:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FGa5h_xXsAQW66S?format=jpg&name=900x900)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on December 12, 2021, 03:58:11 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 12, 2021, 04:17:57 PM
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.

It's the epicentre of the "Omicron variant" and thus further along than anywhere else.

In case you needed reminding of the global death toll from Omicron:

(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/0805ddd8483c60df5b733df519a4c3a9f0844f0f087a73f1e7200df9632396e9.png?w=600&h=343)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on December 12, 2021, 09:39:05 PM
Global collapse is around the corner.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on December 12, 2021, 10:51:25 PM
Global collapse is around the corner.

Depends.  Omicron won't cause anything other than a few sniffles and herd immunity.  But the Covidiots in government and their desperate attempts to retain power via mandates and lockdowns could easily cause major collapses.  The only way to prevent this is to reject the fear-mongering and government overreach...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 13, 2021, 04:05:23 AM
2012 and its going to be all over, rover.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 13, 2021, 09:02:34 PM
Regarding UK statistics:

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.

I'm not talking about anyone else's interpretation - I'm talking about the raw statistics on the graph that you yourself posted, and that are in the report that you just linked above. If you have a different way to read it, then please explain. But from how I personally read your data, the statistics show is indeed that elderly people in the UK are still dying - but elderly vaccinated people are dying at a much lesser rate than elderly unvaccinated people. They provide both raw numbers and rates on pages 31-34 of the report you just linked.

If you have a different way to look at the data, then please explain it. From what I can see:

1) There are about 9 million people who are 65+ in the UK, and they're around 94% vaccinated: so about 8.5 million vaccinated and 0.5 million unvaccinated.
2) These elderly people make up the vast majority of covid deaths.
3) Deaths among the 0.5 million unvaccinated elderly is a higher proportion than among the 8.5 million vaccinated elderly.


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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 13, 2021, 09:21:31 PM
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.

Doh! The person-years are in the denominator. Just like normalizing travel accident risk by person-miles.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 16, 2021, 08:06:32 AM
The "covid death" figures are utter bullshit. They massively overestimate the number of people dying "with" covid, rather than of.

Every time these requests are submitted, the results are the same:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FGuu5QuXEAMvnt7?format=jpg&name=900x900)

95%+ of those who died within 28 days of a positive test didn't actually die from covid, they merely had a positive result within a month of their demise.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 16, 2021, 11:36:47 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on December 16, 2021, 11:49:05 AM
Kiero, are you aware of how viral transmissions occur? You should start with the basics first.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 16, 2021, 11:58:48 AM
Kiero, are you aware of how viral transmissions occur? You should start with the basics first.

You really are an imbecile, aren't you? It's the sniffles, not ebola.

Show me where on the all-causes death stats for 2020 there was a "pandemic" compared to other years.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on December 16, 2021, 06:10:05 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 16, 2021, 06:34:41 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on December 16, 2021, 06:42:10 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 16, 2021, 07:18:08 PM
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.
It has to be a conspiracy! Otherwise, we couldn't just dismiss it out of hand, could we?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 16, 2021, 08:01:05 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on December 16, 2021, 09:08:13 PM
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.

Well, it's not like he can argue the statistics or information presented here.  So he has to deflect by pretending that the argument is about the the purpose of the falsehoods, as opposed to the falsehoods themselves...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 16, 2021, 09:21:34 PM
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 got some numbers here that you can call for further information if you like.

(https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2019/07/12/TELEMMGLPICT000203590888_trans_NvBQzQNjv4Bqx2kJFSJsNXMtLTc7whMEme6wLShpE0vuyVUWOQQS1hY.jpeg?imwidth=480)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 17, 2021, 06:49:47 AM
You know it's bad when The Atlantic is going against the narrative:
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/12/mask-guidelines-cdc-walensky/621035/

TL:DR =
With Biden in the White House, the CDC has promised to “follow the science” in its COVID policies. Yet the circumstances around the Arizona study seem to show the opposite. Dubious research has been cited after the fact, without transparency, in support of existing agency guidance. “Research requires trust and the ability to verify work,” Ketcham, the ASU public-health economist, told me. “That’s the heart of science. The saddest part of this is the erosion of trust.”

The boldface (added by me) says it all.

Then for good measure throw in that any questioning of "The Science!(tm)" narrative, rather than being seen as part of the process of science
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

is labeled disinformation. Reminds me of Galileo vs. the Catholic Church
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei

or Soviet genetics
https://theconversation.com/the-tragic-story-of-soviet-genetics-shows-the-folly-of-political-meddling-in-science-72580

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 17, 2021, 12:05:53 PM
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.

Pfizer have bought the right people. It's really no more complex than that. Though whether or not they are themselves on China's payroll, since they are the ultimate beneficiaries of the utter humiliation of the West, is unknown.

If you really think this entire production is about a virus, then you're spectacularly dumb. The jabs are about vaccine passports, which are a stepping stone to digital ID, which is the foundation of a Social Credit system which will control us all.

As already exists in China, just in case you are really that ignorant:
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 17, 2021, 04:46:58 PM
Denmark is locking down again, because that's worked so well before. I wonder what could be driving their spike in infections:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FGpYXQlWUAYqQep?format=png&name=900x900)

Baffling.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 19, 2021, 07:42:41 AM
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 big spike compared to other years?

Where is the "pandemic"?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 19, 2021, 08:05:28 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 19, 2021, 08:55:12 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Chris24601 on December 19, 2021, 09:22:03 AM
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.

The second thing to know is that many CDC employees hold patents on various drugs. For example, Dr. Fauci holds the patent on a drug called Rendezivir. Now, guess which drug is the only one approved for hospitals to treat Covid with as decided by Dr. Fauci? Rendezivir… with Dr. Fauci pocketing millions from his patent licenses in the process.

It’s not an evil conspiracy; it’s a bunch of greedy assholes trying to scrape as many tax dollars as they can into their pockets… just as it’s always been except that right now we’ve got Mr. “Ten Percent to The Big Guy” at the top of the heap and as long as he gets his cut he won’t even blink as the greedy assholes keep shoveling our money into their coffers.

That’s all this is. That’s all Build Back Better and the WEF’s agenda are when you boil it down… schemes to bilk the producing classes out of as much money as they can to enrich the people at the top. Everything else is just marketing to those they need to keep compliant and onboard to keep siphoning up the money.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 19, 2021, 09:23:33 AM
Remdezivir which doesn't work and has horrendous side-effects. Unlike cheap, generic Ivermectin.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 19, 2021, 09:29:37 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 19, 2021, 11:37:38 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 19, 2021, 11:59:11 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Chris24601 on December 19, 2021, 12:51:32 PM
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.
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 19, 2021, 02:03:29 PM
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.
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.
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.
I don't see how that has anything to do with the cause of death.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 19, 2021, 02:55:09 PM
I don't see how that has anything to do with the cause of death.

Before 2020 cause of death was never classified that way. Which is why the all-cause mortality for 2020 isn't exceptional, because there was no great die-off caused by an exceptional event.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 19, 2021, 05:37:20 PM
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.
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.
.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 19, 2021, 05:41:36 PM
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.
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.
.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 19, 2021, 06:15:16 PM
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.
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.
.

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.

Except that obesity and hypertension are correlated with other more acute health issues (e.g., hypertension leads to strokes, obesity leads to hypertension and diabetes) .
https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/weight-management/adult-overweight-obesity/health-risks
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/high-blood-pressure/in-depth/high-blood-pressure/art-20045868

https://www.wvdhhr.org/bph/oehp/obesity/mortality.htm
Assuming that the 300K deaths/yr from obesity is correct, that puts obesity right up there with covid deaths/yr (414K).

https://www.cdc.gov/bloodpressure/facts.htm
In 2019, more than half a million deaths in the United States had hypertension as a primary or contributing cause.

And IIRC, the average number of comorbidities associated with covid deaths is 2.6. So, on average, people dying with/of covid are not healthy to begin with.

It would be interesting to see hospializations and deaths broken out by age and by some grouping that categorizes health (maybe, no comorbidities, 1 comorbidity, 2 comorbidities, 3 comorbidities, 4+ comorbidities). There might also be sets of correlated comorbidities that ought to be considered as groups.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 19, 2021, 06:35:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on December 19, 2021, 07:01:43 PM
The average life expectancy in the US is 79 years.
The average age for Wuhan flu deaths in the US is 81 years.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 19, 2021, 07:14:35 PM
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.
You know how many times in my career I've had EMS deliver a patient to me with a primary complaint of obesity? Zero.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on December 19, 2021, 08:06:51 PM
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.
You know how many times in my career I've had EMS deliver a patient to me with a primary complaint of obesity? Zero.

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.
Well, folks, since HappyDerp has never seen it, it certainly doesn't happen.  Throw all the statistics out the window; the numbers are irrelevant.

Wait, aren't you the same person upthread who has argued that anecdotes aren't conclusive evidence?  Seems inconsistent...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 19, 2021, 09:11:14 PM
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.
You know how many times in my career I've had EMS deliver a patient to me with a primary complaint of obesity? Zero.

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.
Well, folks, since HappyDerp has never seen it, it certainly doesn't happen.  Throw all the statistics out the window; the numbers are irrelevant.

Wait, aren't you the same person upthread who has argued that anecdotes aren't conclusive evidence?  Seems inconsistent...
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 19, 2021, 09:57:55 PM
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.
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.
.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 19, 2021, 10:40:34 PM
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/)


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 19, 2021, 10:50:50 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 19, 2021, 10:55:38 PM
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.

You never specified whose obesity.  You said died "from" obesity.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 20, 2021, 12:11:36 AM
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.

You never specified whose obesity.  You said died "from" obesity.
Regardless, the priciple cause of death was not determined to be obesity.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on December 20, 2021, 01:06:24 AM
This argument is reminding me of the old joke that people do not die from falls, it's the sudden stop at the end.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 20, 2021, 07:18:09 AM
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.
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.
.

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.
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.

I would agree that they died of covid plus their comorbidities.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 20, 2021, 07:35:32 AM
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.
You know how many times in my career I've had EMS deliver a patient to me with a primary complaint of obesity? Zero.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 20, 2021, 09:41:29 AM
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.
You know how many times in my career I've had EMS deliver a patient to me with a primary complaint of obesity? Zero.

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.
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.

That said, it's pretty sloppy, and terrible optics, and we should do better. Doctors should make a clinical determination of the actual cause of death.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 20, 2021, 10:30:54 AM
Doctors should make a clinical determination of the actual cause of death.
Do you believe that this isn't happening?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 20, 2021, 10:46:57 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 20, 2021, 11:04:36 AM
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.






Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 20, 2021, 11:19:52 AM
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.

That press conference transcript is telling.  The president is doing what he should be - reassuring the public and pledging federal assistance to the states.  And then that asshole Fauci yaps through both sides of his piehole.  He should have been fired right then and there.

Record what other conditions someone had and make it transparent. 

1. Healthy 35-yr old marathon runner died of covid, no underlying conditions.
2. 90 year old died of covid, underlying conditions of end-stage emphysema due to 80 year smoking habit.
3. Died from GSW to the head, had covid.
4. Morbidly obese 19 year old died of covid.

One can clearly see that #1 is concerning and could have been prevented. #2 is expected. #4 could have been prevented. #3 - why are you bothering to test for covid to begin with?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 20, 2021, 11:45:51 AM
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 (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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 20, 2021, 11:58:01 AM
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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 20, 2021, 11:59:15 AM
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 (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.
That's exactly what I was criticizing, HappyDerp. Read my entire post.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 20, 2021, 12:14:39 PM
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 (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.
That's exactly what I was criticizing, HappyDerp. Read my entire post.
Petty name-calling, Pat? I thought you tried to be better than that.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 20, 2021, 12:15:29 PM
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.
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.

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.

But the "experts" can't be seen to be wrong...  Fucks up the narrative that Fauci knows best.

I find it interesting that all these Dem pols who were triple vaxxed and everything are coming down with covid omicron with mild cold symptoms - all at the same time.  Almost as if it's a concerted effort to extract society from a virus that was purposefully or accidentally let loose by a communist government hell-bent on world domination in cahoots with bought-and-paid for Western politicians and government bureaucrats. But that's just crazy talk.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 20, 2021, 12:35:13 PM
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 (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.
That's exactly what I was criticizing, HappyDerp. Read my entire post.
Petty name-calling, Pat? I thought you tried to be better than that.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 20, 2021, 01:06:19 PM
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 (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.
That's exactly what I was criticizing, HappyDerp. Read my entire post.
Petty name-calling, Pat? I thought you tried to be better than that.

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.
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 20, 2021, 01:43:55 PM
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 (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.
That's exactly what I was criticizing, HappyDerp. Read my entire post.
Petty name-calling, Pat? I thought you tried to be better than that.

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.
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.
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.
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.

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. You've seen this yourself, with all the people jumping to false conclusions about your politics, based on isolated positions on specific topics.

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 in the parts they missed.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 20, 2021, 01:47:24 PM
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 (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.
That's exactly what I was criticizing, HappyDerp. Read my entire post.
Petty name-calling, Pat? I thought you tried to be better than that.

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.
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.
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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 20, 2021, 01:49:37 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 20, 2021, 01:56:47 PM
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 20, 2021, 02:15:00 PM
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).
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 20, 2021, 03:20:55 PM
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).
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.
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 20, 2021, 06:27:31 PM
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).
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.
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?
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:
https://www.therpgsite.com/the-rpgpundit-s-own-forum/covid-the-lockdowns-etc/msg1200209/#msg1200209
... where I included all the caveats and qualifiers. Since that was just a few minutes earlier, and you replied to that post, I assumed you could remember the full argument, and I wouldn't have to repeat everything. Again.

And they're definitely coming across as attacks, of the "I don't have an argument, so I'll just make vague assertions" kind. Especially since you still haven't provide a single specific example pointing out how it was my post that led to your false interpretation.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 20, 2021, 07:19:31 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 20, 2021, 07:34:42 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Daztur on December 20, 2021, 11:32:03 PM
So now Trump's being booed again for telling people to get vaccinated. He's trying so hard to claim credit for vaccine development and his main obstacle is the stupidity of his own dim-witted followers.

Brings joy to my heart in these dark times.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 21, 2021, 06:04:17 AM
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: https://dailyexpose.uk/2021/08/29/midazolam-was-used-to-prematurely-end-the-lives-of-thousands-who-you-were-told-had-died-of-covid-19/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 21, 2021, 07:18:54 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 21, 2021, 08:11:09 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 21, 2021, 08:39:48 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 21, 2021, 09:10:55 AM
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".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 21, 2021, 09:20:58 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 21, 2021, 10:19:37 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 21, 2021, 10:26:24 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on December 21, 2021, 10:35:19 AM
"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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 21, 2021, 11:37:50 AM
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".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on December 21, 2021, 12:41:45 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 21, 2021, 01:06:45 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on December 21, 2021, 01:10:18 PM
"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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 21, 2021, 01:13:40 PM
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.

The source would have to be any reputable research institution that wasn't being paid by the manufacturer of the vaccine to deliver the required result.

Hell, or even the manufacturer's own properly conducted and completed trials. Where they hadn't deliberately compromised the control group.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on December 21, 2021, 03:19:12 PM
Where they hadn't deliberately compromised the control group.

How did they do that? Im asking because I don't have a scientific background.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 21, 2021, 05:23:55 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on December 21, 2021, 05:36:28 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 21, 2021, 06:49:29 PM
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.n2635

Also here: https://dailysceptic.org/2021/11/17/can-anything-about-the-pfizer-vaccine-trial-be-trusted/

Process flow of the Pfizer trial:

(https://dailysceptic.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Image-from-iOS-1-1.jpg)

The "Open Label" part is where they breached the control group by telling them they'd received the placebo, then gave most of them the experimental drug.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on December 21, 2021, 07:30:14 PM
Reported in the British Medical Journal: https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on December 21, 2021, 08:04:24 PM
"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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 21, 2021, 08:54:39 PM
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.

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 21, 2021, 09:18:20 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 21, 2021, 09:24:57 PM
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.

It's Leana Wen- a known CHICOM operative.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 21, 2021, 09:45:03 PM
This is the best summary of masks that I have seen to-date. A bit long, but worth the read.
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/10/commentary-what-can-masks-do-part-1-science-behind-covid-19-protection
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/10/commentary-what-can-masks-do-part-2-what-makes-good-mask-study-and-why-most

"We are well past the emergency phase of this pandemic, and it should be well-known by now that wearing cloth face coverings or surgical masks, universal or otherwise, has a very minor role to play in preventing person-to-person transmission. It is time to stop overselling their efficacy and unrealistic expectations about their ability to end the pandemic."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on December 21, 2021, 09:51:11 PM
“Cloth masks are little more than facial decorations.
That's not entirely true.  Cloth masks act as rape protection in certain ethnic cultural areas.
>:->
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 21, 2021, 10:35:41 PM
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.

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.
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.

That said, I've also seen discovery abused. They want a broad swath of financial records? Don't put them on a memory stick. Print them all out, and then ship them by the pallet. The assumption was that nobody would read them.

But yes, the 75 year gag order and all the nonsense with the trials makes Big Pharma sound very bad.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 22, 2021, 05:13:06 AM
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.

If this were the only incidence of this sort of thing, you might excuse it, but it's part of a pattern of behaviour stretching back decades. Pfizer, on any objective assessment, is evil.

What it proves is that their "trials" aren't worth shit (so any claims of efficacy are suspect). That they will falsify data, bribe people and break the rules to push their product. This is the critical thing, Pfizer are not part of the "medical establishment" as you put it, they are a manufacturer of a product who's only priority is selling as much of that product as they can. They don't care how safe it is or whether it even works, only that they can keep shipping product.

The significance for that "medical establishment" is that they have been thoroughly corrupted by Pfizer (and to a lesser extent the other manufacturers). Pfizer pays for their research, "sponsors" media outlets, funds the supposed regulators, bankrolls politicians, bribes individual doctors. They are utterly untrustworthy.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 22, 2021, 06:22:55 AM
And on that very point, here's a "fact check" from Reuters: https://twitter.com/ReutersFacts/status/1465339719672221701

Guess who's on the Pfizer board and is a major investor? Chairman (and former CEO) of Reuters James C Smith.

https://www.pfizer.com/people/leadership/board-of-directors/james_smith

No conflict of interest there!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 22, 2021, 07:04:57 AM
CDC Director is Wrong Re Myocarditis Numbers 5-11 & CDC Cannot Count Vaccine Doses - Huge Blunders!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpwSYQelMEg

This is the same person that said surgical masks are 80% effective, without providing any technical basis.

Fucking clown shoes.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 22, 2021, 12:48:45 PM
Our cash-strapped NHS are so desperate for funds that there are nearly 3,000 unfilled diversity posts:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FHOhsBjXEA4MMAn?format=jpg)

That only equates to about £110m on their salaries alone.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 22, 2021, 01:04:40 PM
Our cash-strapped NHS are so desperate for funds that there are nearly 3,000 unfilled diversity posts:

(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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 22, 2021, 01:59:49 PM
Is 40-45k a good 'starting salary'? I'm not up on cost of living in Britland.

The average salary is £25-30k. So yes, unless you're in London (but that usually has the "London weighting" uplift applied to it).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 22, 2021, 05:15:30 PM
"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.

This. I'd be happy to support the Pope Innocent III method of dealing with them - kill them all and let God sort them out.  They're *all* in collusion.  Interlocking corporate directorships, industry/government revolving doors, quid pro quo media relations.  They all have to go.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 22, 2021, 08:08:52 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Daztur on December 22, 2021, 08:51:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 22, 2021, 08:57:44 PM
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.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Daztur on December 22, 2021, 09:16:51 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 22, 2021, 10:42:52 PM
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.
:swoosh:

Incidentally dkabq, the Pundit frowns on links without context. You might want to edit a short description of the article into your post.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on December 23, 2021, 03:22:53 AM
A man asks his doctor, "Hey doc, when is this pandemic going to end?"

Doctor says, "Don't ask me, I'm not a politician."

:)

Remember kids, you can't vote your way out of communism.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 23, 2021, 05:56:35 AM
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.

Nope. You just aren't grocking what I am saying.

From the article, the US position is:
"The comments from the WHO come as health officials in the U.S. promote vaccine booster shots for all residents over the age of 16 amid a surge in Covid cases driven by the omicron strain."

and

"We want people to be able to gather” over the holidays, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said in an interview Wednesday on CNN. “And safe gathering includes, of course, being vaccinated, ideally being boosted and making sure that all the people who you gather with are also vaccinated and boosted."

That is the narrative. Everyone in the US (except illegal aliens) needs to get vaccinated. Hence Let's Go Brandon's executive orders mandating vaccination for companies with 100+ employees and all federal employees and contractors.


From the article, the WHO position is:
"Blanket booster programs are likely to prolong the pandemic, rather than ending it, by diverting supply to countries that already have high levels of vaccination coverage, giving the virus more opportunity to spread and mutate."

and

"No country can boost its way out of the pandemic"


The WHO position deviates from the US position. Which begs the question of the WHO position being misinformation. Or maybe it is the US position that is misinformation. While I know that at one point Big Tech said the WHO was dogma, I forget who Big Tech is holding up as dogma at the moment.

Moreover, as the US position is the one proffered by St. Fauci, that also makes it against Science!(tm), as he "represents Science!(tm)".


Seems clear to me -- YMMV.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 23, 2021, 06:02:53 AM
Ah, so you did read the article. You just don't understand it. Got it.

Bless, you're incapable of understanding that "the narrative" is inconsistent, contradictory bullshit that changes from one minute to the next.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Reckall on December 23, 2021, 08:19:58 AM
Remember kids, you can't vote your way out of communism.

But you can hubris your way into a pandemic.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 23, 2021, 08:48:07 AM
But you can hubris your way into a pandemic.

What pandemic? What kind of imbecile still believes this bullshit two years on?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 23, 2021, 08:50:36 AM
The Midazolam murders are "nutjobbery" - except someone has put a private criminal prosecution before a magistrate's court today.

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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 23, 2021, 09:37:31 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 23, 2021, 09:42:05 AM
Link edited out

Almost nobody knows what the fuck you're talking about or why you're talking about it in this thread. I assume you mean it's used for people on ventilator in some nations (but not in most). Death rates from covid are not different between nations which use that drug and nations which do not. So if you're trying to blame covid deaths on that drug worldwide, then yes you're a fucking nutter. But then we already knew you were a fucking nutter. I am still waiting to hear your views on whether mankind actually landed on the moon in 1969 and who shot JFK.

If anyone doubts Kiero is a nutter, go to the site he just linked to and look around. It's a serious whack job behind that site. Like Time Cube level nutter. Among his theories are that 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 this one: that it's not cornoavirus 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.

And that's the source Kiero is reading and posting here.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 23, 2021, 10:20:50 AM
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:

Quote
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 23, 2021, 10:50:31 AM
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.

I expect everyone to read the article. I know that when you, or anyone else, makes a post with a link, I read the article.

And I was making neither a pro or anti vax argument. Rather, I was pointing out that the WHO position is different from the US/CDC position. And as with all things covid, there is the one true faith dogma, and everything else is heresy. So the question is, who is the heretic? The WHO or the CDC? Like the Highlander, there can only be one.

===========================

As far as my pro/anti vaccine take, which has nothing to do with the point I was making, it is that both positions are wrong.

If the vaccine was a sterilizing and had a high effectiveness, then I would lean towards the WHO's position. Specifically, the vaccine would not be given until there was enough (8B for one dose, 16B for two doses) for everyone. Otherwise, you are still playing wack-a-mole between vaccinated and un-vaccinated. However, as it is apparent that the vaccines are not sterilizing, even with you gave everyone the vaccine all at once there would still be enough break-thru cases to keep it going.

I agree with the US/CDC position to the extent that I believe the old, those with comorbidities, and anyone that wants it, take the vaccine and as many boosters as they like. The young and the healthy, and those that do not want to take the vaccine should not be forced to.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Reckall on December 23, 2021, 12:07:51 PM
But you can hubris your way into a pandemic.

What pandemic?

Have you looked outside your window as of late?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 23, 2021, 12:19:42 PM
But you can hubris your way into a pandemic.

What pandemic?

Have you looked outside your window as of late?
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 23, 2021, 12:34:16 PM
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"?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Reckall on December 23, 2021, 01:03:05 PM
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.

Quote
Are 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%.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 23, 2021, 01:09:04 PM
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.

Quote
Are 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Reckall on December 23, 2021, 01:31:32 PM
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.

Quote
Are 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.

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… ;)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 23, 2021, 01:33:51 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 23, 2021, 01:35:21 PM
I believe you: no virus will ever kill an ally.


Bless. No, minor respiratory infections are of little consequence to people who are healthy.

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%.

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.

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… ;)

Uh, had it, not in the least bit afraid of the sniffles. I've had three colds in the last two weeks, none of them lasted longer than 48 hours. Any of them could have been Omicron.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 23, 2021, 02:41:31 PM
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)

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:

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 23, 2021, 03:04:39 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 23, 2021, 03:44:28 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 23, 2021, 04:02:20 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 23, 2021, 04:30:49 PM
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:

Quote
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.

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.

He's citing a blatantly antisemetic nutcase conspiracy theory website that talks about how the Rothschild family causes all wars.  And when I challenge him for doing that, he cut out that part of what I said and refused to respond to it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 23, 2021, 04:33:55 PM
Link edited out
[/quote]

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Reckall on December 23, 2021, 04:37:18 PM
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.

Well, that you never sought professional help - in a very general sense - is quite clear.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 23, 2021, 04:41:34 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 23, 2021, 04:42:41 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Reckall on December 23, 2021, 04:45:07 PM
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:

Quote
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.

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?

From that very link:

It thus seems as though the article (the original Italian source) severely misrepresents the position of the NIH, but a lot seems to have been lost in translation and this is really just an opinion piece where the author is poking fun at the NIH while trying to make a point about the risks of Covid.


The image of the Italian government downplaying the COVID risks - as confirmed by four fully masked guys - is very funny toh. :D
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 23, 2021, 04:46:09 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 23, 2021, 04:52:14 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on December 23, 2021, 04:58:37 PM
I'm cool with adults suffering for injecting themselves with obviously failed experimental cocktails, but even I have sympathy for what's already happened and what else unknown that's coming for the kids.

But hey, we gotta make sure all the leftists get their unlimited series of boosters!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 23, 2021, 05:17:13 PM
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.

Given the details are deliberately obfuscated to remove any suspicion around the jab, who knows. The big change between that period June-September 2021, compared to the same period in 2020 was the rollout to 12-17 year olds.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 23, 2021, 05:22:27 PM
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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Daztur on December 23, 2021, 08:40:07 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 23, 2021, 09:38:04 PM
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.
Considering the worthless definition of fascist these days is 'person that I don't like', your opinion is garbage just like you are.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 24, 2021, 05:41:21 AM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 24, 2021, 05:43:34 AM
Misattribution...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 24, 2021, 05:47:04 AM
This, folks, is what narrative collapse looks like: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54145299

Quote
If 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.

I cannot find that quote in the article.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 24, 2021, 05:56:31 AM
Fauci says large holiday gatherings not safe — even with booster
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 24, 2021, 06:23:57 AM
Fauci says large holiday gatherings not safe — even with booster
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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 24, 2021, 06:58:49 AM
Fauci says large holiday gatherings not safe — even with booster
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 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.

“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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 24, 2021, 07:28:39 AM
Fauci says large holiday gatherings not safe — even with booster
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 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.

“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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on December 24, 2021, 08:14:58 AM
Fauci says large holiday gatherings not safe — even with booster
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 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.

“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.

Ok. And are we all in agreement that the vaccine also does not prevent you from transmitting covid?

So the take-away has to be that large gatherings will be recommended against forever (does that include restaurants with 30+ seats, and if not, why not)? And if not, what is the end-game?

Note, I am not taking a shot at you with this, rather I am interested in seeing the thoughts of the collective.
 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 24, 2021, 09:18:30 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 24, 2021, 10:23:24 AM
I cannot find that quote in the article.

Sorry, my bad, that was from the comments. Post removed.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 24, 2021, 10:25:05 AM
So he is effectively admitting that the vaccine does not prevent you from getting covid.

That's self-evident from the widespread reports of people triple-jabbed, yet repeatedly infected. It doesn't prevent infection, doesn't prevent transmission, doesn't reduce viral load.

What "protection" are they providing exactly?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 24, 2021, 12:38:05 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on December 24, 2021, 01:48:29 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Reckall on December 24, 2021, 03:00:54 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 24, 2021, 03:56:15 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on December 24, 2021, 06:37:06 PM
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.
 

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on December 24, 2021, 07:10:06 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on December 24, 2021, 09:01:53 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Daztur on December 24, 2021, 09:11:41 PM
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.

The 94% included a massive basket of other health problems including "being fat."

So ALL fat people who got corona and died were counted as part of that 94%.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 24, 2021, 10:39:04 PM
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!

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 24, 2021, 10:42:01 PM
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.

There is no genuine link to that claim.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Reckall on December 25, 2021, 04:40:46 AM
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.

See: you can see your problem (two actually) right there:

First, you start with assumptions and then you act like if they were The Truth.

Second, you don't even bother to read anything. I was kicked off from a clinic because it was turned into a COVID ward - and us non-COVID cases were sent home. As I wrote. I wasn't there because I had COVID. I was there for some minor surgery.

Which explains why you link a page about the Italian situation with a disclaimer that those news had already been debunked on the same page you linked. ::)

Everybody is gangsta about his own ideas until people start to do some checks - which is why you fail at failing.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on December 25, 2021, 03:43:12 PM
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?

Well it's impossible for the DemonKKKrats to win an election without cheating right now so you need to keep a running total to scare the mid-wits so that you can continue using mail-in ballots allowing cheating.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 25, 2021, 06:27:27 PM
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.

Thats the same person
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 25, 2021, 07:42:41 PM
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.

Sorry, you need to wind right back and ask yourself a fundamental question: why is any of this necessary for something that's harmless for the overwhelming majority of people?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on December 25, 2021, 08:51:39 PM
Oops wrong post
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 26, 2021, 07:32:22 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 27, 2021, 06:03:10 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 27, 2021, 08:45:42 AM
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.

Do it, Misty. C'mon! Let's fucking DO this.

Or fuck off like the pussy we all know you are.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on December 27, 2021, 10:55:45 AM
If Hitler made the cure for cancer, it would still be the cure for cancer. Im jewish and I fight over this sort of rhetoric with my sister all the time.

But Im looking for the 9% CDC link and I can't find it. I will have to assume its a misquoute or just made up. But a death toll of 800K sounds f***ing rediculous and improbable.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 27, 2021, 12:42:36 PM
UK government is rolling out digital ID (using a currently inactive part of the covid passport) in April 2022: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/digital-identity-document-validation-technology-idvt

Because it was never about public health, and always about control.

Meanwhile the Bank of England continues building it's case for digital currency: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/news/2021/november/statement-on-central-bank-digital-currency-next-steps

Nothing to see here, though, unless you're paranoid. No way they'd remove cash and link your accounts to your identity and social credit score, so they can switch off your ability to spend your own money if you behave in a proscribed manner.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 27, 2021, 08:50:53 PM
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.

Do it, Misty. C'mon! Let's fucking DO this.

Or fuck off like the pussy we all know you are.

Why do you think it's acceptable to be linking to antisemitic sites here? Is there ANYTHING Kiero can do which you would be bothered by at this point?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on December 27, 2021, 09:23:18 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 28, 2021, 06:11:18 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 28, 2021, 08:18:10 AM
What's interesting is that there is NOTHING about these murders, at least in terms of 'mainstream' coverage. Nada.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, though. And I find it fascinating that Wayne Smith, who had been spearheading the probe, mysteriously turned up dead.

This might offend people's sensibilities less: https://principia-scientific.com/overwhelming-evidence-of-midazolam-murders-by-government-policy/

Notable is that they include a link to a PDF that recommends, for patients with breathlessness (difficulty breathing, I believe), a morphine and midazolam infusion. Which is... worrisome. There was a murder case in 2011 where a guy with sleep apnea evidently died from a dose of midazolam.

Very curious, to say the least.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on December 28, 2021, 12:01:23 PM
This might offend people's sensibilities less: https://principia-scientific.com/overwhelming-evidence-of-midazolam-murders-by-government-policy/

From the article above:
Quote
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.

That site is filled with just as much bullshit as any other conspiracy site.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 28, 2021, 12:10:08 PM
This might offend people's sensibilities less: https://principia-scientific.com/overwhelming-evidence-of-midazolam-murders-by-government-policy/

From the article above:
Quote
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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on December 28, 2021, 12:12:07 PM
And while I'm at it, your golden calf Fauci just straight up admitted the new quarantine guidelines are politically driven.

https://twitter.com/CNNSitRoom/status/1475614249766559748

But yeah, tell me more about how he's 'Mr. Science'.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 28, 2021, 01:09:06 PM
This might offend people's sensibilities less: https://principia-scientific.com/overwhelming-evidence-of-midazolam-murders-by-government-policy/

From the article above:
Quote
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.

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?

As someone with no medical background, I don't know. My question would be: what are the alternatives, and how do they compare in safety? Is your claim that the alternative sedatives are as effective and overall safer compared to midazolam for patients with breathing issues?

As for accusing doctors of murdering using it, I'd be concerned about false read of causation. My understanding is that in general, doctors will prescribe sedatives like morphine and midazolam to patients who are in a lot of pain -- and a lot of pain is also correlated with dying. That doesn't mean the death was caused by the sedative. As a parallel, a lot of patients die in surgery -- it's always risky. But that doesn't mean that surgeons are deliberately killing patients, and not doing surgery won't necessarily result in less deaths. It's that surgery is done when the risks are already high.


As for the Principia Scientifica site, from brief browsing, I don't see anything anti-semitic -- but it is anti-nuclear and was anti-vaccination long before covid. Sample quotes: "Scientists have uncovered a new threat to humanity emerging in the area surrounding the former Fukushima nuclear power plant: indestructible radioactive hybrid terror pigs." and from 2018 "Will the DHHS finally be held accountable for their failure, or will the vaccine industry continue to spread its toxic injections without fear of government scrutiny?"

https://principia-scientific.com/radioactive-hybrid-pigs-taken-over-fukushimas-exclusion-zone/
https://principia-scientific.com/court-us-government-broke-the-law-on-vaccine-safety-for-30-years/
https://principia-scientific.com/u-s-government-defeated-in-vaccine-safety-lawsuit/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on December 28, 2021, 02:11:22 PM
Again though: why on earth would you prescribe morphine and midazolam for someone with breathing issues?

Quote from: Wikipedia entry for Midazolam
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

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. 

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 28, 2021, 02:27:11 PM
Again though: why on earth would you prescribe morphine and midazolam for someone with breathing issues?

Quote from: Wikipedia entry for Midazolam
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

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.
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 28, 2021, 04:22:05 PM
This might offend people's sensibilities less: https://principia-scientific.com/overwhelming-evidence-of-midazolam-murders-by-government-policy/

From the article above:
Quote
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.

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?

Morphine helps people with breathing issues and I presume midazolam is to help them relax so they dont take rapid shallow breaths.

Either that or to help them die in their sleep.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 28, 2021, 05:48:49 PM
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:

Quote
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.

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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 28, 2021, 05:57:56 PM
Double post
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Garry G on December 28, 2021, 07:10:00 PM
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:

Quote
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.

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).

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on December 28, 2021, 07:17:34 PM
They're going after every single element of the coronascam - it's all in there.

It's not ALL in there.  WHat about the lizard people and CIA.
I don't see David Icke,  Patrick Byrne, Dennis Montgomery in on this.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on December 28, 2021, 07:25:29 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 28, 2021, 09:10:48 PM
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:

Quote
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.

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).

So, it's insane. Like, off the chart insane.

For example:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FHGNh2SVcAYFauS?format=jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on December 30, 2021, 01:28:34 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 30, 2021, 01:55:33 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 30, 2021, 06:30:50 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 30, 2021, 07:26:49 AM
Lastest UK government bullshit, they don't talk about the "unvaccinated" any more, but the "unboostered" - meaning anyone who hasn't had three jabs.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 30, 2021, 08:00:37 AM
Lastest UK government bullshit, they don't talk about the "unvaccinated" any more, but the "unboostered" - meaning anyone who hasn't had three jabs.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 30, 2021, 09:19:23 AM
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%.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 30, 2021, 10:20:54 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 30, 2021, 01:17:11 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 30, 2021, 01:33:50 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 30, 2021, 02:52:50 PM
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?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 30, 2021, 03:24:05 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on December 30, 2021, 04:17:48 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 30, 2021, 05:17:19 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 30, 2021, 05:36:13 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 30, 2021, 06:29:20 PM
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.

Don't worry, Misty, a few years from now you'll catch up.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on December 30, 2021, 06:47:36 PM
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"). 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 30, 2021, 07:09:58 PM
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?
How many corrupt bankers were jailed after the crash of 2008?

The SEC doesn't seem to do much except put barriers in the way of startups.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 30, 2021, 07:14:40 PM
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").
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.

Doesn't help that more and more agencies are adopting the NTSB model, where they rely on experts from the industry they're regulating to provide technical expertise in their investigations.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 30, 2021, 07:32:37 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on December 30, 2021, 08:14:34 PM
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"...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 30, 2021, 08:49:16 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 30, 2021, 09:12:06 PM
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.
So just more of your usual bullshit then.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on December 30, 2021, 09:43:23 PM
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.
All very true.  And that's how "good" people become the engine of very bad things...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 31, 2021, 12:15:53 AM
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"...

So your claim is that she is doing overt evil and utterly failing to do her job - but she is a helpless pawn who just can't see beyond Deloitte's worldview? I don't see that as any better than being a nefarious villain - nor do I find it believable.

It's not like she was born and raised into Deloitte's worldview. She wasn't even an economics major in undergrad. She got a psychology degree in college, then worked as a counselor for a few years before going back to school for her business degree (which turned into a Finance PhD).

---

I find her own explanation much more believable. Like any organization, the SEC has some dysfunction - but its people are neither nefarious villains nor brainwashed drones. They are generally fulfilling their job -- enacting the legal codes that they are given by the elected government. They work with businesses because that's their job. They are not generally crusaders or mavericks looking to change the system, because that's not what they're hired for, nor what the law tells them to do.

If you swept away all of the current SEC bureaucrats and replaced them with people with no background in finance -- then they might *attempt* to make more change, but they'd be less effective in actually getting it done. An organization full of mavericks and crusaders might be morally superior, but it wouldn't be effective in implementing the change desired.

To get any real change in how things work, we have to change the laws. There needs to be wider public sentiment against corporate dominance, and get more genuinely anti-corporate politicians elected. Most of the public simply don't care and are happy to get their iPhones and Amazon delivery, and they elect the majority in both the Republican and Democrat party who support that.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 31, 2021, 12:40:08 AM
Locally, homeless people are being tested and many are coming up positive for Covid. Relatively few of them have severe symptoms, and some probably don't have any. However, they are required to get a negative test to get into shelters, so many "infected but not sick" are being forced out of some of the few refuges normally open to them. Now, again locally, that might not be so bad when the nighttime temperature is 60 degrees F, but I do wonder if this is also happening in colder cities. I plan to look into it over the weekend.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 31, 2021, 01:02:21 AM
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.

That's why I completely reject the idea that the socialism is based on good intentions. It's not. It's just the facade of good intentions, and the lofty but abstract claims that go against every bit of what we know about how humans work and every historical example, are just the tools of self-deception people promoting very evil ideas use in an attempt to excuse themselves. And it's no different when it comes to cronyism, or corporatism, or all the other names for the way people build lives and careers that benefit them and theirs, and mask their self-serving nature with claims that they're public servants or that they're really doing good or that it would be so much worse without them.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 31, 2021, 01:46:23 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on December 31, 2021, 01:47:45 AM
Mark Levine Tweet about Covid Hospitalizations (https://twitter.com/MarkLevineNYC/status/1476709170636337157)

Who is filling up the hospitals in NYC as omicron surges?

Answer: it's still the unvaccinated. They are now *32* times more likely to land in the hospital vs. vaccinated.

You don't want those odds. Get vax'd now. https://vax4nyc.nyc.gov

(https://i.ibb.co/NjzzY5B/image.png)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 31, 2021, 03:06:17 AM
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.
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.

And I specifically spoke to the reason why democracy is a poor check on regulatory capture in the previous post, which you apparently just ignored. Special interests gain sway against the interests of the vast majority because small groups benefit in large and concrete ways from the privileges they seek, and thus have a pressing need to preserve them. While the harm they do the general public may be vast in toto, but to each member of the public the impact of each new privilege is tiny and abstracted away into something like a tax bill with no itemized costs or some barrier against entry that leads indirectly to higher costs because of a lack of true competition, so they have little incentive to get involved, even if the accumulation of special privileges leads to great public harm.

And if you consider the wars wrong but don't blame the soldiers, then you're also absolving Eichmann, or at least the lower level functionaries who worked for him. You're exhibiting exactly the same kind of rationalization I was criticizing. The root of all evil is complaisance.

And if the vast majority of people are onboard with the politicians, why have Congress's approval ratings been in the single digits for decades?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 31, 2021, 05:43:32 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on December 31, 2021, 05:45:05 AM
In the latest instalment of bullshit official statistics, the UK government's "daily" covid death stats from yesterday included a little bonus: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/whats-new/record/258bbad6-5c7b-458c-ab88-fcc6b9df4b7a

Quote
Today’s death figures include a backlog of hospital deaths reported overnight by NHS England covering the period 24th⁠–⁠29th December.

Not that any of the MSM outlets feverishly reporting it as a "spike" will include that footnote.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on December 31, 2021, 06:47:42 AM
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?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on December 31, 2021, 06:58:41 AM
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?

Is your sister a democrat? Does she support "banning hate speech online"? "Gun control"? "Vaccine Mandates"? "Mask mandates"? "Diversity hiring"? "Mandatory Sensitivity Training"? "White Privilege Seminars"? "Gender Sensitivity training"? Even if she doesn't support one or more of those, has she heard of those things?
The entire hierarchy of public "service" is actively involved with agendas which inherently strip away the fundamental rights to free speech, property/commerce, freedom of conscience, equality under the law, etc.

The SEC specifically is just one of the many many government agencies that have been actively subverted into working as a political branch of the Democratic party. They are actively engaging in biased pursuits of political opponents of the Left:

 https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/sec-targets-conservative-investors-just-as-irs-targeted-tea-party-orgs-shareholder-group-claims (https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/sec-targets-conservative-investors-just-as-irs-targeted-tea-party-orgs-shareholder-group-claims)

They are specifically directed to try to force both the Environmentalist agenda and "Diversity" quotas on private companies:

https://www.fastcompany.com/90695095/inside-the-brewing-fight-over-the-secs-esg-enforcement (https://www.fastcompany.com/90695095/inside-the-brewing-fight-over-the-secs-esg-enforcement)

So yes, your sister is either a moron, or she's not just aware, but an ENFORCER of this goal to impose government-forced social engineering and control of private enterprise.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on December 31, 2021, 07:03:14 AM
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?
How many corrupt bankers were jailed after the crash of 2008?

The SEC doesn't seem to do much except put barriers in the way of startups.

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".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on December 31, 2021, 07:07:40 AM
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.


Politicians come and go, but the Bureaucratic Class is forever. And we've seen a marvelous example in the Trump years of what happens when a popularly elected leader tries to implement policy that the Bureaucratic Class is opposed to.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on December 31, 2021, 07:10:24 AM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on December 31, 2021, 08:46:51 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 31, 2021, 09:55:32 AM
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.

Fauci being considered an expert on viruses as a result of his fucking up the response to the AIDS epidemic is a primary feature of any good bureaucracy - shit always floats to the top.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on December 31, 2021, 01:59:55 PM
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.

And that's a good thing, in my opinion. While I have many criticisms of our current laws -- if the SEC were forcing publishing companies to make particular content - regardless of the politics - I think that would be massive government overreach.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on December 31, 2021, 03:51:20 PM
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.

He was also in charge of the original SARS outbreak and also took heat but no repurcussions from his bungling of that was well.  He's the very definition of th Deep State.

Don't get me started on fucking ESG -- the corporate social credit score.  It is such bullshit.  Oil and mining companies are on the shit list despite being responsible for the well being and advancement of literally billions of people worldwide yet companies that are literally using slave labour and "dirty" energy are given good ratings because the fucking bend the knee to the piece of shit marxists.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on December 31, 2021, 05:04:02 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on December 31, 2021, 05:54:47 PM
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.
How many laws do politicians pass?

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 31, 2021, 06:36:31 PM
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.

The only solution is to not incorporate as a public company to begin with.  Better to remain private and rule your company as a benevolent dictator - iron hand/velvet glove...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on December 31, 2021, 06:40:59 PM
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.
How many laws do politicians pass?

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.

We would do well to force elected politicians to write their own bills.  Better yet, force them to divest themselves of *all* staff.  Answer your own phones, read your own mail, etc
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on December 31, 2021, 08:16:08 PM
HBO did a surprisingly good documentary just recently which shows to perfection to collaboration of massive corruption between Politicians, Bureaucrats and Corporations. It's called "The Crime of the Century" and it's about the opioid epidemic, but it shows you how the same rot is being applied in every other level.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on December 31, 2021, 10:16:28 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: ThatChrisGuy on January 01, 2022, 12:23:31 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on January 01, 2022, 12:37:06 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 01, 2022, 01:04:20 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 01, 2022, 03:02:32 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mercurius on January 01, 2022, 11:00:46 AM

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 agree that conspiracy websites are used in that way, and certainly there's validity to the notion that the idea of a "conspiracy theory" was created by the CIA as a means to invalidate any and all counter-viewpoints to the mainstream narrative, especially those that critique the CIA. In fact, I see this basic tactic employed all the time by the political establishments and their MSM pawns: you create a threat, or at least magnify it beyond any reasonable proportion, which distracts from the actual threats that exist (which also happen to be, imo, the very establishment that is employing the tactic).

But while none of what is currently going on regarding the pandemic requires a secret master plan, the absence of this requirement doesn't negate its possible existence. I mean, I agree with you that--at the bare minimum--what we're seeing is an immense power-grab. But it could be more than that, and I think there's good reasons to think there's more going on.

I'm reminded a bit of the Batygin/Brown view on "Planet Nine" - that while they haven't seen it, it would explain all sorts of anomalous behavior in the solar system. Now it is not the only possible explanation, and there's a valid counter argument for why it might be wrong (see Kevin Napier's study), but the point is that absence of direct or obvious proof (a smoking gun, or actually seeing the planet with a telescope) doesn't disprove something's existence.

I tend to think that the "truth" is somewhere between the cabalistic master plan and mere opportunism, that there is some degree of planning and orchestration, but the actual shape of it is not what most conspiracy theories think, or at least there's no way to specify what is "actually going on." I'm also leery of documents or manifestos that claim to know everything that's going on, or overly focus on any one, single theory or villain. I mean, if there truly is a master plan, chances are we wouldn't ever see the main perpetrators, only their middle-men and public faces.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mercurius on January 01, 2022, 11:01:33 AM
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."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: ThatChrisGuy on January 01, 2022, 12:01:51 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 01, 2022, 01:51:12 PM
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.

As with everything, the original purpose always gets corrupted.  The revolving door allowing people to work for the SEC one day and then work for the companies they're supposed to be watch-dogging the next day means that the SEC is effectively neutered so long as the companies they're regulating all agree to the same basic corruption. 

They didn't go after Madoff because they didn't want to know.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 01, 2022, 02:40:29 PM
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?
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.

That's why the banality of evil concept is so important, because our instinctive aversion to Nazi imagery is the result of hindsight and constant reinforcement. We have no such association with the uniforms of new types of evil.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 01, 2022, 02:48:11 PM
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."
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 01, 2022, 05:55:12 PM
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.

I've never used the word "conspiracy", didn't say it was one. Our former Health Secretary has been pictured several times with Gates and Schwab. He tweeted recently about how he was still in dialogue with Gates. It's all in plain site, yet we have people who immediately say you're engaging in delusional thinking to point out what is public knowledge if you but look.

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.

I didn't say most, it's about a third. Another 20% or so get it in care homes. Those can be found without much effort, but fucked if I'm going to make any effort to assist you, cunt.

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.

There's another lesson of the 20th century that the left is desperate to memory hole: the communists were every bit as evil as the Nazis. And they had longer to work.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 02, 2022, 04:06:35 PM
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.
You, and her, would be wrong.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on January 02, 2022, 10:10:45 PM
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.
You, and her, would be wrong.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 02, 2022, 11:20:47 PM

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.
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!"

That's typical John Kim -- framing things in the most deceptive and dishonest way possible.

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.

The ComputerBureaucracy Is not Your Friend.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on January 03, 2022, 07:07:41 AM
  Nazis can be created because LOTS of people NEED rules and LOVE daddy to tell them what to do.  At some point people simply excuse themselves from being the driver and just go along for the ride.  I do not know if everyone is capable of going down that road, but I am certain enough are capable that they will remove those unwilling/incapable of going down the same road with them at the earliest opportunity.   

   I have seen more mindless following of arbitrary rules the past two years than I would have ever thought possible in this country.  I do not think that bodes well for the future.  I see a good deal of very low grade organizing to resist some of those rules...I think that is not a great sign either, at some point once people decide they can not tolerate one another any more, some one has to go. 

 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 03, 2022, 08:11:44 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on January 03, 2022, 09:18:15 AM
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 both are fully valid examples, hollywood has just made Nazi's the ULTIMATE hollywood bad guys.  Seems people in hollywood have a special place in their hearts for Nazis, which is understandable, but seem to some how, despite being learned and knowledgeable folk,  to completely miss the many, many many horrors of communism, which taken as a whole is worse and has taken a worse toll on humanity if nothing else, due to longevity. 

  Strange how one evil always gets the spot light and the other sort of gets excused by so many....almost as if agenda first principles distant second, or maybe not at all.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on January 03, 2022, 09:19:50 AM
 Which to their credit, hollywood has managed to add a few new ultimate bad guys, seems russian mafia is behind almost all violent crime in the USA, or at least the ones the meth addled skin head hillbillies are not perpetuating. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mercurius on January 03, 2022, 09:44:17 AM
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."
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.

How to shift that? I have no idea, or rather, I have ideas but I don't know how they could be implemented successfully, given how attached people are to their tribal thinking.

I think a key component is a desire among the majority for a "benevolent dictator." This is why I see Covidianism (that is, unquestioning belief in whatever the official narrative is) to be quasi-religious. Actually, scratch the quasi. The irony, of course, is that some of the very same folks who bag on religious people for believing in their God or leaders, are zealous about the "new gods": Fauci, Gates, or whichever promulgator of the narrative they prefer. So they cheer on non-sensical platitudes like "Trust the Science" and believe Fauci when he says, "mistrust in me is not trusting the science, because I am the science."

Science becomes a new religion, and the opposite of its original intent. Enantiodromia, the Greeks called it, which is how the teachings of Jesus morphed into the Crusades and Inquisition: when an impulse transforms into its opposite. This is also at work with "Wokism": a desire for social justice and "inclusion" ends up creating a new monster or other - those that disagree with the new belief system. Or as George Bush famously said, "If you're not with us, you're with the terrorists." Ironic how the Wokies have unwittingly followed the neo-con playbook.

Yet I wouldn't say that simply having a healthy degree of skepticism or capacity for rational thought is enough. I think of Sam Harris, a guru of secular humanist intellectualism, who is strangely unwilling to think outside of the box on this, as evinced by his weird disavowal of Bret Weinstein and refusal to debate him on anything Covid related. Even Harris, and any self-proclaimed guru of rationalism, is not immune to emotional override and cognitive blindspots.

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."

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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 03, 2022, 11:25:57 AM
Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes of Children and Adolescents Aged <18 Years Hospitalized with COVID-19 — Six Hospitals, United States, July–August 2021
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm705152a3.htm

Approximately two thirds of patients (67.5%) had one or more underlying medical conditions, with obesity being the most common (32.4%); among patients aged 12–17 years, 61.4% had obesity.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 03, 2022, 05:39:21 PM
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.

Nazis and Communists got nothing on the CCP.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 03, 2022, 06:49:13 PM
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.

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."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on January 03, 2022, 08:00:39 PM

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.

The ComputerBureaucracy Is not Your Friend.


You're not wrong. The root of the problem is that selective enforcement leads to inequality under the law. Biden's friends know they will never be audited, any conservative who speaks out knows he will. Communist Antifa & BLM terrorists burn down whole cities knowing that cops won't arrest them and DAs won't charge them, or let them on $0 bail, and in the most egregious cases will let them off with unsupervised probation. But anyone who goes to protest against the Left knows that they could end up theoretically facing no bail, months or years of imprisonment and mistreatment, with slow lingering trials, sometimes for no definable crime at all.

And then you wonder why the right increasingly distrusts the government.

The answer would be to restore equality under rule of law.  If you protest, or if you burn down a building, you face the same consequences whether you're on the left or the right. That literally doesn't happen now anymore.

Likewise, things like IRS audits have to be completely randomized, except in the case of tips being given of course, in which case the protocols for investigation MUST be applied EXACTLY the same whether the guy or company the IRS was tipped off about is the MyPillow guy or one of Hunter Biden's Shell Companies For CCP Payoffs. 

And the SEC and all other government institutions (including Education) get out of the business of pushing CRT, Gender Theory or Wokism.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on January 03, 2022, 08:09:50 PM
I am sure however we're all shocked you in particular tried to minimize the Nazis as "only active for a few years."

I agree. National Socialism is just as comprable in atrocities as Communism.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on January 03, 2022, 09:55:14 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on January 03, 2022, 11:08:46 PM
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?

https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/587322-fauci-says-he-was-stunned-by-boos-from-supporters-to-trump-over
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 04, 2022, 11:04:27 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 04, 2022, 11:11:47 AM
The entire official narrative is founded on bullshit statistics.

"Cases" are not infections, they're pings on a crappy test never designed as a diagnostic tool. Hospitalisations depend upon testing everyone upon admission, even though a significant proportion weren't admitted for covid, but happen to have pinged the aforementioned crappy test. And "covid deaths" are the biggest chicanery of all, a bollocks measure invented in 2020 to artificially inflate the number of deaths "with" rather than from covid.

There's one statistic that can't be massaged or inflated, and that's the all-cause mortality figure. Which barely upticked in 2020 despite the so-called pandemic, and came after a decade of falling death rates to 2019. I bet 2021 will prove to be little out of the ordinary either.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on January 04, 2022, 11:42:56 AM
The entire official narrative is founded on bullshit statistics.
The pandemic isn't real and only fat people are dying from it.
You're a moron.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 04, 2022, 12:22:26 PM
The pandemic isn't real and only fat people are dying from it.
You're a moron.

Average age of death from covid indistinguishable from average age of death from all causes. Real pandemics kill across the board, they don't merely shorten old people's lives by a few months.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 05, 2022, 01:41:41 PM
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.

Killer viruses really aren't all they've cracked up to be.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 05, 2022, 05:50:05 PM
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.

Killer viruses really aren't all they've cracked up to be.
So your aquired immunity isn't so good then.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on January 05, 2022, 06:17:45 PM
What Im seeing is that its better then the worst projections, worse then just flu, and there just isn’t a real solution at all.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Daztur on January 06, 2022, 12:43:24 AM
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.

Killer viruses really aren't all they've cracked up to be.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 06, 2022, 05:03:02 AM
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.

Killer viruses really aren't all they've cracked up to be.
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.

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 06, 2022, 10:27:43 AM
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.

Killer viruses really aren't all they've cracked up to be.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 06, 2022, 03:18:20 PM
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.

Killer viruses really aren't all they've cracked up to be.
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.

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.

I used "herd immunity" in the sense that it was proffered by St. Fauci, which was when x% get vaccinated, we will be at herd immunity and covid will no longer be a problem. I figured it was like measles; if enough people get vaccinated, even though the vaccine is imperfect, transmission is effectively eliminated. That is obviously not the case.

Btw, in Fauci-speak, x(ti+1) > x(ti).


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on January 06, 2022, 04:57:53 PM
We have moved a bit past the side topic of bureaucracy, but I'd like to follow up.

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.

I feel like we are talking past each other, because I generally agree with this.

I agree that there should be strong and simple but clear rules -- and that we are in a bad state currently. The question is, how do we get better rules implemented? I agree that crises are bad for legislation. The ideal public involvement is slow-and-steady growth of awareness rather than any crisis. Within U.S. history, I think the Gilded Age (1870s to around 1900) was a high point in corruption, and I think that things improved after that. I don't have a strong opinion about why, but the terrible corruption of the era was pretty clear. I do think the development public education helped, as did other grassroots organizing. Things got worse at some point in the 20th century - I don't make any strong claims of when. But the point is, we are due for more improvements.

Currently, we need to vote in moderate reformer politicians. I think that the current extreme partisanship is bad for improving the workings of government, because each party portrays the other as the ultimate evil -- and that one's own party is the best solution. As long as they perceive a much worse enemy, people accept the flaws of their own party. Partisanship will likely get worse for a time, but I hope that it will peak -- and we'll see people start to get off social media more, increased calls for reform, and more independent figures challenging the establishment.


EDITED TO ADD: The tricky question is how do we get stronger and clearer rules. Especially, are there particular countries in particular periods of history that we should emulate?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 06, 2022, 06:36:00 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 07, 2022, 08:20:58 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 07, 2022, 11:57:45 AM
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.

This really all depends on the individual.  No vaccines and minor symptoms, vaccinated answer minute symptoms, vaccinated and awful symptoms, not vaccinated and awful symptoms - and everything in between.

I got my 2nd Pfizer in April. Got delta at the beginning of September from my unvaccinated teenage son (high school athlete with higher risk of vaccination complications for him than from COVID). Loss of taste/smell. Head cold symptoms with low grade fever first 3 days. Then exhaustion and shortness of breath (96% SpO2) for a few days until I got mAb treatment.  Got a booster at beginning of December . Son got covid again this week (stuffy nose, only, but had to test him for school and the rapid antigen test I used turned bright pink in the sample line like right away).  I'm sure I got it again from him - had a minor fever 2 days ago that went away in a few hours and woke up with sinus pain behind my left cheek this morning, but no fever, no head cold symptoms, no loss of taste/smell.

To vaccinate or not - health authorities should have couched it as similar to an annual flu shot rather than the "get the shot or you'll kill others and yourself" message - worst marketing campaign ever...  Many of those opposed to getting it are *because* of the high pressure sales tactics that were used to try to get them to take it.

Yes, protect the vulnerable, but then stay out of everyone else's way - exactly what we've always done during flu season with the frail and elderly, cancer patients, etc.  I've never gotten a flu shot when I was younger (outside of when I was in the military) despite all of the world travel I've taken in the course of employment, but now that I'm 50, it makes sense. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on January 07, 2022, 12:56:03 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 07, 2022, 04:08:47 PM
(misread a post)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on January 07, 2022, 04:20:37 PM
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. It is similar for many other safety measures, like avoiding indoor crowds. One can still get infected even with reasonable precautions, but precautions can reduce the likelihood of infection.

I think a lot of points are getting conflated here, though - especially clashing on some very different versions of facts.

I can understand opposition to government authoritarianism. I had much the same feeling after the Patriot Act was passed after 9/11. It's not that I was pro-terrorist, but I felt that the government was using the crisis to increase it's surveillance and reduce civil liberties. Still, very few people are actually skeptical that I can see regarding covid. They buy very hard into a particular narrative based on their politics, and will react very emotionally to disagreement.

Personally, I don't have much background in medicine, and I don't claim to know a whole lot. But the people I know who are medically trained all seem to agree that this is a very serious disease and they encourage vaccinations.

Regarding HappyDaze's reply - it should be noted that he was replying to these comments by Kiero --

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on January 07, 2022, 04:27:04 PM
Hey bitches, time to get scared of the sniffles again!

Here comes the FLURONA!!!

It's been detected in America! And it's coming for you all!

Run! Hide! Mask! Vax! Boost! Double Mask! Double Boost!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on January 07, 2022, 04:31:06 PM
But the people I know who are medically trained all seem to agree that this is a very serious disease and they encourage vaccinations.

The thing is that any establishment is also not infallible. They have been wrong on COVID multiple times before, and after being double jabbed myself, id rather wait out until they get some 'No for real this thing will work' medication instead of getting the newer and newer jabs that get counteracted by the newer and newer strain, with no promises of ending lockdowns.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 07, 2022, 04:57:08 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on January 07, 2022, 06:33:46 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 07, 2022, 06:48:00 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 07, 2022, 06:57:14 PM
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".

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.

The jab is a much more serious risk for younger and healthier people. Notice all the sportsmen and women who keep dying? Or getting permanent heart damage that forces their retirement? There's an implication the damage done is accelerated by their fitness.

I'm over 40, but in excellent health. I exercise every day, I don't smoke, drink alcohol or eat crap. The impacts of this on athletes are far more relevant to me than all the 80-somethings, who's immune response is barely measurable, but are "fine". And I've now had covid three times with little consequence, with a shorter period of illness each time.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on January 07, 2022, 07:50:26 PM
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".

I've looked at the all-cause mortality stats, and they appear consistent. Here's the CDC page that looks at all-cause mortality, for example.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm

But it's not just the U.S. CDC. Every state from New York to Texas have reported similar stats. This requires not just massive fraud from thousands of health professionals within the U.S., but also unprecedented international cooperation between radically different countries to all agree to mock up their mortality statistics similarly. Here is an international comparison, for example:

(https://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=1Dl7KRiu1QBRJP7h4itcBN7JaSI1_9wTm)
Source: https://ourworldindata.org/excess-mortality-covid

I could believe that one country's official stats were inaccurate. I don't buy that dozens of countries have all agreed to shift stats over 20 times higher than reality. That would be obvious to tens of thousands of professionals who work with those numbers everywhere.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 07, 2022, 09:07:44 PM
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.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 07, 2022, 10:02:04 PM
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?" 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. The shitbag Ferguson at Imperial College has *never* produced a computer model that is accurate, yet the UK relied upon his doomsday scenarios. If Fauci was such an expert at virology, why didn't he figure out an AIDS vaccine (this is an interesting question since covid vaccines are kinda like the HIV drug cocktails - not curing, just ensuring a steady customer base)?

I think the what-if question that needs to be answered is - if we hadn't had lockdowns but had merely protected the vulnerable, would we have the same amount of overall deaths, but over the span of a year and been done with it?  In the past (1918, 1957, 1968, etc.) there were no lockdowns during pandemics and they naturally burned themselves out and become milder endemic seasonal viruses.

This panic over covid ignores that even rhinoviruses can result in death, per this paper: https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/18/11/12-0607_article

Interesting that they were doing PCR in that study - to identify the pathogen, not to determine infection - what people have been saying for a long time regarding covid - a positive PCR in the absence of symptoms means nothing.

I'm betting that if we were to have tested during past cold and flu seasons to the extent we have for COVID, we'd discover a lot more "they died from pneumonia, they were old and sick" actually died from the common cold viruses.

Doesn't change the fact that, for a not-so-healthy person, getting the jab *reduces* risk - the same as they've done for flu. We just don't have any solid data to show how many people have gotten the flu asymptomatically or had a reduced severity over the years with comparison data showing vaccine injury rates to compare flu shots to covid shots (we've also never forced society as a whole to get flu shots).  I'm going to go out on a limb in stating that the true number of people who caught COVID is probably two orders of magnitude higher than the best official count, when you consider how many got it asymptomatically and how many had such mild symptoms that it was never counted.

Lastly, what the midwits in charge fail to realize - giving kids childhood vaccinations against diseases that have a high chance of death or disablement is primarily for the benefit of the child and is worth it to give them a chance at a future life - and it isn't the same as forcing them to take a shot so that an elderly or very ill person can live a few more months. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 07, 2022, 11:30:16 PM
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".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 07, 2022, 11:50:43 PM
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.

Dude who routinely quotes from antisemitic sites he just happens to read also just tried to minimize the Nazis, and you are making a personal attack on me for pointing it out? Yeah, OK.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 07, 2022, 11:55:18 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 08, 2022, 07:16:12 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 08, 2022, 11:11:09 AM
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.

I agree with you that communism today is a much larger threat to civilization than nazism today. This, despite some places in the media trying to spin small numbers of white supremacists as being much larger in numbers than they really are. Fortunately I think the hardest core communist nations are slowly but surely falling as well. Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, I can see all being more "ordinary" socialist nations in this upcoming generation. And I am not saying I like "ordinary" socialist nations, just that they tend to murder people far less often than hardcore communist ones.

As for China, I think we fucked up. In fact I blame Trump for a lot of that fuck up, and I blame Biden for continuing a lot of Trumps fuck ups, with regard to China. Massively increasing trade with China was in fact spreading US culture throughout China and creating a real Chinese middle class which didn't like the suppression of freedoms which comes with communism. Then we started a trade war with them which played right into the hands of the Communist party in China and allowed them to regain some powers they were losing. It was an incredibly stupid move which has turned China back more towards the direction of hardcore Communism and away from the more "ordinary" socialism they might have been heading towards.

And that trade war, more than anything else, is the #1 reason why I don't like Trumpism. That aspect of Trumpism was not meaningfully different than the pro-union stances of prior Democrats who also wanted a trade war with China. It was short sighted, and didn't think about the total ramifications of such a trade dispute on the long term goals of our nation.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 08, 2022, 03:01:48 PM
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".

I dunno. Declaring people to be whatever gender they feel like, in contravention of biological truth? Deciding that burning and looting minority-owned businesses in the name of racial equity? Teaching children to hate themselves? Increased grifting by politicians and tech charlatans to the point of doing it openly? Fighting tooth and nail to prevent election results audits while proclaiming them to be the most transparent ever? Lying to judges and withholding exculpatory evidence to put innocent people in jail? Destroying monuments that tell our history (good and bad,) in an attempt to rewrite it?Allowing immigrants to rewrite cultures of the nations they move to rather than taking them to assimilate (grooming gangs, no-go zones, etc.) Quid pro quo amongst politicians, bureaucrats, and the media to tell a tale instead of reporting facts as they exist. Fighting forever wars in brown people lands without actually intending to win, so that multinationals can earn another 12¢ on the stock next quarter and the favored local warlords can be paid off. The revolving door of industry, government, and lobbyists that ensures fraud waste and abuse are brushed under the rug. The inability for many people to write a coherent sentence, let alone a formal written letter. The preference for staring at social media or tv instead of reading a book. The demand for equal treatment of women, minorities, and special interests without demanding that they meet the same expectations as everyone else (or deciding that someone with a different opinion than your own has to be a racist or transphobe or anti-gay). The entitlement mentality amongst both the wealthy and those on government assistance. The over reliance on white collar careers, driving college attendance and the tuition inflation that comes with it, even as those same college educated but unable to get a job have no idea how to change a tire, replace a light switch, or hang drywall.  The ever fewer participants in charitable fraternal organizations (Elks, Shriners, etc.) and the reduction in participation in local government, attendance at organized religious services, and community engagement.

Pick your poison.

Fact of the matter is that society is collapsing around us and we don't recognize it - kinda like observing the light from a star, even as it has already burned its last.  Western societies would do well to return to 1950s attitudes towards DIY, what constitutes a successful career, the roles of men and women and the expectations of being citizens, even as we reject some of the difficult historical parts like racism, nepotism, and tolerance for corruption.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 08, 2022, 07:19:37 PM
What are the hypochondriacs who like testing themselves repeatedly going to do when they have to pay for LFTs?

This on the cover of tomorrow's Sunday Times:

(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4bd69013024123cc2a62142a89aea384f7a312db8168bed277e58216e32cb63c.jpg?w=600&h=481)

Six more years of what? They can get fucked if they think I'm going along with this bollocks that long. They're not jabbing my kids ever, nor will I ever consent.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on January 09, 2022, 12:18:41 AM
Last week, we learned to be TERRIFIED of the new variant called FLURONA...

...but TODAY we have the DELTACRON upon us all!!!

Kneel to The Science you bitches and double mask your assholes!!

Only more government control of our lives can save us!!!

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on January 09, 2022, 01:54:41 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 09, 2022, 08:57:24 AM
No Way to Grow Up
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/04/briefing/american-children-crisis-pandemic.html

Even the NYT acknowledges that covid is not a significant risk for children. And yet all of the NYT-reading leftist are baying for children to be vaccinated.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 09, 2022, 09:15:18 AM
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.

It's the whole "good people fix problems, which leads to complacency which leads to corruption, which leads to revolution by good people to fix problems..."

Luckily some of us (the collective "we") were smart enough to not allow government to take away the right to bear arms...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 09, 2022, 09:17:39 AM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 09, 2022, 04:13:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 09, 2022, 04:26:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 09, 2022, 06:07:56 PM
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.
I didn't know Elizabeth came out as transgender. Or is that his dead name now?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 09, 2022, 07:36:20 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 09, 2022, 08:34:55 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 09, 2022, 08:56:04 PM
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.

The most interesting thing is The Ethical Skeptic had been suggesting that omicron is actually a grandchild of a covid strain that predates alpha.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on January 09, 2022, 09:13:49 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 09, 2022, 10:24:57 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 10, 2022, 01:51:54 AM
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 WARNING
Quote from: From his MSNBC interview
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.

When are we going to finally cancel this alt-right wacko from all platforms for misinformation?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 10, 2022, 08:12:15 AM
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

And that's the problem for leftists... They don't understand words like "Congress shall make no law," or "...shall not be infringed" are absolutes.

In engineering terms, they're "shall" statements - i.e. they are requirements, not design goals...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 10, 2022, 08:22:52 AM
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 WARNING
Quote from: From his MSNBC interview
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.

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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: horsesoldier on January 10, 2022, 10:14:25 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 10, 2022, 10:50:41 AM
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.

The difference being that, at any time, the Aussie government can come along and confiscate weapons ) whether a grain thresher, a longbow, or an AK-47) and you have no recourse. In the US, when a government attempts to restrict firearms in any way, you still have the ability to sue them with the possibility of overturning bad legislation, or move to a different state...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 10, 2022, 01:33:11 PM
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 WARNING
Quote from: From his MSNBC interview
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.

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...
It's not gain of function if we change what gain and function mean.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 10, 2022, 06:20:31 PM
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has tested positive for covid-19 after visiting Happydazeland to party without a mask among the huge piles of rotting corpses that are 100% the fault of Sith Lord DeSantis.
https://astoriapost.com/rep-ocasio-cortez-tests-positive- for-covid-19

We send hopes and prayers for her speedy recovery, but none whatsoever for her incipient cancellation for hypocrisy, because we know that will never happen. The rules are for thee and me, not for she.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 10, 2022, 08:41:13 PM
If you got vaccinated to prevent transmission, protect others, and "end" the pandemic, you were a sucker.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiEiZEMM_0s

And these are the people we're supposed to believe about reduced mortality from being vaccinated.  ;)

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 10, 2022, 10:46:24 PM
If you got vaccinated to prevent transmission, protect others, and "end" the pandemic, you were a sucker.

Ackshually we prefer the term useful idiots.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 10, 2022, 11:37:04 PM
For the last two weeks EDs in the central Florida area have been hit with a Covid surge. No, not a bunch of people on ventilators...in fact, most of them don't require any significant interventions at all. So what's the issue? Testing. Every jackass is rushing into EDs for testing thinking it's somehow going to move faster than the testing centers. It doesn't. Anyone showing only minor (or no) symptoms gets tagged as Acuity 5 (the least severe category) and might have to then sit for hours in an overcrowded waiting area until the staff is available to swab them, do the required initial assessment (including vital signs), have registration (billing dept) verfiy their information (not that most of the uninsured are ever going to pay), and then get discharged. At that point, they still don't have an answer--they need to log into a web app to find out if they are positive or not.  Sometimes the same person will come in again for retesting only a few days later (current record at my site is four visits for testing in 10 days). Hilariously, these people expect to have meals served to them while they're piled up in the ED lobby, and they make other outrageous demands on a regular basis too. On Sunday, I was heading into work and saw that the two local testing centers I passed by had signs saying "open Monday-Saturday." Sure enough, we had a shit-load of "testees" show up, and it makes it hard to focus resources where they need to be, since EMTALA says we can't turn them away.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on January 10, 2022, 11:54:43 PM
Don't need no constitution if our ancient rights and traditions are respected.
If.

However...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 11, 2022, 09:54:21 AM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on January 11, 2022, 12:29:45 PM
  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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Jam The MF on January 11, 2022, 01:14:58 PM
I read a 7 page policy document last night.  Numerous large U.S. employers are using February 9th, as a deadline for vaccination or submitting to mandatory weekly testing at your own expense.  Things will tighten down on many citizens in the U.S. February 9th.  They aren't mandating vaccination.  They are mandating testing.  A huge logjam is about to hit the U.S.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 11, 2022, 01:31:02 PM
So much for medical privacy or 'my body my choice'.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 11, 2022, 01:57:13 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 11, 2022, 05:37:13 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 11, 2022, 05:41:03 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 11, 2022, 06:08:15 PM
I've had all three major strains. None of them put me anywhere near a hospital, or even required bed rest. Never been jabbed.

A week after my symptoms started with the last one, I'm back to exercising again. No lingering symptoms.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 11, 2022, 06:35:07 PM
I'm old enough to remember when the "lab leak" was a conspiracy theory: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/01/11/scientists-believed-covid-leaked-wuhan-lab-feared-debate-could/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 11, 2022, 07:42:12 PM
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/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 11, 2022, 08:42:58 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 11, 2022, 09:08:40 PM
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.
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.

People would flip out.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 12, 2022, 08:00:05 AM
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/

Amongst many other things in there, it notes they knew mRNA "vaccines" didn't work and that Ivermectin and HCQ are effective treatments. Which members of the Senate and Congress have been receiving this whole time, even while denigrating them.

This is pretty damning stuff from an Israeli immunologist: https://swprs.org/professor-ehud-qimron-ministry-of-health-its-time-to-admit-failure/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 12, 2022, 08:08:06 AM
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/
Considering 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.

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 12, 2022, 10:37:38 AM
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/
Considering 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.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 12, 2022, 11:55:37 AM
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/
Considering 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.

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.

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.

They supposedly were marked as UNCLASSIFIED. The allegation is that they were thrown on a classified computer system to hide them.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 12, 2022, 04:10:44 PM
To see the insanity of mass formation psychosis in action, just take a gander at this:

https://twitter.com/CDCDirector/status/1481315911843856387

The responses are peak mental patient stuff.  Proof positive that when you brainwash people hard enough, they won't see the truth when confronted with it - Yuri Bezmenov was 100% accurate...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 12, 2022, 06:58:37 PM
  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.

It was so bad that you never caught it?

Even with the Hospitals so full the ICUs were at 97% capacity?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 12, 2022, 08:53:56 PM
  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.

It was so bad that you never caught it?

Even with the Hospitals so full the ICUs were at 97% capacity?

Sshhh...  Don't tell him that if an ICU isn't operating at or near max capacity, it's losing money.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 13, 2022, 12:19:22 AM
  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.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 13, 2022, 10:18:55 AM
  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.

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.

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...

Here's some recent job reqs for traveling nurses:

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 13, 2022, 10:26:55 AM
  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.

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.

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. 

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 13, 2022, 10:48:39 AM
  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.

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.

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. 

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.

It has to do with number of employees and the (unlawful) Biden mandate.  As an independent contractor, you're not an employee, so in states that haven't banned vaccine mandates, it is lucrative work.

I'm sure that plenty of staff were out sick with COVID - but omicron is essentially no more dangerous than a typical cold for most people. I'm sure that lots of people, brainwashed for the last two years, overwhelmed hospitals and urgent care centers looking for tests even though they are not showing any signs of illness (other than mental illness).

At *no* points in our past have we ever demanded that people who are not showing signs of any illness to go and get themselves tested for illness. Gov Desantis recently stated as much and the mentally ill pundits started with the whataboutism referring to cancer screenings, neglecting to understand that cancer screenings are performed based upon risk factors (hey, you're 50, get your prostate tickled), as part of routine annual blood work (this number is a little high, let's investigate further), or in response to potential symptoms (I've got this lump on my balls, Doc...) We don't have doctor's handing out cancer screenings like Oprah hands out cars...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on January 13, 2022, 03:08:38 PM
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/

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 13, 2022, 03:15:07 PM
Its been two years of covid mania. If hospitals haven't prepared for covid spikes it's on them.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on January 13, 2022, 03:48:29 PM
US Supreme Court just blocked the OSHA mandate (6-3) but upheld the CMS one (5-4).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 13, 2022, 04:22:22 PM
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/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 13, 2022, 05:08:21 PM
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/
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 13, 2022, 07:05:42 PM
US Supreme Court just blocked the OSHA mandate (6-3) but upheld the CMS one (5-4).

Good and not-so-good.

I am beyond done with this covid madness. Everyone involved in this bullshit should be metaphorically run out of town. This has been a disastrous response from day one, and they're intentionally prolonging the stupidity.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 13, 2022, 08:21:56 PM
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/
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 14, 2022, 12:04:35 AM
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/
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.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 14, 2022, 09:04:37 AM
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/
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.

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.

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 14, 2022, 10:02:15 AM
This ad nauseum, the elites are so terrified of the 'rona:

(https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d6a1ffa05da82346999d2205fdbdb195ff46b917eb8e85ba6ca76aa2c7f391fd.jpg)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 14, 2022, 10:08:00 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 14, 2022, 10:17:17 AM
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/
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.

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.

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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 14, 2022, 10:17:36 AM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 14, 2022, 10:22:41 AM
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...
Even better, he basically admits to such on Twitter.

You know, there's a reason why security-conscious people are looking at social media more and more askance.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 14, 2022, 11:12:26 AM
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/
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.

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.

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.
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.

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.

You answered your own question...  All these panicky brainwashed morons sitting up at the ER demanding a covid test to "prove" they're not infected or because they've been brainwashed to think "I've got a runny nose - I *must* have vivid covid and a covid infection = murderdeathkill" need to be summarily triaged back into the parking lot.  This behavior is *exactly* mass formation psychosis, and the media will happily report this mass of perfectly healthy fools as "overwhelming" the hospitals, in conjunction with twisting "well, we're at 110% capacity because we're understaffed" to be "See? See?!? all these people with covid have filled up all the hospital beds. They're stacking them like cordwood in the hallways!"

At *no* time in the past have we ever had such clear mental illness on display.  It's always been "hey, I've got a cold, I think?  Oh, I'm running a fever and my body hurts - let me call my doctor.  Yep, your fly test is positive. Take some tamiflu and Tylenol and drink plenty of fluids." The people who go to the hospital are either indigents or, mostly, the feeble sent there by neglectful nursing homes well after they should have when they've already got pneumonia starting to settle into their lungs.

I speak from experience. My mother (suffering from Alzheimer's) was in an assisted living facility with my father. She got a head cold that moved into her chest and she had trouble breathing. She was sent to the hospital a week later ( instead of just being able to call her family doctor and make an appointment as soon as things got worse). Flu test was negative but she has fluid in her lungs. They had to intubate her. Ten days later, when she was taken off the vent (she had a living will instructing no prolonged care in such an event, which they violated despite my father's objections), she died within 2 hours.  She was older (78). She smoked most of her adult life and had COPD. Being an Alzheimer's patient, being placed on a vent always seems to least to a poor outcome.  This happened like 4 years ago. No idea what virus actually caused the infection.  *Those* are the people who need to go to the ER. Not a week after dyspnea. Right away.  The young(er) and healthy (ier) - not so much.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 14, 2022, 01:15:15 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 14, 2022, 01:21:45 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 14, 2022, 03:43:28 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 14, 2022, 06:09:39 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 14, 2022, 06:41:53 PM
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.

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.
Search for palliative care medications on PubMed and you can find many quality studies. Somehow, the studies Kiero favors don't make the cut.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on January 15, 2022, 12:48:40 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 15, 2022, 01:07:33 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on January 15, 2022, 01:23:52 PM
  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.

  I never said they did.  I have no doubt old people and with other health issues can be compromised.  I just think the constant push for a one fix (a vaccine that does not work) is causing a lot more problems long term than a virus that has an average age of death of around 85.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 16, 2022, 07:14:24 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 16, 2022, 10:37:13 AM
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.

Here's all you need to know about mask effectiveness:

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 16, 2022, 12:26:46 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 16, 2022, 12:39:41 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 16, 2022, 12:46:51 PM
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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 16, 2022, 01:07:04 PM
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.
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.

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.
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 16, 2022, 02:18:05 PM
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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 16, 2022, 04:09:57 PM
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.

And that is why all of the science (and the CDC) pre-covid said masking was not recommended for the general public. The suddenly, SCIENCE!(tm) happened during March and April 2020 that said to wear a cloth or surgical mask. The embodiment of SCIENCE!(tm) himself, St. Facui, was at one point saying you should wear two masks.

I have one of those letter too, except mine is from a lower level bureaucrat in the DOE/NNSA food-chain.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 16, 2022, 05:29:51 PM
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.

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.

Yep and covid is no different. Harmless (if briefly unpleasant) to the overwhelming majority.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 16, 2022, 05:31:53 PM
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]
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 16, 2022, 05:34:39 PM
[Citation Needed]

I posted it several pages back.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on January 16, 2022, 06:37:09 PM
[Citation Needed]

I posted it several pages back.

The only candidate for a link I can find is the one referenced here:

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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 16, 2022, 06:37:42 PM
[Citation Needed]

I posted it several pages back.
Your push-pins-and-string mapping of whackadoodle nonsense doesn't count.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 16, 2022, 10:01:31 PM
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/
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.

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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 16, 2022, 10:11:03 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on January 16, 2022, 11:21:50 PM
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.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on January 17, 2022, 12:19:11 AM

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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 17, 2022, 06:48:36 AM

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...

I assumed that the use of the term "breath weapon" was humorous hyperbole.

But since he opened the door for it, I would go with:

=====

I have a question for you.

You're a lawyer*, not a scientist or an engineer. You're telling a guy who has worked as a risk and safety analyst for 30+ years, developing and executing complex models that involve the transport and fate of aerosols, that you know fluid mechanics and aerosol physics better than he knows fluid mechanics and aerosol physics, based purely on your gut instinct and what matches your world view.

My question is: How the fuck?

* or at least to my best recollection Mistwell is a lawyer, but I could be wrong

=====

That said, Mistwell is correct in that a mask does at least deflect your breath. So if you are up close to someone and talking to them, even a cloth mask may delay some exposure.
https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/personal-protective-equipment-infection-control/n95-respirators-surgical-masks-face-masks-and-barrier-face-coverings
https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coronavirus-covid-19-and-medical-devices/face-masks-barrier-face-coverings-surgical-masks-and-respirators-covid-19#using

Specifically, from the first link:
"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. 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."


However, as noted by Eirkrautha, it is virus concentration x exposure time (as a linear approximation) that drives the likelihood of infection. And that virus concentration is driven by the aerosol (small particles that remain airborne for long periods of time) portion of the viral release, not the droplet (large particles that plate out relatively rapidly) portion. The long-term concentration is also driven by the number of air changes of the space you occupy. For example, nobody is catching covid on airplanes, not because they are wearing masks, but because there are 12 to 15 air changes/hr and they cycle the air through HEPA filters.
https://www.travelandleisure.com/airlines-airports/how-airplane-cabin-air-works
https://www.quora.com/How-many-times-per-hour-is-the-air-inside-a-airliner-changed

The same thing, to a lesser extent (and without the HEPA filters) applies to restaurants, office cube farms, your house, etc., dependent on the number of air changes/hr.
https://smartairfilters.com/en/blog/ashrae-air-changes-per-hour-office-residential/




Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 17, 2022, 08:28:11 AM
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/
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.

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.

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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 17, 2022, 08:50:15 AM
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/
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.

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.

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.
You're a blind man describing an elephant.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on January 17, 2022, 10:49:46 AM
Does your data show you the multiple aspects of staffing difficulties (including retention and retraining)?...

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.
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 17, 2022, 12:18:59 PM
Does your data show you the multiple aspects of staffing difficulties (including retention and retraining)?...

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.
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...
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 17, 2022, 12:44:04 PM
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/
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.

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.

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.
You're a blind man describing an elephant.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 17, 2022, 04:58:31 PM
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

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.

It's worse than that in the UK. The NHS nominally has 1.4 million staff, except only 550,000 of them are actual clinicians providing primary care of some sort. Most of the 100,000 refuseniks are the latter sort, which means if they stand firm and refuse to get their first dose by 3rd February, entire departments are wiped out. You can't redeploy diversity officers or procurement managers to cover missing surgeons and anaesthetists.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 17, 2022, 05:37:27 PM
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/
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.

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.

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.
You're a blind man describing an elephant.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 17, 2022, 05:50:23 PM
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/
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.

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.

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.
You're a blind man describing an elephant.

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.

That you can't refute my statements says everything...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 17, 2022, 08:08:36 PM
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/
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.

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.

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.
You're a blind man describing an elephant.

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.

That you can't refute my statements says everything...
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?"
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 17, 2022, 10:43:18 PM

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 17, 2022, 11:12:45 PM

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.
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.

Covid-19 is primarily transmitted via aerosolization. The chance of getting the disease from fomites or large droplets that quickly precipitate from the air is negligible.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 18, 2022, 03:36:30 AM

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 18, 2022, 10:26:26 AM
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/
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.

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.

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.
You're a blind man describing an elephant.

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.

That you can't refute my statements says everything...
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?"

Then please do so. For every hospital system that you can do this for, there is an equal number that you can't. Multiple points of the same condition is not a sweeping generalization - it's pointing out that when the majority of hospitals are doing the same thing and it's not working, then they need to change how they do business.

As to how to identify fixes?  A couple of methods exist.  None of them are ready. Most of them require looking beyond a fiscal ledger sheet.

1. Actually negotiate with suppliers rather than try to maintain a comfortable relationship. Your goal isn't to be their friends - and the harder you negotiate, the more you can buy for the same price which means you can maintain higher stock levels.
2. Performance-based logistics works for some things, but not others. It uses desired outcomes as a measure of success.  If that means you order from suppliers, great. If it means you establish your own logistics organization, then do so - if you manufacture your own supplies, you never have to worry about paying to outbid your competition when dealing with a supplier.
3. Demand accurate record-keeping of things you know need to be kept track of, not just what is mandated to be kept track of. You can't know unless you measure, and too often, it gets blown-off.
4. Hire the best person for the job, regardless of background.  Right now, there is an emphasis on diversity hiring just to check a gender/color/race box even when a better candidate exists.  Pay them well or otherwise compensate them (time off, perks, specific job assignments, etc.) based upon what they value as compensation - not just what the market average is, but what you expect they'll be worth in a year or two - the goal is retaining people rather than scrimping on compensation so you don't have to recruit and train people in a never-ending cycle.  The goal is not to match newly-minted doctors and nurses just to fill the req, if they are going to take a long time to develop only to have them leave before you get to take advantage of their development and growth.  The goal is to have a solid bench of people who you can interchange in a surge/flex situation while having sufficient reserve that they aren't going to be burnt out too quickly.  This only happens when people want to come to work because they see themselves being promoted and earning more compensation 5-10 years down the line rather than "it's a job and I gotta pay the bills."  This is a bigger problem in LTCs than in hospitals.
5. Be willing to look at the organization and be ready to make redundant as many administrative staff as possible if they are not value-added and not willing to perform.  You don't need three supervisors if you have one with the authority to act and a willingness to do so.  Your legal counsel and HR director should not be more highly compensated then your licensed medical staff.  They're support staff and are part of your overhead costs and are not bringing in business, research dollars, etc.

These are all very simple things that are very hard to execute - mostly because top-heavy organizations all have to weigh in on policy and procedure.  Authority and decision-making should be driven down to the lowest possible level.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 18, 2022, 10:20:09 PM

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on January 19, 2022, 12:10:15 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on January 19, 2022, 12:11:55 AM

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.

Maybe they do. But I've seen far too many examples of people being stupid about masks to trust the people using them have any idea what they're doing.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 19, 2022, 06:10:39 AM

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.

And some don't wear a mask properly.

However, redirection (like communism) is a red herring, as Covid-19 is primarily transmitted by exposure to aerosols (i.e., small particles that are not filtered by cloth or surgical masks), with the risk of transmission being proportional to the aerosol concentration and the duration of exposure.

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.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 19, 2022, 09:35:36 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 19, 2022, 12:01:59 PM
Ah, but it's so much more profitable -- in terms of money and control -- to drum up panic and encourage people to not only wear masks but to actively threaten people asking questions about such mandates.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 19, 2022, 03:55:46 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 19, 2022, 04:03:48 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: TNMalt on January 19, 2022, 04:16:02 PM
The follow-up to lockdowns in 2020 was severely lacking. Besides, if you didn't test then you'd have no covid cases to report.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 19, 2022, 04:22:58 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 19, 2022, 04:27:11 PM
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.

Can confirm initial CDC advice was just that (though it was after the initial spread of Covid in the U.S., through all of March I think). I experienced a hilarious turn of events (or at least I found it funny) where a well know specialist doctor had published an article stating that masks would help and the CDC was making a mistake, and then anyone who posted that article on Facebook or Twitter got the post deleted and a suspension for posting fake news. Then a week and a half later the CDC revised their recommendation to match exactly what that doctor had recommended. And then mere weeks later if you posted the prior CDC policy which recommended against mask use, THAT became a deleted post with a suspension! It was a deeply moronic turn of events for social media - which is perhaps a redundant statement.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 19, 2022, 04:30:03 PM
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.).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 19, 2022, 04:59:39 PM
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.

The two studies that fall higher on the tiers of evidence based medicine are the Danmask and Bangladesh studies. The Danmask study shows no effect, and it seems to have held up pretty well. I haven't seen any substantive criticism. The Bangladesh study showed an effect, but had numerous methodological problems that we noted in the thread, and since that discussion medical statisticians have been given access to the raw data and came up with some more problems. Which is really disappointing, because it's the largest study by a big margin.

So at best, masks could have a small effect. Or no effect at all. There's no evidence whatsoever they have a strong effect.

I thought masks were a reasonable precaution at the start of the pandemic, because there was a lot of misinformation about the deadliness of the disease, and we really had very little idea how the virus was spreading. But as evidence came out supporting the highly aerosolized nature of the disease, the case for masks was demolished. The studies since have supported that conclusion.

Masks have known negative effects. They can spread disease, some people have difficulty breathing, and most importantly they hurt socialization for children. Since those are real and damaging downsides, and the potential upside is at best dubious, there's absolutely no justification for this obsession with masks, and the lack of attention to things like ventilation that have a much greater effect.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on January 19, 2022, 05:43:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 19, 2022, 05:47:57 PM
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.

It provides an upper-bound on potential effectiveness.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 19, 2022, 06:03:38 PM
Something to remember about statistical studies is that the null hypothesis (there is no statistically significant effect) requires a strong signal to reject. Moreover, the notional p <= 0.05 only says that it is a 1/20 chance you should not reject the null hypothesis. One can argue for lower p-value thresholds (I believe that the particle physics community uses p <= 1.0E-06).

Also, even if you find a correlation, you have to demonstrate to what extent the variance explained by the correlation explains the overall variance. I recently took a class on how to use the statistics package in MATLAB. One of the example problems had us looking for correlations in real-world NIH data. The instructor led us down the primrose path to finding a correlation with a very low p-value. Then he had us look at the variance explained by the correlation vs the overall variance; the correlation explained < 0.1% of the overall variance.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 19, 2022, 06:03:57 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 19, 2022, 08:20:31 PM
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.

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.

Understanding mechanistic behavior does not tell the entire story, but it is a key part of the story. Statistical studies are all well and good, but correlations that explain the majority of the variance just tell you where to look to understand the underlying causation.

Also, having a mechanistic upper bound can tell you, as a first cut, if something is important. For example, if blocking snot is important and a cloth mask is 99% effective (mechanistic upper bound) in that regard, that allows you to evaluated if that theoretical efficiency is sufficient for your intended purpose (might be great for covid, but maybe no so great for ebola). Conversely, if stopping very small aerosol particles was important and a cloth mask is 1% effective (mechanistic upper bound) in that regard, and you know that a higher effectiveness is necessary to impact the risk of spread, you could eliminate cloth masks from consideration.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on January 20, 2022, 05:20:44 PM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on January 20, 2022, 09:13:17 PM
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."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 21, 2022, 05:04:28 AM
For the time being at least, in England (not the whole of the UK) the covid charade ends next Thursday. All the "Plan B" restrictions which were never justified in the first place are being dropped. The biggest wailing of all from the covidian cultists is that mask wearing is no longer "mandated". Which means only the virtue-signalling tossers and cowards will still be muzzled in public.

I still retain my perfect record of never having worn a mask and never owning one.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 21, 2022, 05:10:02 PM
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."

I think you misspelled Hypocritic oath
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 21, 2022, 05:32:10 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 21, 2022, 06:43:24 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 21, 2022, 07:57:55 PM
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.
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.

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/)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 22, 2022, 01:14:41 AM
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.

Thats easy Kiero, a mask mandate is actually causing a reduction in the rise of cases compared to having no mask mandate.

So cases are going up but at a reduced rate.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 22, 2022, 07:18:14 PM
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.
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.

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?

As for "dated five days in the future" I want everyone to look at my link, look at Pat's claim, and answer the question as to if Pat is that fucking sloppy with something as simple as that why do you trust him with anything else?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 22, 2022, 08:09:50 PM
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? The only way is something like the hamster study, which like the physics study above, provides some context and rationale for the results of the other studies, but isn't a real world study and doesn't measure transmission under real world conditions. And it literally doesn't matter. What matters is whether wearing masks reduces infection in the observed population. Whether it works on input or output is irrelevant.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on January 22, 2022, 09:50:04 PM
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?"

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 22, 2022, 10:26:48 PM
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?"

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 22, 2022, 10:52:07 PM
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?"

Quote
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.

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.

Then come back and apologize.

(Not that you ever will, you little baby.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 22, 2022, 11:01:00 PM
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?"

Quote
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.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 23, 2022, 10:24:30 AM
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?"

Quote
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.

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.

C'mon, man...  Everyone knows that lawyers are qualified to render judgement on science and engineering and medicine.  The rest of us are uneducated hacks just reading off the list of ingredients in the quantum cookbook...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 23, 2022, 12:33:51 PM
I'm old enough to remember when the notion that the vaccine passport would be used as the stepping stone to digital ID was a "conspiracy theory": https://twitter.com/SikhForTruth/status/1484849526133374976

See also:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FJx-qFSXwAMmR8Q?format=jpg&name=medium)

I mean no one ever predicted they'd be abolishing cash next (see Central Bank Digital Currencies)...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 24, 2022, 07:01:49 AM
The very first lockdown was in Wuhan on 23rd January 2020. Why would they be doing that unless the infection had been raging for months without any of the previous measures doing anything? I'd note they didn't suspend travel out of Wuhan in any of the preceding time.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 24, 2022, 12:49:39 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 24, 2022, 02:11:39 PM
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.

If only the twats in charge of my country had found their balls and stuck to their original plan, following Sweden in doing nothing.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 24, 2022, 04:26:42 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 24, 2022, 04:34:01 PM
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 finding them accountable involves firing them or firing on them.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 24, 2022, 04:38:33 PM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on January 24, 2022, 04:56:26 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on January 24, 2022, 05:02:35 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: ZetaRidley on January 24, 2022, 05:12:35 PM
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.

Basically this. This mask thing, and the social distancing, I don't think it really did anything good, other than weaken all of our immune systems. Our school district went back to school with no mask mandate, basically because we're in a red state and everyone put their foot down. Man, I've never been more sick in my life. A pretty bad cold in October, a Sinus Infection before Christmas, and I just got over the dreaded coof. My symptoms sound fairly similar to that you had the first go around, no where near the sickest I've been, but it sucked. After about a week, symptoms pretty much disappeared over night.

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.


This is the problem really. The policies just made everything worse. Also, I don't think these vaccines were worth a shit. And why are they pushing them so hard? They were formulated for the previous, first incarnation of the virus. It seems like Omnicron is the variant everyone is getting now anyway. Governments need to have a serious look at their policies, because this didn't work out the way they though it would at all. What's even worse is if you try to talk about this shit, the doom porn filled government sycophants have allowed any legitimate criticism of the government to be ignored with labels such as "anitvax" or whatnot.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 24, 2022, 06:33:59 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 24, 2022, 06:50:19 PM
If anyone's interested:
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm

<snark>
You really need to stop referencing alt-right, crack-pot, conspiracy theory websites like the US Centers for Disease Control. But then, by the same token, I need to stop referencing the US Food & Drug Administration regarding cloth and surgical mask efficacy with respect to their inability to filter aerosols.
</snark>
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on January 24, 2022, 08:01:40 PM
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

This is meaningless. The "document" is just a complaint filed by a group of (seriously) self-described "activists." It proves nothing.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on January 24, 2022, 08:19:50 PM
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 agree that this shows value to natural immunity. However, it also shows that the vaccines have a huge effect compared to being unvaccinated for first exposure. So if one considers this good data, it contradicts claims from posters like ZetaRidley who says that the "vaccines aren't worth shit". The vaccines have a huge effect on this chart.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on January 25, 2022, 12:14:37 AM
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.

Can confirm that NZ is avoiding respiratory infections.

But then it is summer so dont expect much until April.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on January 25, 2022, 12:41:37 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPDmyYuXWMw

Far ranging talk about covid-19 and the response, especially related to omicron. The two participant are both M.D.s, one with a Masters in Public Health who has authored over 300 papers, and the other has been running an ER during the pandemic, so they combine a very strong theoretical background with a boots on the ground look at what's actually been happening. Both are strongly pro-intervention and pro-active public health, but despite that they're pushing back strongly against the narrative and think things went wrong and way too far.

The discussion covers with covid vs. from covid (60/40), mandates, the mental health damage to children, where the science is good and where it's missing (given the massive repercussions and almost complete lack of evidence, why hasn't the CDC funded a RCT on the effectiveness of children wearing masks at some point the last 2 years?), the trade offs when it comes to vaxxes and different age groups, how we should be allocating the jabs (boosters for children are silly when there are seniors who haven't had the shot), the absurdity of the response by various schools and universities to omicron, how we seem to be prioritizing the elderly over children (contrary to... well basically every time and place throughout history), some insight into how healthcare officials are rationalizing their recommendations (given the climate, if we recommend A, that may lead to positive result B, even if there's no justification for A in the first place), how among providers the fear of testing positive is much greater than fear of the disease (because of the disruption), and much more.

It's an hour long, but even the first 20 minutes or so will give a good taste.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 25, 2022, 03:02:35 PM
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'.

https://dailycaller.com/2022/01/25/new-york-kathy-hochul-elise-stefanik-mask-mandates-schools/
https://redstate.com/bonchie/2022/01/25/new-york-enters-constitutional-crisis-territory-after-schools-disobey-court-order-on-mask-freedom-n512417
https://www.dailywire.com/news/education-department-tells-all-ny-parents-that-kids-have-to-mask-despite-supreme-court-ruling-it-illegal

"Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters." --Daniel Webster
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on January 25, 2022, 04:30:21 PM
 I have to laugh to myself a whole lot when people keep believing "data" from people who have lied to them from the beginning about origins and nature of virus, as well as efficacy of vaccines.  Why would any person with a lick of critical thinking feel government toadies are going to be honest or present honest data about anything at this point?  That vax is a money grab.  People who can not actually hack the real world, and who are government toadies and corporate shills have no interest in truth, just a bottom line. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on January 25, 2022, 07:50:08 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 26, 2022, 08:01:23 AM
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 :)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on January 30, 2022, 06:52:14 PM
Fuck beans!?! You know it's bad when the Daily Beast comes out against masking kids in school:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-true-cost-of-masking-young-kids-forever
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on February 01, 2022, 01:13:47 AM
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 01, 2022, 01:51:58 AM
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)
Nope. Nope.

But you knew the answers already.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on February 01, 2022, 02:05:55 AM
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)
Nope. Nope.

But you knew the answers already.

Yes, yes I knew the answers. I think we should push to have them suffer legal repercutions tho. And I mean the world over because they were busy everywhere and I dare say they killed people with their dissinformation.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 01, 2022, 02:40:40 AM
WHAT? ISN'T THAT HORSE MEDICINE?!?!?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 01, 2022, 05:19:42 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on February 01, 2022, 11:26:05 AM
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.

Well, in México Invermectine used to be sold over the counter with no prescription needed... Gues what happened when it threatened Big Pharma's bottom line? No idea about if HCQ was also sold without prescription, probably.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on February 01, 2022, 11:27:00 AM
WHAT? ISN'T THAT HORSE MEDICINE?!?!?

iT's HoRsE dEwOrMeR! XD
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 03, 2022, 05:44:54 AM
Only 0.2% of deaths prevented by lockdowns: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/health/medical/covid-lockdown-prevented-only-0-2pc-of-deaths-in-first-wave/ar-AATpz0M?ocid=msedgntp

And even that is a bullshit fig leaf to try to justify the policy. The costs far outweighed the benefits.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Fheredin on February 03, 2022, 08:28:34 AM
The bottom line of COVID policies:


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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on February 03, 2022, 08:34:39 AM
Jen Psaki went out on live TV and implored Spotify to muzzle Joe Rogan.

Needless to say, this is not only spectacularly fascist, it's also a direct violation of the First Amendment as per Bantam Books Inc. vs Sullivan and Manhattan Community Access Corp. vs. Halleck.

But then, it's not like the regime gives a shit about what's legal or constitutional.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 03, 2022, 08:39:03 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on February 03, 2022, 09:03:33 AM
The bottom line of COVID policies:

  • 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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 03, 2022, 10:35:03 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on February 03, 2022, 11:10:54 AM
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.

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.

Still caused by the government's reaction to the King-Flu, just not that one.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 03, 2022, 11:21:44 AM
  BROUGHT TO YOU BY PFIZER!!!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on February 03, 2022, 12:32:23 PM
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.

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/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 03, 2022, 12:45:59 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on February 03, 2022, 03:36:18 PM
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.

If we can save just 1 precious 90 year old then all the teen death will have been worth it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Fheredin on February 03, 2022, 07:42:55 PM
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.

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/

Yes and no; that just happens to be where a life insurance expert was willing to talk openly. Consider this analysis of New Zealand (which had very low COVID cases when the vaccines were rolled out, so the author of this paper used New Zealand's isolation to control for COVID's healthcare effects). Peak Prosperity has been one of my go-to scientific article reader reviews because Martenson is a formally educated pathologist and was well over a year ahead of the mainstream on lab leak.



Skip to 12:20 if you want to see the smoking gun graph. Yeah, the vaccines are probably causing some fatal adverse reactions and this is almost certainly being underreported. That said, a 40% increase in annual deaths (in this demographic range) is mind-bogglingly huge. I am skeptical that even the most carelessly designed and rushed vaccine of all time could explain this.

If I had to hazard a guess, I would say that the majority culprit is that the first round of vaccines triggered SARS-CoV-2 to evolve into more transmissible variants. The Delta variant actually predated the vaccines, but it was not a significant variant until after the vaccine rollout because the speed of the infection beat vaccinated responses; the sheer number of Delta cases caused a good number of fatalities. Now with the truly vaccine resistant Omicron, we're seeing a strange retelling of that story, where Omicron infects the vaccinated, but unboosted better than either the boosted or the never-jabbed. Which is more than a bit disturbing.

Direct vaccine injury is probably a second cause, along with delayed medical treatments, lockdown-induced mental health problems, and a not-insignificant number of drug overdoses and suicides.

However, the real conclusion is not that the vaccines killed people, but that the pandemic response policies--lockdowns, masks, vaccines--summed into a fatal miscalculation. I don't know for a fact where that fatal miscalculation was, but the vaccines are definitely the top suspect on a relatively short list.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 04, 2022, 08:56:42 AM
If only there had been people warning that starting a mass jabbination campaign during an active outbreak was a bad idea...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: TNMalt on February 04, 2022, 07:42:50 PM
Non-clinical trial and almost 16 and a half years old from publication.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 04, 2022, 11:05:31 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on February 05, 2022, 09:20:37 AM
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.

I would not be opposed to the peasants dragging these shitheads from their places of power and beating them to death in a very public manner. We're already starting to see these vermin turning on each other - Zucker and Cuomo for example.  We just need to see that the likes of Soros, Gates, and the politicians in their pockets suffer the same fate.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on February 05, 2022, 12:08:46 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 05, 2022, 12:58:44 PM
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.

   There is a reason for generation after generation for thousands of generations, the most reviled things a Man could be, are weak or cowardly.   Notice how the past 40 years or so western civilization has done about all they can (or at least the media/pop culture/social engineers) to make these things no longer the worst things a man can be?  Seems now it is "Toxic Masculinity" which often translates to showing strength and having some balls.   So it should be no surprise IMO that the form of evil you mention seem to have spread quite well.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on February 05, 2022, 01:16:52 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on February 05, 2022, 02:41:06 PM
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

Yep.  It is much like the old joke from the fifties, that the number of members of the French Resistance ballooned post-war.  The number of folks who were "always suspicious" of the pandemic measures will somehow be much larger after the stupidity of them is undeniably obvious...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 05, 2022, 04:25:14 PM
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

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 06, 2022, 08:17:57 AM
Non-clinical trial and almost 16 and a half years old from publication.

Bless, you still believe the coronabollocks.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on February 06, 2022, 09:06:46 AM
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

All these cunts realize that people have had enough of their bullshit to the point they're willing to drag them kicking and screaming out into the streets.  They're just trying to ensure that their head doesn't end up tumbling into a basket after being lopped off by the crowd - given half a chance, they'd still be happy to parrot the mandate bullshit.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: TNMalt on February 06, 2022, 09:34:09 AM
Non-clinical trial and almost 16 and a half years old from publication.

Bless, you still believe the coronabollocks.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on February 06, 2022, 11:33:53 AM
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

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.

Our benevolent fascist dictators are telling us that they "might" let us have freedom by our upcoming long weekend.  This after they promised last year that we'd be free after 70% double vaxxed -- we currently sit at 84% of everyone 5+ years old being double jabbed.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on February 06, 2022, 12:01:27 PM
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

It's almost as if what we've been saying from the start is true...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 06, 2022, 12:40:14 PM
  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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 06, 2022, 01:00:42 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 06, 2022, 01:09:33 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 06, 2022, 01:15:20 PM
  LOL I am spreading rumors possibly, but, I am not so sure the cowardice of that queef is any less one way or the other.  Sorry if I jumped the shark on his staying in or out of Canada as he completely fled his office and hid in a secret site instead.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 06, 2022, 01:22:27 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 06, 2022, 01:33:54 PM
  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.

  Oh I believe you on where he is, what I doubt is that political class people have to follow any rules at all regarding movements and Covid.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 06, 2022, 02:00:54 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 06, 2022, 02:16:38 PM
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)?   
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 06, 2022, 02:36:32 PM
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

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on February 06, 2022, 02:42:49 PM
But whatever the calculus, he has pretty much abided by the rules Covid-wise
https://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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 06, 2022, 02:59:28 PM
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

  To your knowledge, and to my knowledge, which if we are honest is 0 knowledge.  I was speaking broadly of the political class of both Canada and the USA.   I find myself making the assumption that if Castro Jr can break a rule, or do as royalty does, he is going to do it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 06, 2022, 03:00:21 PM
But whatever the calculus, he has pretty much abided by the rules Covid-wise
https://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...

Well, the Brampton rally technically complied with Ontario's Covid rules. You're right about his Easter trip to Harrington Lake though, I had forgotten about that,  that was dodgy and slippery. It may even have complied with the letter, but definitely not the spirit, of Quebec's guidelines at the time.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 06, 2022, 03:00:33 PM
But whatever the calculus, he has pretty much abided by the rules Covid-wise
https://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...


  Color me shocked.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on February 06, 2022, 04:28:25 PM
Coming soon to a convention near you:

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 06, 2022, 06:06:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on February 06, 2022, 06:28:01 PM
I'm not sure he even could travel abroad, since he's got Covid.

Ah, you sweet summer child.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: TNMalt on February 06, 2022, 06:30:02 PM
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 you against the covid vaccines for whatever reason you either heard or read on the internet or does that also include all vacccines?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 06, 2022, 06:46:54 PM
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 you against the covid vaccines for whatever reason you either heard or read on the internet or does that also include all vacccines?
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 06, 2022, 06:51:53 PM
"Scientists Find Putting Pantyhose on Your Head Makes Your Mask Safer"
https://www.vice.com/en/article/akvng5/mask-hacks-better-fit-research

If I thought Vice had a sense of humor, I'd think this was joke. But nope, it's based on a peer reviewed paper:
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0262830



Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on February 06, 2022, 06:56:14 PM
"Scientists Find Putting Pantyhose on Your Head Makes Your Mask Safer"
https://www.vice.com/en/article/akvng5/mask-hacks-better-fit-research

Of course it makes your mask safer.

No one wants to get too close to the guy wearing his wifes pantyhose on his head.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: TNMalt on February 06, 2022, 07:11:25 PM
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 you against the covid vaccines for whatever reason you either heard or read on the internet or does that also include all vacccines?
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?
Since I'm not in an iron lung, the answer should be obvious. But please, explain why you are against the covid vaccines.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 06, 2022, 08:05:26 PM
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?"
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: TNMalt on February 06, 2022, 08:22:24 PM
So Operation Warp Speed should not have been done and we all should still be waiting on any vaccines then?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 06, 2022, 08:50:50 PM
So Operation Warp Speed should not have been done and we all should still be waiting on any vaccines then?

I was all for it up to the point of, "...and then pushed them on as many people as possible while intentionally suppressing any investigation into side effects as being "anti-vaxx".".

And I am still for anyone that wants to take the vaccine being able to take the vaccine. But forcing people to take a vaccine that does not stop you from transmitting covid or catching covid is bullshit. Or forcing kids to take the vaccine, when there is more risk of dying in a car accident over then course of a year than them dying from covid.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 06, 2022, 08:53:26 PM
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 you against the covid vaccines for whatever reason you either heard or read on the internet or does that also include all vacccines?
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?
Since I'm not in an iron lung, the answer should be obvious. But please, explain why you are against the covid vaccines.
Oh, so you believe everyone who hasn't taken one of the covid-19 vaccines is on an iron lung? Please explain more.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: TNMalt on February 06, 2022, 09:08:39 PM
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 you against the covid vaccines for whatever reason you either heard or read on the internet or does that also include all vacccines?
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?
Since I'm not in an iron lung, the answer should be obvious. But please, explain why you are against the covid vaccines.
Oh, so you believe everyone who hasn't taken one of the covid-19 vaccines is on an iron lung? Please explain more.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on February 06, 2022, 09:46:23 PM
Please name one country where the injections stopped Covid-19.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 06, 2022, 09:56:25 PM
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 you against the covid vaccines for whatever reason you either heard or read on the internet or does that also include all vacccines?
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?
Since I'm not in an iron lung, the answer should be obvious. But please, explain why you are against the covid vaccines.
Oh, so you believe everyone who hasn't taken one of the covid-19 vaccines is on an iron lung? Please explain more.
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.
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.

Now tell us more about what vaccines or diseases put 100% of the people affected on an iron lung.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 06, 2022, 09:56:53 PM
Please name one country where the injections stopped Covid-19.
Israel!

Oh.

Darn.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on February 06, 2022, 10:23:01 PM
Please name one country where the injections stopped Covid-19.
Israel!

Oh.

Darn.

LOL, and the lockdowns at best reduced covid mortality by 0.02%, while increasing suicides by how much?

But it's about saving lives.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on February 06, 2022, 10:24:29 PM
Please name one country where the injections stopped Covid-19.

You don't get it man, we need to have 120% of the population with 5 jabs. Then it'll work.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 06, 2022, 10:59:10 PM
So Operation Warp Speed should not have been done and we all should still be waiting on any vaccines then?

In hindsight, yes. They sold us a bill of goods and now instead of having a proper vaccine going through the proper approval process, we've got a rushed vaccine that absolutely cannot be criticized under any circumstances, until the government can figure out a way to avoid responsibility for overselling their miracle cure.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Thornhammer on February 07, 2022, 12:11:14 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 07, 2022, 06:33:00 AM
Are you against the covid vaccines for whatever reason you either heard or read on the internet or does that also include all vacccines?

There's no such thing as a "covid vaccine", none of the therapeutic treatments being offered actually convey immunity. As in prevent you from contracting an infection.

Not for "whatever reason", but because I actually bothered to do some research into what they are, and observed the real world results of those non-vaccines doing precisely fuck all (see fully Pfizer'd up Israel).

I've had lots of genuine vaccinations, and I'm in favour of those.

So Operation Warp Speed should not have been done and we all should still be waiting on any vaccines then?

Waste of time and money, and no one should have been waiting on anything at all. There was never any justification for any of this theatrical production around a seasonal bug.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KingCheops on February 07, 2022, 10:32:35 AM
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.

We didn't get tested so not 100% sure.  My dad came to our house with a "head cold" which he didn't disclose until sitting on our couch for hours.  He'd tested positive 7 days earlier due to being at my sister's house where her whole family tested positive.  He also tested positive the next morning.  So safe to assume it was coof.

My girls missed school last thursday then were fine.  I took thursday and friday off work.  Friday night was shitty with aches in all my joints and the chills but that seemed to be the breaking point.  I'm sadly at work this morning.  None of us are jabbed at all.

My wife worked last week but called in sick today.  She's getting worse and she's double jabbed.  My triple jabbed mother in law seems fine.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 07, 2022, 11:11:41 AM
A good video on how this particular mask study is crap. Not that it stops the CDC from pimping it.
New CDC Mask study | Full of Errors | But many RTs | Science credibility dies slowly | Reflections
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hWmFnA3AQ0
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 07, 2022, 11:28:48 AM
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 you against the covid vaccines for whatever reason you either heard or read on the internet or does that also include all vacccines?
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?
Since I'm not in an iron lung, the answer should be obvious. But please, explain why you are against the covid vaccines.
Oh, so you believe everyone who hasn't taken one of the covid-19 vaccines is on an iron lung? Please explain more.
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.

  Which was not obvious or clear at all from your back and forth.  You make me think you are in bad faith here.   I would also say, if your eyebrows do not go up a bit when massive drug cartels are given carte blanche immunity and have a massive financial incentive to push something....well you may be a bit too trusting.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 07, 2022, 11:36:55 AM
  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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 07, 2022, 12:10:52 PM
Delta didn't give much of a shit about the jab either. Omicron isn't the first variant to bypass it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 07, 2022, 12:28:58 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 07, 2022, 01:01:24 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 07, 2022, 01:26:04 PM
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.

This is something we keep hearing, that the "with Covid" vs. "of Covid" is a distinction that has been deliberately hidden from us. Now I do realize that different jurisdictions do differ widely in how they report things, but around here, the numbers are broken down pretty clearly every day.

So yesterday for example reported hospitalizations (total, not new that day) were 369:

95 hospitalized as a result of COVID-19 and being treated in a unit designated for such cases. These are your "of covid" cases.

135 people in hospital who were admitted for another reason and tested positive for COVID-19 on admission. These are "with Covid" cases, and

139 people who contracted the virus after being admitted to hospital for other reasons. These are also "with Covid" cases

The numbers change daily, and sometimes patients "with" Covid later become patients "of" Covid. As you'd expect.

Overall though, at least for this wave, it's generally 30% of patients with Covid who are actually hospitalized  because of Covid.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 07, 2022, 01:29:43 PM
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.

  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 07, 2022, 03:53:53 PM
  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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 07, 2022, 04:00:03 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 07, 2022, 04:03:39 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 07, 2022, 04:08:23 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on February 07, 2022, 04:36:57 PM
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.

I agree.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on February 07, 2022, 04:42:36 PM
  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.

We may have learned more, but the active suppression of inconvenient information is unforgivable.  For example, we've known *for decades* that masks worn outside of a clinical setting by personnel trained in their use do fuck-all for airborne respiratory viruses, but those studies were ignored or minimized so that "the authorities" could be seen to be "doing something." Being forced to admit that there isn't much that can be done would be seen as "leader and medical experts = totally ineffectual.". That is, why are you wasting time and money engaging in medical theater, when you'll just have ride it out, with some people dying until the virus mutates into an endemic form.  Lockdowns, masks, and vaccines will be shown to have done nothing except to prolong the pandemic.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 07, 2022, 05:41:26 PM
  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.

  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on February 07, 2022, 05:56:05 PM
Greetings!

It's so amazing to watch all the wormy fucks jump through their mental and verbal gymnastics to avoid admitting the truth--

The government and medical authorities have been lying all along, every step of the way, and have been fucking you in the ass with authoritarian power-grabs and tyranny.

Just admit it. The elites have been using you as a cum rag and treating you like stupid fucking sheep.

Get on your knees, shut up, and believe the science!

As they fuck you in the ass and impose all kinds of tyranny everywhere in society.

Fucking morons.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on February 07, 2022, 06:11:59 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 07, 2022, 06:17:47 PM
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.
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.

And I'm pretty sure many of the people involved had no idea what was going on with the Wuhan funding. There's too much evidence that those involved tried to obscure their tracks. I also reject the idea that they were competent enough to know all the consequences of their actions. This sounds more like hubris, echo chambers, and entitlement than some grand plan.

And specifically about aerosolization, you're overlooking the fact that in early 2020 the prevailing model of how respiratory diseases were transmitted was very binary. Either a disease was aerosolized, or it wasn't. Covid-19 was initially believed not to be aerosolized, which meant it could be be blocked by sneezing into an elbow or wearing a barrier on your face. But in truth, aerosolization is a spectrum, with no respiratory disease being either/or.

And it quickly became evident that covid-19 was far down on the spectrum. For instance, there were several cases from China where people were infected by someone who was not in their line of sight (one example was someone in the front of a bus infecting someone in the back -- which was verified by security footage). Another widely publicized example were the tests of air in the hospital ventilation systems, where airborne viral particles were detected hours and even days later.

What's remarkable is how long the information was ignored, instead of being contested as is normal in the scientific process where new ideas are hammered at to see if they hold up or break. And even when it was accepted, that it didn't lead to any policy changes.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 07, 2022, 06:33:02 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 07, 2022, 08:19:38 PM
  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.

  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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on February 07, 2022, 08:59:21 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: consolcwby on February 07, 2022, 10:01:47 PM
The despair here is palpable! Keep it going! Ban all the mothertruckers and any who doubt the state's 'mah sigh-ance' from life!!!! Muh-hahahahah! Wait until they round-up anyone who makes under 100bil USD for being a 'drag' on their transociety! HAHAHAHAH! Okay, I'll lurk moar again.  :-X
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 07, 2022, 10:11:57 PM
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.

I do not believe that is correct. From the figure on the CDC website:
Estimated hazard rate is laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations per 100,000 person-days visualized at midpoint of each reporting interval.

At the peak, in CA, for unvaxxed, no previous covid, the hospitalization rate was 18/(100,000 person-days). So on that peak day, for every 100,000 persons in CA, 18 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations occurred.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 07, 2022, 11:05:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on February 08, 2022, 01:22:59 AM
Arguing about statistics at this stage seems quite pointless. They've been lying about everything since 2019 and onward. They didn't suddenly become truthful. Lying liars are untrustworthy, and it is pointless to engage in their deceitful word game shenanigans. ("Oh ho! A pregnant woman giving birth counts as 'unvaxed' hospitalization for C-19!")

STFU. They're evil liars.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 08, 2022, 02:28:54 AM
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

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 08, 2022, 05:41:20 AM
  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.

I was ill enough to stop exercising for that period of time. Otherwise I carried on doing everything as normal.

Normal colds give me the sniffles for 48 hours, but I don't stop exercising for them.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 08, 2022, 05:57:08 AM
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 08, 2022, 07:57:31 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 08, 2022, 08:38:55 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 08, 2022, 08:41:07 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 08, 2022, 09:11:18 AM
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.

  well....only by the loosest of definitions and most certainly not to the modern expectation of a vaccination.  They are often for a strain that was the last, or 2-3 strains ago, they do basically nothing at this point to prevent infection from the current strain, they also at this point do about jack shit to lessen the symptoms as well.  So though I would have agreed that is a stupid argument a year ago, that "learning new information" you mention means current day, it is a pretty sensible argument.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 08, 2022, 09:15:52 AM
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.

There's only one other "vaccine" that fails that test: the flu jab. Which at least has the virtue of being relatively harmless, even while being useless.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on February 08, 2022, 09:32:18 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 08, 2022, 09:59:59 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on February 08, 2022, 10:13:20 AM
My other sister also got covid. She was sick mildly for a few days. Now is negative.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on February 08, 2022, 10:21:37 AM
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.

And the rest is protected by herd immunity.

But you can't make a vaccine for a virus that mutates this fast.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 08, 2022, 10:30:51 AM
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.
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.

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 08, 2022, 10:37:12 AM
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 how your body's immune system works. You may display mild or no symptoms, but you were infected.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 08, 2022, 11:45:44 AM
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.
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.

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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 08, 2022, 11:49:03 AM
  If people have to reach so far up their ass they tickle their throats, or use brand new definitions of words (merriam Webster is amazing at updating any words establishments needs updated on the fly, racism, vaccine, etc) to make a case for whatever shit Pfizer is putting is a vaccine, as expected and defined up until the point they started having "break through" cases....well forgive me for not taking it as the same meaning the words has had all the way up until 2021.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 08, 2022, 11:56:04 AM
  Shitty vaccine = doesnt really work in its stated capacity
  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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 08, 2022, 11:57:36 AM
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.
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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 08, 2022, 12:03:13 PM
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.
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.

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?

  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....
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 08, 2022, 12:04:45 PM
  Shitty vaccine = doesnt really work in its stated capacity
  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.
See 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.

Have you seen Prasad's video on the latest CDC mask "study"?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hWmFnA3AQ0
He thoroughly demolishes it, and a lot of his arguments are similar to the ones you're making about self-selection and different populations leading to garbage results.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 08, 2022, 12:10:03 PM
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.
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.

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?

  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:

"... 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 ..."

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 08, 2022, 12:13:49 PM
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.
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.

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?

  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:

"... 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 ..."

  Bro you sure do seem to have to hit some funky Yoga poses to pretend the vaccines have any effect on the iteration of covid rolling around right now.  If that fucking thing was on a free market, it would get discontinued.  It does not work.  One of the qualifiers to be a vaccine, is it has to work.    UNless you are saying providing antibodies for the wrong virus (the old strain) while providing zero immunity for the new strain is fitting the definition you want for a vaccine.  Then so be it.  I guess words dont mean shit if we decide to shift what they are commonly accepted to mean in society whenever it suits Pfizer.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 08, 2022, 12:17:12 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 08, 2022, 12:20:40 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on February 08, 2022, 01:24:06 PM
How convenient.

(http://ace.mu.nu/archives/Screenshot%20(1455).png)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 08, 2022, 01:25:26 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on February 08, 2022, 02:05:45 PM
  Shitty vaccine = doesnt really work in its stated capacity
  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.
The 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 08, 2022, 02:06:03 PM
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.

They stop the virus manifesting as an active, symptomatic infection. I have only ever had chicken pox (varicella) once in my entire life, as a child. I have had three children get it, and wasn't ill with it at all. If anyone bothered to test me at the time, chances are my viral load would have been insufficient to infect another person too.

The covid jabs do fuck all. The virus blows right through the non-existent "protection" they supposedly provide.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 08, 2022, 04:07:12 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on February 08, 2022, 04:12:20 PM
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.

Which is why we need more mandates, lockdowns, eternal boosters, etc.

(This comment brought to you by Pfizer)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on February 08, 2022, 04:16:59 PM
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."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 08, 2022, 04:19:58 PM
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.

Which is why we need more mandates, lockdowns, eternal boosters, etc.

(This comment brought to you by Pfizer)
You forgot the video version:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uexqgkyFmo
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on February 08, 2022, 04:42:44 PM
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.

Which is why we need more mandates, lockdowns, eternal boosters, etc.

(This comment brought to you by Pfizer)

I find it enraging that all of the people who over the past 2 years that the vaccines, masks, and social distancing would not appreciably change the pandemic outcome were actively silenced.  We see the outcome - no appreciable difference.

The fact that the guy who invented PCR was lambasting Fauci for using it to diagnose infection - in the 1980s for AIDS - should have been paid attention to but wasn't.

The fact that one of the guys who invented mRNA cautioned against it's use without more clinical trials and concerns about ADE should have been paid attention to but wasn't.

That locales with widespread access to HCQ and ivermectin had lower case rates and faster viral clearance rates should have resulted in serious studies of their use for covid but didn't.

That there was a massive effort to obfuscate the origins of COVID.

These all point to massive incompetence couples with massive cover ups.

Everyone involved in keeping this pandemic going needs to pay in blood.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 08, 2022, 05:18:11 PM
Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test who said it was never designed as a diagnostic tool, died in mysterious circumstances a few years ago.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 08, 2022, 11:21:41 PM
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."

    Suffering dementia doesnt redeem him IMO.  I would be a bit more eager regarding the 500 cronies.   If there is a hell he will burn in it. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 08, 2022, 11:30:31 PM
  Shitty vaccine = doesnt really work in its stated capacity
  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.
The 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.

   I $uspect that admi$$ion might be weighted on another other factor$ as well.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on February 09, 2022, 12:08:21 AM
  Shitty vaccine = doesnt really work in its stated capacity
  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.
The 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.

   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?

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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 09, 2022, 12:14:30 AM
  Shitty vaccine = doesnt really work in its stated capacity
  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.
The 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.

   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?

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 think you misunderstand.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 09, 2022, 12:17:14 AM
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/04/24/fact-check-medicare-hospitals-paid-more-covid-19-patients-coronavirus/3000638001/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 09, 2022, 12:18:59 AM
 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on February 09, 2022, 12:35:11 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 09, 2022, 12:41:15 AM
 I never said there was a conspiracy.  You keep saying things I am not saying.  I do think there are people who are going to the hospital and some getting admitted who really did not need to be admitted, and the hospital is going to be incentivized to err on the side of an admission with a covid patient who is complaining with their symptoms.   I place the whales share of the blame for these people taking the trip on constantly getting the shit scared out of them about covid.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 09, 2022, 12:43:19 AM
  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 $aid about other factor$.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on February 09, 2022, 01:08:27 AM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 09, 2022, 05:22:40 AM
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.

It's not a conspiracy when it's done openly, you buffoon.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 09, 2022, 07:02:35 AM
I saw this
https://www.vox.com/22699019/covid-19-children-kids-risk-hospitalization-death

when I was reading this
https://www.sfgate.com/politics-op-eds/article/California-vaccine-mandate-schools-COVID-omicron-16832461.php

You know it's bad when Vox is publishing an article counter to the leftist narrative.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on February 09, 2022, 08:19:01 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 09, 2022, 08:38:45 AM
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.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 09, 2022, 08:41:48 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 09, 2022, 08:53:40 AM
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..."  :)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 09, 2022, 09:13:05 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 09, 2022, 09:50:56 AM
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..."  :)

  No worries, I just said even on this board for over a year, if a person is really concerned about catching covid, they need to stop worrying about what anyone else wears, and just wear a respirator or gas mask, and they will then be as protected as they can get.   The push back I kept getting about how everyone else needs a cloth mask to go with their cloth mask just made me laugh at first, but these people were serious.   But I think lots of them were the same people buying all the hand sanitizer, rigorous in everyone having a mask, and then go out to a restaurant and eat and drink in a room with lots of other people....so it gets confusing as to what people see as risk or not a risk.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 09, 2022, 10:00:24 AM
*Consults poll numbers*

The Science says Covid is over!

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 09, 2022, 10:14:29 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on February 09, 2022, 10:51:49 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 09, 2022, 12:05:51 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 09, 2022, 12:30:45 PM
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.

It takes an hour+ for my wife to get fitted. And the fitting is done by someone specifically trained to do N95 fittings.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on February 09, 2022, 01:45:23 PM
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.

It takes an hour+ for my wife to get fitted. And the fitting is done by someone specifically trained to do N95 fittings.
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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 09, 2022, 04:09:53 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 09, 2022, 05:37:38 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 09, 2022, 05:59:59 PM
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?

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 09, 2022, 06:24:49 PM
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.
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 09, 2022, 06:41:28 PM
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.
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."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on February 09, 2022, 07:48:30 PM
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?

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 09, 2022, 07:57:23 PM
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.
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."
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.

More science:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33243355/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on February 09, 2022, 08:11:00 PM
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?

Western Sahara.  Only 1 confirmed covid death.  And they've done absolutely nothing except enjoy their national past time of robbing, raping and murdering.  Well they don't really have a government to screw things up anyway.

 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 09, 2022, 08:16:35 PM
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?

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?
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.

That paragraph would have sounded like horrific dystopian fiction, two years ago.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 09, 2022, 09:24:36 PM
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.
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."
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.

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."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 09, 2022, 09:31:58 PM
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.
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."
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.

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."
+1 dishonest poster point

I said vanished. You replied to my post, tacitly accepting that phrasing instead of Kiero's. Now you're trying to shift back.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 09, 2022, 10:46:16 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on February 10, 2022, 12:09:01 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 10, 2022, 12:39:05 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 10, 2022, 05:03:52 AM
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.
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."
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.

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."
+1 dishonest poster point

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 10, 2022, 06:47:43 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 10, 2022, 06:49:29 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on February 10, 2022, 08:51:00 AM
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.

The fact of the matter is that the guy who invented PCR clearly stated it's not a diagnostic tool - he blasted Fauxi for using it in the 80s to declare someone infected with AIDS.

Just like the guy who invented mRNA technology clearly warned of its dangers.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 10, 2022, 09:55:01 AM
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.
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."
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.

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."
+1 dishonest poster point

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.
+2 dishonest poster points

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on February 10, 2022, 12:25:41 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: moonsweeper on February 10, 2022, 01:16:02 PM
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)

If not, how do you feel about Trump recommending the vaccines and boosters?

What the hell difference does this even make...just because you conduct your scientific interpretations and analysis through a political lens doesn't mean the rest of us do...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on February 10, 2022, 01:23:16 PM
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.
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.

I have no idea how a home test (which takes 10 minutes) would put stress on vital systems. Some nations got to the point where front line workers who are in common contact with the public would taste daily before work on a voluntary basis. That did reduce the spread in meaningful ways, and is a lot less invasive than some other measures we took. The tests do have some false negatives but tend to be accurate over time with repeated usage like you get from daily usage.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on February 10, 2022, 01:26:25 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on February 10, 2022, 02:52:50 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 10, 2022, 03:17:55 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 10, 2022, 03:29:13 PM
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.
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."
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.

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."
+1 dishonest poster point

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.
+2 dishonest poster points

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 10, 2022, 03:43:39 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on February 10, 2022, 05:44:02 PM
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?


Uruguay.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 10, 2022, 08:21:32 PM
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.
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."
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.

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."
+1 dishonest poster point

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.
+2 dishonest poster points

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.
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.

And I'm not allowed to respond to conversations unless I've been specifically invited? Fuck that.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 10, 2022, 08:36:02 PM
LOL I like to argue sometimes as an intellectual exercise from time to time, as I am sure most of us here do, but you two need to get a room.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on February 10, 2022, 10:37:38 PM
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.

Thanks for the clarification, Ratman. Your position is at least clearer to me now.

I also don't know what tomorrow may bring. I don't have a medical background, and don't have any strong predictions about the long term consequences of covid and/or covid vaccines. It seems like omicron is going to become endemic like the cold and flu, but what that means is still up in the air. For social trends - for long-term predictions, I tend to downplay what is seen in the last 5-10 years. It is overly hyped and people don't have perspective on it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 10, 2022, 11:38:29 PM
I've believed, from almost the start of the pandemic, that the #1 problem with the response was messaging. Public health lied, manipulated people, acted like patronizing shits, tried to shut down legitimate debate, drummed up irrational fear, and spoke with authority about things they know absolutely nothing about (someone with no training and who's never even had a real job in their life isn't an authority on the economy). You know it's bad when even extremist left-wing sites that are complete lickspittles when it comes to government anything call them out for being the worst part of the pandemic:
https://www.vox.com/coronavirus-covid19/22870268/cdc-covid-19-guidelines-isolation-boosters-masks

Well, it used to be the #1 problem. Right up until the moment when most of the world's leaders spontaneously decided to violate the Nuremberg Code on a national scale.

WTF is wrong with the world.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 11, 2022, 12:14:37 AM
WTF is wrong with the world.

People were/are afraid. Fearful people can be easily manipulated.

It's probably literally the oldest trick in the book. Right next to "What's that?!?!"



Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 11, 2022, 09:46:20 PM


Dr John Campbell commenting on the Isreal news report about increased cases of myocarditis in vaccinated people.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 11, 2022, 11:10:35 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 12, 2022, 12:31:17 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 12, 2022, 01:18:35 AM
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.
He's got his biases, but he's critical, and looks hard at data instead of trying to morph everything to fit preconceived notions.

The one thing he got blatantly wrong was US states. He absolutely did not grok the concept of federalism. He's 100% the central government should have unlimited authority type of guy. Which makes him a useful counterbalance, because he comes from a very different perspective.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 12, 2022, 05:23:37 PM
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.

Assuming you're still alive after jab number nine or whatever you're on next year, I'm going to enjoy ripping the piss out of you when you've finally got a clue. My "beliefs" don't change day to day, I've said this is all utter bullshit from the beginning, and time is vindicating.

Nor could I give a flying fuck who's listening, I'll be able to point to this in the future and laugh at you idiots when you finally catch up.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on February 12, 2022, 07:52:41 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zirunel on February 13, 2022, 07:17:28 AM

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.

Already searched. BBC no. Sky sort of: one sensationalist headline about "eradication" but the body only refers to a "reduction" in flu cases.

In short, unsurprisingly, there is no there there.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 13, 2022, 04:36:15 PM
  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.

I can't imagine why Pfizer are so desperate to delay the release of their trial data...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 15, 2022, 12:13:37 PM
"Free" covid tests to be scrapped from next week: https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/free-covid-tests-pcr-scrapped/

Cue meltdown from hypochondriacs.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 16, 2022, 06:16:25 AM
The latest from Vinay Prasad:

How the CDC Abandoned Science | My Article in Tablet Magazine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2C6524soTnA
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/science/articles/how-the-cdc-abandoned-science
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 16, 2022, 11:32:52 PM
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 Cole
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.

Quote from: Chris Cole
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.

Quote from: Chris Cole
They'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/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 17, 2022, 06:37:38 AM
How do you create metrics to remove COVID19 restrictions that never had data in the first place?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NALzWyASruw

Looking forward with bated breath to the critiques from the mask apologists on Dr. Prasad's videos.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Fheredin on February 17, 2022, 08:24:36 AM
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.

Campbell is a good academic paper reader, although a touch too concerned with being in-line with mainstream narratives. If he doesn't have any immediate information to the contrary, he will default to mainstream wisdom rather than being critical. My preferred data commentator is by far Chris Martenson from Peak Prosperity, as he is qualified to read these documents, basically doesn't care what other people think of him because he's an entrepreneur rather than an academic, and has shown a knack to be obscenely ahead of the curve on things like Lab Leak. His presentation on how SARS-CoV-2 was a viral chimera of at least two viruses and an insertion is almost a year and a half old at this point. But academic readers definitely play a part. I regularly listen to Campbell, Vinay Prasad, Dr. Dhand, and Dr. Moran. I think each of these readers brings a different content selection bias, though, and even as a collective it's still likely an incomplete picture.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 18, 2022, 11:02:05 PM

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/science/articles/the-mask-debacle
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on February 19, 2022, 02:04:18 PM

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".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 19, 2022, 02:48:30 PM

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on February 19, 2022, 04:17:27 PM

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?
There's probably some. Politicians tend to be like that.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on February 19, 2022, 05:35:28 PM
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 Cole
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.

Quote from: Chris Cole
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.

Quote from: Chris Cole
They'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/

Just imagine, lets say a dollar per jab once a year, that's 7+ billion dollaroos per year. But we all know it's not going to be a dollar a pop but way more and probably twice a year if they can get away with it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: RPGPundit on February 20, 2022, 12:55:57 AM

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 20, 2022, 03:46:11 AM

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.
Biden didn't institute vaccine mandates, until they were already widespread. The real war over mandates was fought in the states.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on February 20, 2022, 12:59:50 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 20, 2022, 01:44:04 PM
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.
I still find that utterly bizarre.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 20, 2022, 08:49:16 PM
Looks like the US is as bad as Scotland:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/20/health/covid-cdc-data.html
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 23, 2022, 10:07:04 AM
Looks like the US is as bad as Scotland:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/20/health/covid-cdc-data.html

Someone else did it first! That's makes it alright, or something.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on February 23, 2022, 10:09:38 AM
Cue more shrieks from the covid bed-wetters of the UK on Monday, when the government announced all restrictions end on 25th March (temporarily - they're not revoking the laws that give them the powers to put them all in place again at a whim). Yet more virtue-signalling tossers on Twatter had to make a point of how they're going to carry on ragging up and all the other shit even though they don't have to. Go them!

Meanwhile, the government also quietly approved jabs for 5-11 year olds. Cunts. Despite the latest JCVI recommendation saying 4 million children would have to be jabbed to spare one child hospitalisation. Not even preventing a death, hospitalisation. Meanwhile those 4 million jabs would bring hundreds of deaths and tens of thousands of vaccine injuries. Totally worth it.

Needless to say, no fucking way any of my children are being jabbed with that shit.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on February 23, 2022, 02:45:56 PM
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.

I'm not even sure what you're calling the orthodoxy on GMOs, but the anti-GMO movement is divided among Democrats and Republicans. Lots of Democrats are hippy all-natural, pro-organic, anti-GMO -- as are many Republicans. While there has been some incremental shift, non-GMO labelling remains popular among a lot of Democrats. I live right next to a Whole Foods in a strongly Democratic district, and I see tons of people into the non-GMO and/or organic stuff. cf. https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2016/12/01/the-new-food-fights/   

I also don't see any general change on foreign wars among Democrats. Historically, mainstream Democrats have always been hawkish - just less hawkish than the Republicans. Clinton and Obama both engaged in plenty of war-making with the support of mainstream Democrats, but Bush's invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq went farther. On this issue, the main flip-flop has been that many Republicans have changed to being opposed to foreign wars, not that Democrats have changed.

This isn't to say that Democrats haven't changed in general - but most of their change is incremental.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on February 24, 2022, 01:15:09 PM
Well, now it's safe to say that Omicron is both less deadly and a better vaccine than the jabs...

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 25, 2022, 07:22:26 AM
Well, now it's safe to say that Omicron is both less deadly and a better vaccine than the jabs...



No surprise there. Many of the standard set of vaccines for Americans (e.g., measles, mumps, rubella, etc.) are not required if you have already had the disease. But for some, never explained, reasons covid natural immunity was summarily rejected. I am guessing because SCIENCE!(tm).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 25, 2022, 07:49:52 AM

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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 25, 2022, 11:08:39 AM

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?)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 25, 2022, 11:43:51 AM

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?)

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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on February 25, 2022, 12:07:24 PM

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?)

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.
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.

But I also have a very low regard for the statistical studies. As I covered last post, data sets with a sufficient number of variables (basically any real world data set) can be made to say almost anything. If your definition of "significant" is there's a 1 in 20 chance it's just random noise (which is the usual standard), and there are thousands of ways to slice and dice the data, there will be thousands/20 ways to look at the data that show a significant result, even if the underlying data was just random noise. This is a fundamental problem, and one of the reasons behind the various replication crises. And as I've covered in other posts, the quality of the various statistical studies on masking and lockdowns is dismal, with all except two falling very low on the tiers of evidence based medicine. One of those two seems okay, and the other has major issues. But that still isn't conclusive.

And as Prasad pointed out, given the hyperpolarization on this matter, including among scientists, it may never be possible to draw any firm conclusions. Even without deliberate data manipulation, there's just too much inherent bias, and too much room to inadvertently introduce it.

I think this is an area where we need to understand the limits of science. This crosses multiple fields -- there are similar problems with the econometrics, for instance. We'd be in a much better place if pundits, politicians, journalists, science educators, and yes a hell of a lot of legitimate scientists, all recognized and clearly communicated the limits of what we know and what we can know, instead of providing definitive answers that matched political narratives. That's the key failing of public health, that I mentioned a couple pages ago.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 26, 2022, 05:02:32 PM
COVID masks | Do cloth masks work?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJgc2DLEl0s
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on February 28, 2022, 05:02:55 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 01, 2022, 02:03:51 AM
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

Totally predictable. There's a part of me that wants to punch every one of these nutbags who went psycho and now want to downplay their atrocious behavior.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 02, 2022, 05:30:33 PM
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/


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 02, 2022, 05:35:04 PM
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/

It's never been about health or "science", but control.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on March 02, 2022, 05:45:09 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on March 02, 2022, 07:20:25 PM
  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.

"Stop being a vaxxhole! No more misinformation!! TrUsT tHe ScIeNcE!!! No NoT tHaT sCiEnCe!!!!"

It doesn't surprise me that the same turds who were crying about people refusing to get the jab are the same ones who want to make kids keep wearing masks are the same ones who want us to dive headlong into Ukraine to continue more war adventurism so Lockheed and Halliburton can eke out an extra quarter of a cent dividend next quarter.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 03, 2022, 05:55:26 PM
Remember the crazy conspiracy theory that the Vaccines affected your DNA?

Quote
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://www.mdpi.com/1467-3045/44/3/73/htm
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 04, 2022, 11:55:30 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on March 04, 2022, 12:05:47 PM
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.

Is there a way to get an accurate number of the deaths, suffering, poverty, etc. caused BY the meassures used to "Stop the Spread"?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on March 04, 2022, 12:24:33 PM
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.

This page may help somewhat. https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/disparity-explorer

Some states have more data than others but in my state of Ohio, for example, the 20-29 age group which is 13% of the population had the highest % of cases at 18% but were only 0.34% of the deaths.

On the other hand, the 80+ age group makes up 4.2% of the state population, had 3.7% of the cases and were 42% of all the deaths.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on March 04, 2022, 12:42:28 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on March 04, 2022, 04:46:42 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on March 04, 2022, 05:38:53 PM
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 nothing. Except in your head.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 05, 2022, 07:20:50 AM
I suppose he will forward on that information to the Ministry of Truth:
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/596709-surgeon-general-demands-data-on-covid-19-misinformation-from-major-tech
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 06, 2022, 08:31:07 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on March 06, 2022, 10:03:25 AM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 06, 2022, 10:08:22 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on March 06, 2022, 11:09:20 AM
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.

Concur.  But the public is stupid and easily led.  At this point, many who are still demanding people wear masks and get jabbed can be considered cultists who need to be deprogrammed.  I spend some time on the current iteration of the old Circvs Maximus boards and one of the posters (kirinke) fully exhibits these cult-slave behaviors...  There are plenty more like her - they *want* and *need* someone to control their lives.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 06, 2022, 01:59:32 PM
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..
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on March 06, 2022, 02:07:20 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on March 06, 2022, 02:47:26 PM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on March 06, 2022, 02:51:26 PM
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...

Fair enough.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 06, 2022, 04:32:35 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on March 06, 2022, 04:49:49 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 06, 2022, 05:26:09 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 06, 2022, 10:21:27 PM
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.

Seeing a stack of these tests in the grocery store makes me thing we're a step away from magic talismans and tea leaves.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 07, 2022, 06:15:40 PM
Incredible how many seem to have forgotten all about the covid-scam now the Ukraine squirrel has been loosed. Never mind that the data Pfizer wanted to hide for 70 years is now available and being ignored by the MSM.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 07, 2022, 08:35:38 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 07, 2022, 08:38:11 PM
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

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?

Quote
2019 was the end of an almost two-decades long decline in death rates. The death rate in 2008 was higher than 2020.

Because....reasons? Gosh what an amazing coincidence a two-decades-long trend ended when covid started. Must have nothing to do with covid, right?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on March 07, 2022, 08:59:53 PM
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.

By every technical measure, deaths from covid were previously just deaths from some kind of viral pneumonia.  It's *only* because people started looking that they saw what was already there in years past.

It is, however, undeniable that meaningless and harmful measures to lock down, wear masks, and take untested therapies has led to childhood mental illness, drug abuse, alcoholism, and suicide.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 08, 2022, 05:10:16 PM
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?

The US is fatter and even unhealthier than the UK, with worse healthcare provision overall. There are wild disparities between states in the approaches they took, where ours were uniform at the country level. They're not analogous.

Because....reasons? Gosh what an amazing coincidence a two-decades-long trend ended when covid started. Must have nothing to do with covid, right?

Lockdown here resulted in almost six months of our healthcare system being essentially closed. Diagnoses and treatments were missed on a huge scale. Deaths at home (and suicides) spiked as a result.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 09, 2022, 05:43:20 AM
Another great dissection of a masking study.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivIEnk2sbIg
https://vinayprasadmdmph.substack.com/p/a-new-paper-claims-kids-masking-associated?s=r
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 09, 2022, 10:34:04 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 11, 2022, 08:25:45 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 11, 2022, 12:13:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 11, 2022, 02:18:26 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 11, 2022, 05:16:31 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 11, 2022, 05:25:22 PM
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 believe it was the Cromwell act of 1649 which specifies that the King can fuck right off.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: rgalex on March 11, 2022, 05:28:57 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 12, 2022, 10:52:54 PM
So, working in a grocery store deli, I'd say about half of people, employees and customers, were masked or unmasked.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 13, 2022, 10:04:51 AM
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.

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.

I was challenged a few times by store security, but once I confidently uttered the magic words "I'm exempt", they quickly waved me on.

Though I did have a few arsehole, jumped-up members of the public who felt empowered by the law as they saw it to get in my face.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on March 13, 2022, 05:20:07 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 15, 2022, 07:41:12 AM
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.

The Health Protection Regulations which were used to mandate masks aren't targeted at businesses, but individuals. There is no power created to close businesses who have people not masked in them.

Furthermore, we have a very robust set of "anti-discriminiation" legislation which levies fines on individuals (not even the businesses they work for) if they act in a way that could be construed as discriminating against people with disabilities. The right to refuse service isn't absolute in the UK.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on March 15, 2022, 08:36:59 AM
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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on March 15, 2022, 10:06:24 AM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on March 15, 2022, 11:52:03 AM
  I can not imagine spending a full day at the tragic kingdom in an orlando summer wearing a mask.  No thanks.  Honestly, I would not spend a day in the tragic kingdom without a mask.  I am Ok with a business saying no mask no entry. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 16, 2022, 06:15:54 AM
Why Has Public Health Lost Trust | A Brief Recap of Things We Got Wrong | A Prof reflects
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36qm65kG9Xw

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on March 16, 2022, 09:54:32 AM
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!

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on March 16, 2022, 01:24:46 PM
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!

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on March 16, 2022, 02:04:55 PM
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!

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.

I'm not spending $1000s and travelling halfway across the country so that a Disney employee can express themselves...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on March 16, 2022, 02:51:12 PM
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!

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jhkim on March 16, 2022, 03:40:26 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on March 16, 2022, 05:36:25 PM
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?

For decades, Disney has espoused traditional American values: fairly conservative, patriotic Americana. 

The expression I have a problem with is seeing "male" employees with tattoos, long hair or faddish colors or styles, hippy beards, etc.  Or "female" employees with beard stubble...

Younger kids do *not* need the confusion of looking at a person and not knowing if they are male or female, and for woke companies to claim that gender dysphoria is normal is a problem.  It's not normal - it's a rare minority of people who have true gender dysphoria and who need help.

Likewise, we don't need employees of a company that has made tons of profit off of celebrating traditional patriotic western values to be bad mouthing tourists who believe in those values.

You wanna be a blue haired socialist, go to Portland because they're already fucked, but keep it out of an atmosphere that is allegedly family values oriented.

The recent "don't say gay" debacle is pretty telling - even gay parents who have kids are fed up with the trans agenda and don't want schools teaching their kids.  In other words, school doesn't get to co-parent.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 16, 2022, 09:53:41 PM
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!

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on March 17, 2022, 07:20:31 AM
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!

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.

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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 17, 2022, 07:25:31 AM
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!

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.

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 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.
By that token, pretty much nobody matters individually.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 17, 2022, 07:35:29 AM
Getting Rid of COVID19 restrictions that had NO data in the first place?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NALzWyASruw
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on March 17, 2022, 08:23:33 AM
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!

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.

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 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.
By that token, pretty much nobody matters individually.

Correct. Individually, not shelling out $5000 a year for 4 annual passes plus $8000 a year for meals and drinks is a blip. Now multiply that.  And now add in $3000+ a year for those who don't have DVC memberships and who stay on property. Now add in incidentals.  Call it $20-25k/year.  Forty people at that price is $1M a year. The number of people who've ditched going to Disney parks because of their leftist attitudes is more than 40.  Call it 10000 people. $250M/year isn't insignificant.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on March 17, 2022, 10:33:12 PM
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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on March 17, 2022, 11:01:33 PM
  I doubt that is real, though I know 4 of their employees did get pinched in a pedo sting this week. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on March 18, 2022, 10:04:56 AM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on March 18, 2022, 01:10:20 PM
  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.   
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 19, 2022, 01:50:02 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on March 19, 2022, 05:17:53 PM
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.....
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Daztur on March 23, 2022, 10:18:51 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on March 23, 2022, 10:43:23 PM
  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.

     And it is even more fucked up now.  Like I said.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 24, 2022, 05:32:56 PM
Why Is Removing Restrictions So Acrimonious? | A Doctor Reflects on COVID 19
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgnTkpI1tUA
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on March 25, 2022, 01:36:50 PM
  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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 25, 2022, 01:42:52 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on March 25, 2022, 01:57:48 PM
  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.

   The third world is about to take a monster hit on that food security.  Dipshit Biden himself said sanctions were also sanctions on the west and the USA.  I am not so sure starving people is going to be the great turn around on the poll numbers he was looking for.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Chris24601 on March 25, 2022, 02:37:04 PM
  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.

Finish it off with nuclear death and I could be persuaded the Mayan Calendar was just off by a decade.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 26, 2022, 12:53:50 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on March 26, 2022, 07:50:14 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on March 26, 2022, 11:23:06 AM
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.....
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on March 26, 2022, 11:12:28 PM
I wonder what the CDC is going to name the midterm variant?

Watching the lemmings dutifully mask up again is gonna be a hoot.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 26, 2022, 11:20:50 PM
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.

It's really not, when HERE is where I say it.  I am standing in a room full of people who despise the MSM. It's the least popular choice I could possibly make. YOU are the orthodoxy here. I am standing up to the orthodoxy here with my words. You think you're brave by repeating what the rest of your cheerleaders support here?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on March 26, 2022, 11:22:12 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 27, 2022, 07:39:36 AM
"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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on March 27, 2022, 12:11:12 PM
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.

And you are trolling me again!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on March 28, 2022, 01:57:06 PM
"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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on March 28, 2022, 04:28:08 PM
"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.

I assumed that was part of what Dr. Prasad was referring to as " literature on community masking prior to the pandemic in March".

Still waiting for the Maskqubators to explain what SCIENCE!(tm) occurred from March to May 2020 that was the technical basis for the mask mandates.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on April 01, 2022, 11:54:28 AM
Illinois Director of Public Health explaining how the (covid) case definition is at at the time of death there was a covid positive diagnosis.
https://youtube.com/shorts/QXEoKhI_geM?feature=share
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 06, 2022, 03:51:48 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 08, 2022, 06:46:41 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on April 08, 2022, 11:21:10 PM
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.
They can try. There's an awful lot of shotguns, and drones make big targets.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on April 09, 2022, 08:45:19 AM
The Truth About Randomized Controlled Trials in Cancer Medicine | Ethical vs Unethical Studies
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbgI5h6mWVU

at 18:14
"...as far as I can tell, they (FDA) have no standards anymore. They're approving 4th (covid vaccine) doses based on what Israel has written in crayon on a napkin. I mean, that's really the level of evidence here. Some observational garbage study from Israel."

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on April 09, 2022, 05:25:09 PM
Masking Kids 10-12: A New Natural Experiment From Finland. Did it work?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wb-DECv1spg
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on April 10, 2022, 05:03:54 PM
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.

   Canada possibly.   The USA?   Well....I keep hearing about all the rabid anti government types that are as extreme as the actual Nazis in the Ukraine that roam the wild and remote places in the USA, so I think trying to turn up the water that fast might light a fire, so unlikely to be done.  Now I think the Urbanites in the USA will do it if Fauci tells them to.  They do not seem too willing to buck authority as long as someone can convince them they are "good people" for doing as they are told.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 12, 2022, 01:44:01 PM
Trudeau & many politicians/talking heads around the world get wet when they see how the CCP treats the Chinesse people.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on April 12, 2022, 02:16:47 PM
I'm sure there's a couple people here with huge erections over the way things are playing out in Shanghai.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 12, 2022, 02:54:10 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 12, 2022, 09:58:38 PM
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/
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on April 15, 2022, 01:39:51 PM
Israeli Data for the 4th Dose | How Good Is It? | Make Bourla Earn His Pay
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-xXYwn94l4
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 18, 2022, 02:02:24 PM
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/
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on April 18, 2022, 05:12:21 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 19, 2022, 09:22:20 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on April 20, 2022, 06:50:59 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 20, 2022, 08:46:45 AM
Get a room.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on April 20, 2022, 02:57:11 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on April 20, 2022, 04:53:02 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 21, 2022, 12:17:19 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 21, 2022, 12:42:07 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on April 21, 2022, 05:58:41 AM
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.

Or maybe it's a little of column A and a little of column B, with a side of virtue signaling.  :)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on April 21, 2022, 08:05:36 AM
  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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on April 21, 2022, 01:12:58 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 21, 2022, 01:43:26 PM
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."

Ordinary people are the people who do all the horrible things.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on April 21, 2022, 02:14:15 PM
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 should clarify, when I say respirator I do not mean the n-95, I mean the sort that is the lower half of a full gas mask you would use for industrial painting or being exposed to hazardous breathing environments.   I give some benefit of the doubt to the n-95, and can assume infections in spite of could be due to length of time people in hospitals wearing them at work, and maybe some slip of protocol.  If I would put actual confidence in anything it would be a gas mask or full industrial respirator....but I really do not know if that works either, just that if anything will work that might.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on April 21, 2022, 03:01:18 PM
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.

RCTs for N95s in hospitals for covid? Or for flu? Or both?

"Work" depends on the type of exposure. A cough directly in your face is different than spending a long duration in an environment with a concentration of 1-micron size virus particles.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 21, 2022, 04:02:25 PM
  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.

The fall into fear and superstition is what has shaken me about Covid. Seeing people develop a religious fervor around mask wearing was/is disturbing.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 21, 2022, 04:20:38 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 21, 2022, 05:48:03 PM
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."

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 21, 2022, 06:46:58 PM
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."

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 had everything to do with your post, but to you everything is about virtue signals.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on April 22, 2022, 07:59:53 AM
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."

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 had everything to do with your post, but to you everything is about virtue signals.

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.

Welcome to the deplorables, Pat. Here's your complimentary red cap :)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 22, 2022, 09:34:58 AM
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."

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 had everything to do with your post, but to you everything is about virtue signals.

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.

Welcome to the deplorables, Pat. Here's your complimentary red cap :)

What on earth does "I think Kiero has mental health issues for seeing conspiracies in literally everything he thinks is bad" about the right or wrong side of history and Pat being deplorable?

Right, it was you making a drive by troll.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on April 22, 2022, 02:05:25 PM
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".
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 22, 2022, 09:32:10 PM
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 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 22, 2022, 10:23:47 PM
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.
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.

You made a mistake. Brush it off, and move on. Don't keep digging the hole.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on April 25, 2022, 07:29:07 AM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 25, 2022, 08:16:22 AM
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

Is it a conspiracy theory when they are telling everybody what they are doing? It's right in the WEF website.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 25, 2022, 08:16:57 AM
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
Oh look, another convert of the Pillow Prophet. Fucking idiot.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on April 26, 2022, 07:12:04 AM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on April 26, 2022, 05:41:29 PM
The big hospital where I live is at 137% of nameplate capacity, with 10 wu-flu positive cases. ICU is at 113%. Doing the math finds that the ICU and the hospital overall would be above 100% capacity without the wu-flu cases. Funny how, unlike during covid surges, this isn't mentioned in the local media. It's almost like this is so common-place that it isn't worth reporting on.

Spoiler: going over 100% capacity happens on a fairly regular basis.

I guess that some over-capacities are more equal than others.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 26, 2022, 06:01:40 PM
Investigation into a twitter "doctor".

https://sarahburwick.substack.com/p/who-is-risa-hoshino?s=r

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ghostmaker on April 26, 2022, 09:59:51 PM
Investigation into a twitter "doctor".

https://sarahburwick.substack.com/p/who-is-risa-hoshino?s=r
And you wonder... was this something 'Doctor' Hoshino came up with, or did someone suggest it to her?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on April 27, 2022, 11:04:28 AM
Investigation into a twitter "doctor".

https://sarahburwick.substack.com/p/who-is-risa-hoshino?s=r

The striving of Asian 6s is a plague on us all.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 27, 2022, 07:49:55 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 27, 2022, 09:37:07 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on April 27, 2022, 10:28:08 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 27, 2022, 10:46:48 PM
I agree with Kiero, Ratman_tf and Zelen.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 28, 2022, 04:50:50 AM
"Voices of April" is basically a compilation of audio clips that document what's been happening in Shanghai, including positive things like neighbors uniting and police sharing food with starving truckers, but also a lot of negative things, like local officials agonizing about their inability to help, mothers begging for medicine for their sick children, the quarantined talking about the horrific conditions in the camps, and so on.

The video went viral on WeChat in China, about a week ago, and it was immediately censored. What's remarkable is there's been a popular revolt against the digital tyranny. Instead of just letting it die, people started reposting the video in different forms and different platforms, flooding Chinese social media.

Here's one of the earliest English translations (subtitles):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llP2qTXJFBc

Other translations are up on YouTube. Stories about it have started to appear in Western media, like CNN or China Uncensored, in the last day or so.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on April 28, 2022, 09:01:02 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 28, 2022, 10:30:08 AM
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.
Your denials of what I've experienced firsthand are pathetic.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on April 28, 2022, 11:24:11 AM
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.
Your denials of what I've experienced firsthand are pathetic.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 28, 2022, 01:15:44 PM
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.
Your denials of what I've experienced firsthand are pathetic.
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.
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 28, 2022, 02:21:11 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 28, 2022, 02:22:19 PM
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.

Another lawyerly answer.

Was there a global pandemic or not? Not how dangerous, just was there a global pandemic or not?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 28, 2022, 02:24:39 PM
I agree with Kiero, Ratman_tf and Zelen.

Well they don't agree with each other so far so that's not meaningful.

Kiero thinks there was no global pandemic.
Ratman and Zelen think maybe there was or maybe there was not depending on your definitions you use in a non-answer way.
I am guessing you're ALSO the Ratman/Zelen sketchy wifty non-answer category so far.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 28, 2022, 02:26:08 PM
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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on April 28, 2022, 03:13:31 PM
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.
Your denials of what I've experienced firsthand are pathetic.
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.
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?
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 28, 2022, 03:55:54 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 28, 2022, 03:58:43 PM
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.
Your denials of what I've experienced firsthand are pathetic.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 28, 2022, 04:07:45 PM
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.

I thought you were capable of simple inference. (An exaggerated thing exists) I see that I have to spell it all out for you.

All this comes with the caveat that I would not be shocked to find the details have been obscured by reporting agencies. But here's the situation as I see it.

A real Coronavirus originated in China. Very likely a lab leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. China, for political reasons, has denied the lab leak hypothesis.

This Coronavirus spread outside of China before it was recognized as a novel virus. It spread rather quickly to the rest of the world.

For a short while, there was little reliable information on the virus' lethality, transmissibility and severity. Most of the western world went into lockdown. Supposedly in order to buy time for hospitals and other responders to get geared up and increase capacity to handle patients.

As the weeks turned into months, we learned more about those details, but governments and their institutions "played it safe", by extending lockdowns, enforcing dubious mandates, and generally making asses out of themselves.

After two fucking years, we're kinda sorta finally coming out of that paranoid hysteria. China especially continues to play the Pandemic card in order to bully and push around it's populace.
But the disinformation and political manuvering remain.

So yes, there was a pandemic. But there was also a narrative being constructed around the pandemic.

Let me know if you need any further explanation of my thoughts on the matter. I'm happy to try and help you out there.

*edited to put a flat Yes in there, to make it super easy for Mistwell to understand.*
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 28, 2022, 04:11:05 PM
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 does. There's far more going on with this thing. If Mistwell can't handle that, then that's his problem. I did try to help him out though.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 28, 2022, 04:14:13 PM
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.
Your denials of what I've experienced firsthand are pathetic.
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.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 28, 2022, 04:53:42 PM
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.
Your denials of what I've experienced firsthand are pathetic.
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.
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?
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.
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 28, 2022, 04:56:46 PM
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.
Your denials of what I've experienced firsthand are pathetic.
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.

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.
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 28, 2022, 08:19:14 PM
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?

Don't be such a fucking pussy Pat. You can answer the question. We both know where you stand on the question (your answer is yes it was a global pandemic) so just be a man and say it. It's not a trick. You can in fact think the Governments of the world used a global pandemic to do awful things, while still believing it was in fact a global pandemic. The two concepts are in no way mutually exclusive. Governments frequently do awful things to grab power from very real events. I don't know why you'd be so afraid to admit this was a real event just because Governments did bad things with it.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 28, 2022, 08:21:33 PM

So yes, there was a pandemic.

Thank you. Glad someone has the balls to answer the question.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on April 28, 2022, 08:35:50 PM
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.
Even  if nobody died at all it would have been a pandemic.



Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on April 28, 2022, 08:38:52 PM

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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on April 28, 2022, 08:45:12 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 28, 2022, 10:48:40 PM
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?
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.

Plus, browbeating people isn't a very good way to get people you don't have any control over to follow your rules.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 28, 2022, 10:49:18 PM

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)
Yep.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 28, 2022, 11:34:32 PM

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)

I think everyone here (whether they admit it or not) believes there was a real pandemic, except Kiero. I think he thinks it really was all made up.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 28, 2022, 11:38:07 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 28, 2022, 11:41:08 PM
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?
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.

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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on April 28, 2022, 11:41:50 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 28, 2022, 11:49:15 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 29, 2022, 04:54:10 AM
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?
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.

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?
Not answering a rhetorical question is cowardice?

I think you might want to skip the "p" section of the dictionary, and spend more time among the "c"s.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 29, 2022, 05:02:21 AM
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.
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.

All co-morbidities mean is that of the tiny, tiny, tiny, fraction of young people who suffer severe symptoms, almost all of them will be fat and/or immunocompromised. But if you're young and fat, you're still way way less likely to die than someone in their 60s or 70s who is in perfect condition for their age.

Which is why the NYC mask mandate for 2-5 years olds -- and nobody else -- is completely fucking insane.

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/coronavirus/nyc-mayor-hopes-to-end-tot-mask-rule-within-week-says-hes-at-mercy-of-health-team/3637368/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on April 29, 2022, 12:39:10 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 29, 2022, 01:01:47 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on April 29, 2022, 02:07:08 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 29, 2022, 02:34:59 PM
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.

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?).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on April 29, 2022, 02:37:24 PM
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.

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?).

They were always there - and at about the same rate as in prior years - airborne viral infections are not ever going to be stopped...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 29, 2022, 02:46:36 PM
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.

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?).

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on April 29, 2022, 03:25:02 PM
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.

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?).

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on April 29, 2022, 04:00:35 PM
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.

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?).

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.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 30, 2022, 05:20:15 PM
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.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on April 30, 2022, 06:01:11 PM
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.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 30, 2022, 07:36:00 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on April 30, 2022, 07:37:01 PM
OK. I take it back that literally nobody here agrees with Kiero. 3cat, who never used to be this crazy, also agrees with him.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 30, 2022, 07:50:05 PM
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.
Fuck off.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on April 30, 2022, 08:02:29 PM
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.

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.

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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on May 01, 2022, 12:39:31 AM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 01, 2022, 01:26:03 AM
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...

LOLwut? He directly said it. Not this last post - maybe that's the confusion. Look back to the post Pat was responding to of his.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on May 01, 2022, 11:24:50 AM
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.

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.

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.
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.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on May 01, 2022, 03:15:30 PM
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.

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, 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.

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.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on May 02, 2022, 02:20:17 PM
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.

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, 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.

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.

For such an educated person, you're extremely lacking in the critical thinking skills 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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on May 02, 2022, 03:12:58 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on May 02, 2022, 05:59:19 PM
For such an educated person, you're extremely lacking in the critical thinking skills 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 a critical thinker, you're extremely lacking in the basic knowledge department.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on May 02, 2022, 09:16:40 PM
For such an educated person, you're extremely lacking in the critical thinking skills 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 a critical thinker, you're extremely lacking in the basic knowledge department.

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.

What have I been trying to say to you - yes there are silent pandemics all the time - which is why we never know about them to *declare* then to be pandemics.  You do not need to be symptomatic to have no immunity to something. You also don't need to have symptomatic infections for the to be a pandemic - it just needs to be wide spread enough to be a pandemic.  If something is spread amongst the global population, even if it causes no symptoms, it's still a spread of infection, and if widespread enough, it can be considered a pandemic.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on May 02, 2022, 09:33:06 PM
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.

Since you haven't really addressed what I said and just repeated your initial position, there isn't anything for me to reply to.

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.

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.
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.

What I disputed is your claim that "[t]he *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...".

That's still a ridiculously false general statement, which you threw in out of nowhere into an unrelated conversation. The overwhelming majority of public health workers had no connection to any of that, but still were dancing in the halls claiming the virus wouldn't spread during social [in]justice protests. You need a lot more to explain the insane overreaction by so many people.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Zelen on May 03, 2022, 06:08:07 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on May 03, 2022, 06:51:47 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 03, 2022, 11:38:21 PM
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 on 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).
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on May 04, 2022, 07:10:46 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 04, 2022, 04:41:52 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on May 04, 2022, 04:57:07 PM
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.

I am in agreement with you. A properly fitted and properly worn N95 has ~95% filter efficiency -- because that is what they are specifically designed to do. Not perfect, but a significant reduction.

And I 100% support your decision to wear an N95. I would even support you wearing any other type of mask for that matter, but would disagree about its efficacy.


Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on May 04, 2022, 05:02:53 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on May 04, 2022, 07:06:04 PM
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?
Covid can crawl up your butt if you use a public toilet. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on May 04, 2022, 07:10:22 PM
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?
Covid can crawl up your butt if you use a public toilet.
You don't wear ass protection?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on May 04, 2022, 08:09:33 PM
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)? 

After there was enough data for me to do my own risk assessment, I got the jab. I was "fully vaxed" while dealing with a ridiculous mask mandate - and then got COVID.  I was considered "boosted" and then got COVID again.  Neither masks nor jabs made any difference for me (typical community spread vs. occupational).

My point is this - while there may be risk factors (fat, high blood pressure, "the diahbeetus," etc.) that most USian people have, the biggest risk seems to be old age decrepitude or occupational exposure  - neither of which you probably fall under. Is it just inertia of having had to wear a mask under Governor Moron there in Cali (NJ keeps the title of Governor Jerk Off)?

Especially now that sufficient people have gotten jabbed or gotten COVID and that the current strains appear to have symptoms that seem to be indistinguishable from every other cold or allergy symptom, it seems like masks are now overkill for all but those working in a clinical environment (hospital, nursing home, prison, etc.)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on May 04, 2022, 08:45:51 PM
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?
Covid can crawl up your butt if you use a public toilet.
You don't wear ass protection?
For Mistwell, it would have to be full body...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on May 04, 2022, 08:49:58 PM
  I am all for people who want to feel protected wearing respirators.   I like it because they can not bother me for not wearing a useless mask, and they can feel 100 percent protected (or as close as reality allows) no matter what I am doing.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 04, 2022, 10:45:13 PM
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?

Just my glasses.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 04, 2022, 11:05:13 PM
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)? 

Totally fair question and the answer is I rarely do these days, except at work when I am working with someone obviously more comfortable with masks. Most situations don't call for a mask anymore outside of work. I'm down to "when I feel sick" or "when they feel sick" or "when it's obviously more polite to do so" or "it's still the policy of this place to mask and I want to go there."

But that's a relatively recent thing for me.  I have not fully shifted my thinking on it and still sometimes find myself wearing a mask in a situation where I don't need to be. I guess N. Ireland helped a lot with that though. Nobody masks there, and I was almost never in a situation where it was more polite to mask or anyone was obviously sick, so I was able to really enjoy living without one for almost the entire time (though still required on the plane). And on returning I don't find myself wearing it very often.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on May 04, 2022, 11:37:12 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 05, 2022, 01:19:17 AM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on May 05, 2022, 02:17:21 AM
  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)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on May 05, 2022, 08:48:06 AM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on May 05, 2022, 10:48:37 AM
Greetings!

Well, all the mask-wearing folks out there and about you, just shows you how many of our citizens are fucking sheep and more than eager to get on their knees. Many of these mask-people are desperate to serve the "Master" and love state tyranny. They joyfully aid and support the state tyranny. The fact that enormous transgressions against people's rights to speak, gather together, associate, participate in commerce, and more, have been made by the state throughout the Covid  epidemic is just fine with these people. They don't care about YOUR FREEDOM. They don't even value freedom for themselves. Conform to the state, worm! You must submit and follow the herd! No questioning the state's narrative is allowed!

Notice how the state media labels anyone that questions the state media as engaging in "Misinformation"?

Fuck the mask-wearing sheep. They are disgusting and pathetic. This country has become so fucking weak and full of whining, shrill, hysterical, and compliant pussies it's sad.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 05, 2022, 01:08:32 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 05, 2022, 01:12:25 PM
  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.

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..
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 05, 2022, 01:14:21 PM
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!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on May 05, 2022, 03:58:56 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 05, 2022, 04:13:46 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on May 05, 2022, 04:57:08 PM
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.

I forgot what interview or whatever thingy I saw it from, but one of these school board officials from back east--a good Liberal woman and Biden supporter--somewhere was talking, and said, yes, enforcing mask mandates on the public has much less to do with actual safety and far more to do with psychological and social conditioning. The mask mandates are really about promoting an environment of fear, gaining more power and authority, and conditioning the general public to be more obedient and submissive to the state authority and "officials".

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 05, 2022, 05:33:35 PM
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.

Quote
far 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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: SHARK on May 05, 2022, 06:01:44 PM
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.

Quote
far 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.

People here think differently than people in Liberal states. People here are much more skeptical of the government, and deeply resent the government telling them anything, let alone "enforcing" shit. The majority of people here respect individual choices--but people can get violently angry and oppositional when you start trying to force others to comply to your political or ideological views. And no one gives a fuck about what "medical authorities" have to say about it either. Lots of people here believe in their guns and their Bibles. Start fucking with people's freedoms to speak, gather together, go to church, and so on, yeah, that kind of bullshit just doesn't fly here. Nanny bitches throwing coffee at people minding their own business at a Starbucks while not wearing a fucking mask would get fucking curb-stomped here fast.

It is so nice being around people that are polite, courteous, and respectful. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on May 05, 2022, 06:06:39 PM
Just wear your damn masks biggots

(https://imgix.bustle.com/uploads/getty/2022/5/2/7f528778-7c64-43ce-9a00-337a181b6f06-getty-1395041340.jpg?w=414&h=478&fit=crop&crop=focalpoint&auto=format%2Ccompress&fp-x=0.4373&fp-y=0.364)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 05, 2022, 06:18:50 PM
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.

Quote
far 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.

I don't think you are a Neanderthal that doesn't give a fuck about others being "comfortable" because you do all those other things I mentioned as a matter of routine, and they're all about other people's comfort rather than your own. It's just masks that seems to get this reaction from you. I assume because it's new, and you were not around when our society decided those other things so you grew up just thinking they were normal.

Quote
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.

I've spent time in Casper, Wyoming twice during the pandemic (a town I quite like by the way), and it was the same there. I mean there were a few masks here and there but for the most part nothing. And I can definitely see that living in an area like that I'd probably not wear a mask as well. Because not wearing a mask is conforming to the norms of a place like that. Wearing a mask makes others feel uncomfortable, like you're judging them for not wearing one or something. Sort of the same reaction vegetarians get in those parts sometimes.

But don't you see, you're being as much a sheep to the people around you as people here are being. Each of us is simply conforming to the norm of our towns. Just like I didn't wear a mask in Northern Ireland or Wyoming, but do wear a mask here. Because when in Rome, act as the Romans act, and dress as the Romans dress, and eat what the Romans eat.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on May 05, 2022, 06:27:09 PM
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.

Quote
far 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.
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.

Plus, you're wrong about the utilitarian consequences of clothes. Clothes don't just protect against inclement weather, they protect sensitive areas from scratches and other minor abrasions. Which humans are very subject to, because we have relatively thin skin and lack a protective covering like fur, scales, or feathers. They also serve a utilitarian purpose by hiding sexual signals when they would harm other goals. The cultural conventions aren't purely social constructs with no grounding in practicality.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on May 05, 2022, 06:49:08 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on May 05, 2022, 06:55:24 PM
  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 assume far too much about what I think.

Quote
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.

Perfect example. I have actually put some thought into those exact situations. I've been a driver and a pedestrian. I stop even when no one is there because I've been wrong about no one being there. Painfully wrong. I once accidentally ran a stop sign because I didn't see the sign, and didn't see any other cars. I got T-Boned by a truck and lost my liscense for years due to driving without insurance. (I was young and stupider) I drive on the "correct" side of the road because I don't know if someone is going to pull out unexpectedly. And I've taken it upon myself to "bend" the rules, knowing that it increases my chances of having some kind of incident.

So you are completely wrong with that example. I do think about why I obey those laws, even when no one else is there.

Quote
You wear clothing outside your house even when the weather is such you wouldn't need to.

I wear clothing even when I don't need to because I'm a fatass and don't want to subject the viewing public to my pasty, flabby bod.

Quote
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.

Never gone to the bathroom in a sink. I have pissed outside, and pissed in a plastic tub because the bathroom was occupied and I really needed to go.

Quote
You don't eat dog meat and cat meat and human meat even though your body could digest it just fine.

I don't eat human meat because I think the taboo against canibalism is a good one. Once you open the door to cannibalism you weaken the integrity of the moral value of a human body.
Though in an extreme survival situation, I might break that taboo in order to survive. Thankfully I've never been in such a situation.

I would probably try dog or cat in the right situation. I'm not particularly against eating them.

Quote
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.

And again you get things completely wrong. I see people insisting that they wear their masks past the mandates as some kind of virtue signal. I see people insisting others wear masks despite the lack of evidence that they have a meaningful impact on the spread of Covid, and I see people trying to shore up those beliefs by trying to force others to validate their beliefs though imposing conformity.

And the point you get completely wrong here is that you accuse me of not thinking about other society norms, which I do, and trying to associate this with them, which it is not. There is no good reason for the mask mandates except to make people feel safer.

It's superstition and groupthink and I don't care if the libtards or the conservitards were insisting on it. It would be equally wrong.

I wore masks when there were mandates, even though I knew I was humoring other people's superstions. I don't now that the mandates have been lifted. I think they were misguided security theater. I won't mock an individual who still wears a mask (I see plenty of them at work amongst other who aren't) but I will mock the superstition and ignorance behind wearing them.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on May 05, 2022, 09:03:02 PM
Remember when this was a conspiracy theory?

From the known Q-Anon site the AP:

"U.S. regulators strictly limited who can receive Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine due to a rare but serious risk of blood clots.

The FDA said the shot should only be given to adults who cannot receive a different vaccine or specifically request J&J’s."

https://archive.is/rx7k7 (https://archive.is/rx7k7)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on May 05, 2022, 09:24:52 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on May 05, 2022, 09:29:21 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Spinachcat on May 05, 2022, 09:34:49 PM
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?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on May 05, 2022, 09:35:36 PM
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?

Okay, I will grant you that one.  ;D
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on May 05, 2022, 10:55:46 PM
  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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 06, 2022, 12:43:04 AM
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.

LOL
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on May 08, 2022, 11:50:00 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on May 08, 2022, 03:48:33 PM
  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.

I expect nothing, so I'm never disappointed with the depths of human stupidity..
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 08, 2022, 10:34:39 PM
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.

You don't know what real oppression looks like, you privileged little snotty rich kid.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 09, 2022, 10:01:11 PM
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.

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on May 09, 2022, 10:44:04 PM
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.

All of which doctors and virologists were saying fucking almost two years ago.  Except those folks, who were very clear that there was no way to vaccinate your way out of the covid pandemic because of the features of a coronavirus, were banned from all media for saying so.  But now, since the US population is fed up with restrictions (and continuing covid fear-mongering is hurting Democrats' chances in the midterms), what those doctors were saying 18 - 24 months ago is OK.  In fact, it's now "science"...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on May 10, 2022, 08:23:19 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on May 10, 2022, 11:39:54 AM
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.

I call bullshit, the common cold IS a coronavirus, we know there's no way to vaccinate people to immunity. Granted not all viri oin the family will mutate at the same rates but common sense dictates that the best course of action was to find a treatment, of patent if possible, but that meant the pharmaceuticals wouldn't have made billions, the governments wouldn't have stolen our liberties, the scientists wouldn't have their experiment and probably less people would have died.

And let's not forget that was also against the WEF's plan.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 10, 2022, 01:54:44 PM
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.

1. Have not been a practicing attorney for a long time. I've said that many times, but somehow whenever it's convenient to make some stupid drive by comment like you just did I'm a practicing attorney again. While you fail to mention what you do for a living. Because you're a coward.

2. So were mine, what do ancestors have to do with you currently being a snotty nosed little privileged rich kid who doesn't know what real oppression looks like? What you think you inherited genetic memories? That theory would go along with the rest of your mumbo jumbo nonsense beliefs I suppose.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on May 19, 2022, 01:12:51 PM
https://brownstone.org/articles/have-people-been-given-the-wrong-vaccine/

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: GeekyBugle on May 19, 2022, 05:51:18 PM
Do not worry, the W.H.O. is on the case!

Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on May 19, 2022, 09:24:53 PM
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???
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on May 19, 2022, 09:39:32 PM
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???

I would've chosen Keef Moon instead. Townsend is allegedly a pedo, so he's probably in tight with WHO influencers, Bill Gates, etc.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: DocJones on May 24, 2022, 11:33:21 AM
(https://i.postimg.cc/g2bYTqGk/Fauci-Monkey.jpg)
 ;D
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 24, 2022, 01:42:54 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on May 24, 2022, 06:36:13 PM
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. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 24, 2022, 06:55:46 PM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on May 24, 2022, 07:53:13 PM
.....

(https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/283063728_10227926894386339_6217544052547740412_n.jpg?_nc_cat=102&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=HLCEEb549QYAX-jdGLP&tn=2AB6o7C2r7xtUuW9&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&oh=00_AT8lC-dDk_UnE7L1qjZIdjp9yCWvDb7a_BBQpu6MfizkGQ&oe=6291D109)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 25, 2022, 12:32:49 AM
I laughed!
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on May 25, 2022, 12:42:39 AM
Naw MonkeyPox doesn't kill people.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-we-know-about-the-rise-in-monkeypox-cases-worldwide/#:~:text=Only%20a%20handful%20of%20people,and%20tecovirimat%20may%20be%20used.

"Seven people died during the largest known outbreak, which began in Nigeria in 2017, and at least four of them had a weakened immune system."
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on May 25, 2022, 06:40:35 AM
  It kills people, and seems to have a considerably higher lethality rate than Covid.  It also seems VERY hard to spread unless you are in....extremely close contact with an infected person.  I have no doubt the news cycle would love to make it the "new thing" so people can rush out and get some new shots.  Unlikely though, as the news is already out as to how hard it is to catch, and who is most likely to catch it. 
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: 3catcircus on May 25, 2022, 07:32:23 AM
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.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/monkeypox-sex-raves-europe-world-health-organization/

There you go.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: oggsmash on May 25, 2022, 08:59:27 AM
 Looks like Monkey Pox might wreck the funzies of pride month.  Ah well.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on May 25, 2022, 10:15:04 AM
Oy what's with the blind links people?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on May 25, 2022, 01:38:29 PM
Oy what's with the blind links people?

Which ones?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on June 04, 2022, 12:33:28 AM


Time to throw the vaccinated under the bus.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Simon W on June 09, 2022, 07:43:23 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XMqRHihUbc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XMqRHihUbc)
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Eirikrautha on June 09, 2022, 08:45:33 AM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Pat on June 09, 2022, 08:59:13 AM
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?

Which of course is why the rule is in place. Context helps.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Battlemaster on June 09, 2022, 10:51:24 PM
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.



Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: HappyDaze on June 09, 2022, 11:29:37 PM
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.
Where are you getting your breakdown of the the political affiliations of the dead?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Battlemaster on June 10, 2022, 12:46:12 AM
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/
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Battlemaster on June 10, 2022, 12:52:23 AM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on June 10, 2022, 05:18:25 AM
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.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on June 10, 2022, 05:24:53 AM
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

These are awesome! Best case of confirmation bias I have ever seen! I especially love the youtube video with Neil deGrasse Tyson (the most self important smartest man in the room where ever he goes) on epidemiology! Kudos!

So, being a Bill Maher democrat means that you left your critical thinking behind in your blind hatred of Republicans?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Battlemaster on June 10, 2022, 05:50:37 AM
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...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: jeff37923 on June 10, 2022, 05:53:41 AM
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...

So what are you going to fight with? Your keyboard?
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Mistwell on June 10, 2022, 10:26:06 AM
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.
Where are you getting your breakdown of the the political affiliations of the dead?

His butt.

More seriously, his links do not in any way substantiate an 8-1 ratio of deaths. Indeed, as there is a meaningful racial divide in Covid deaths (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/investigations-discovery/hospitalization-death-by-race-ethnicity.html), one would have to argue minorities are suddenly voting more Republican than Democrat.

Covid does not care what your political beliefs are. It's a pretty equal opportunity killer.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Shasarak on June 10, 2022, 07:14:15 PM
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.

Of course Republicans are dying at higher rates because Andrew Cuomo already killed all the Democrats.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: dkabq on June 10, 2022, 08:57:39 PM
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
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: KindaMeh on June 23, 2022, 04:18:37 PM
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

Always important to consider. Would be odd if being a Republican made you inherently more susceptible just via political opinion. But even still, the numbers seem to say something is going on at least in correlation with respect to deaths, hospitalizations, and even contraction between vaccinated and the unvaccinated. Though those numbers have less disparity for basic vaccination as opposed to booster post-omicron and the virus seemingly adapting to the vaccine or whatever. I'd be willing to believe that the vaccinated are more likely to wear masks and demand masks everywhere, squirrel themselves up like hermits, and avoid the unvaccinated or ill like plague rats, which could be explaining some of this. But at one point nationally there were 10x as many deaths from like omicron among the unvaccinated than the fully vaccinated and boosted. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-compare-covid-deaths-for-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-people/ . So I think it's not unreasonable to conclude there is something going on here, and there is some sort of causal factor somewhere creating the correlative disparity. Also, I think Pfizer and some other companies, as well as convincing the FDA under Trump that their stuff seemed legit enough to allow, did trials that showed the vaccines legit worked within a controlled environment.

 Now, to get some things out of the way, I do question the perfect efficacy of practically every long term effects trial done on stuff like mice instead of humans and think that we can't say with 100% certainty what these vaccines are gonna do to people long term. Moreover, I think people should have the right to choose their own medical prevention and treatment plans, including nothing, especially if a vaccine allegedly decreases risk by as much as the companies say they do. Because then you can't complain about the unvaccinated getting you sick, since you're allegedly protected by your choice, and their choice hurts nobody who didn't want to take that risk over the potential risk of the vaccine. Hell, masking shouldn't be required probably, because if you look at the decrease in death from respiratory illnesses it was like 40-50% when they forced people to mask, and that was a sizable chunk of the deaths caused by Covid at its height. If there wasn't sufficient reason to enforce masking to stop such illnesses, why is COVID innately special enough to  warrant it without death figures that much higher? It was a political decision, science doesn't magically tell you normative things like what should and should not be done. I don't hate people who got scared and chose to vaccinate, I admittedly did that too, but it would be and is outright wrong to prevent people from accessing their jobs, goods and services, government service and the like due to a decision they made weighing their health and the health of their families in good faith, which is what the unvaccinated did and do. It's political discrimination, and there being potentially a causal and at least a correlative relationship DOES NOT CHANGE THAT. Science did not tell these politicians and people to discriminate, they chose to do that on their own.
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kiero on July 06, 2022, 06:35:35 AM
Amazing to see so many of you still pretending covid is even worthy of consideration after all the manipulated bullshit that has passed us by.

No wonder the WEF set have you so easily controlled...
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Kyle Aaron on July 07, 2022, 03:14:18 AM
If Republicans are more likely to be obese, elderly, and reject vaccination than Democrats, that'd shift the death rates considerably.

It does seem troubling to me that Americans talk happily about bulldozing their fellow citizens into mass graves, and that when called on it, their only response is the four year old's "but he started it!"
Title: Re: Covid, the "lockdowns" etc.
Post by: Ratman_tf on July 08, 2022, 06:58:16 AM


(https://c.tenor.com/iSQQoPHD_4AAAAAd/thinking-questioning.gif)