Coronavirus - Overall
-
@siam said in Coronavirus - Overall:
@crucial no. But for god's sake don't explain the fallacy, just keep your knowledge hidden so people can fawn over how clever you are
Using the outcomes of intervention measures as a reason that they weren't needed .
Unfortunately I also waited long enough to hear his anti-mask freedom to breathe rubbish as well
The clip belongs in the conspiracy theory thread. -
@crucial ok. I thought it was a visual representation of the incredibly low fatality rate of those who contract covid and then die. Yes they added comments about the incredibly high average age of death.
Basically the message was to question why all the measures and sacrifices of the populace for a virus that kills a specific and tiny range of people - compared to who gets it and doesn't die.
I think that is different from what you're talking about which is all about becoming infected by this virus that kills less people than poor nutrition.
I think you're confusing man made and socially engineered disruptions to life vs the fact that as far as killer viruses go, this one is a pussy, if you're not 10 years away from dying "naturally". The media paint a picture of death at every inhale. The data says death rate for the overall population is actually very very low on the number of ways anyone will die this year.
So yeah, let's continue to change everyone's life for a disease that kills less kids than falling off a table or down a flight of stairs. Maybe we should ban all kids on stairs?
Lockdowns and masks hasn't changed it's lethality. Vaccines, ivermectin, vitamin d and hydroxychloroquine might though
-
@siam said in Coronavirus - Overall:
@crucial ok. I thought it was a visual representation of the incredibly low fatality rate of those who contract covid and then die. Yes they added comments about the incredibly high average age of death.
Basically the message was to question why all the measures and sacrifices of the populace for a virus that kills a specific and tiny range of people - compared to who gets it and doesn't die.
I think that is different from what you're talking about which is all about becoming infected by this virus that kills less people than poor nutrition.
I think you're confusing man made and socially engineered disruptions to life vs the fact that as far as killer viruses go, this one is a pussy, if you're not 10 years away from dying "naturally".
So yeah, let's continue to change everyone's life for a disease that kills less kids than falling off a table or down a flight of stairs. Maybe we should ban all kids on stairs?
The UK government has always been clear that their policy has been to ensure the NHS can cope. That's it. know many NHS workers and it barely coped. It's fair to say that in some areas, it didn't.
Whether or not all the disruption to humanity was worth it, only time will tell. What I do know is that the human race is incredibly resilient and will bounce back strong, hard and with gusto. What I also know is that many thousands of people were also taken before their time. It may be that before their time may only be a few years, but it's still not right.
I fully respect peoples opinions like yours above, and even the lockdown skeptics media group in the UK. Democracy doesn't really exist without people debating other sides.
But I will add this has left a physical & emotional scar across the UK (and I suspect the US, Europe etc) that those that aren't here can't fully comprehend.
-
@majorrage said in Coronavirus - Overall:
@siam said in Coronavirus - Overall:
@crucial ok. I thought it was a visual representation of the incredibly low fatality rate of those who contract covid and then die. Yes they added comments about the incredibly high average age of death.
Basically the message was to question why all the measures and sacrifices of the populace for a virus that kills a specific and tiny range of people - compared to who gets it and doesn't die.
I think that is different from what you're talking about which is all about becoming infected by this virus that kills less people than poor nutrition.
I think you're confusing man made and socially engineered disruptions to life vs the fact that as far as killer viruses go, this one is a pussy, if you're not 10 years away from dying "naturally".
So yeah, let's continue to change everyone's life for a disease that kills less kids than falling off a table or down a flight of stairs. Maybe we should ban all kids on stairs?
The UK government has always been clear that their policy has been to ensure the NHS can cope. That's it. know many NHS workers and it barely coped. It's fair to say that in some areas, it didn't.
Whether or not all the disruption to humanity was worth it, only time will tell. What I do know is that the human race is incredibly resilient and will bounce back strong, hard and with gusto. What I also know is that many thousands of people were also taken before their time. It may be that before their time may only be a few years, but it's still not right.
I fully respect peoples opinions like yours above, and even the lockdown skeptics media group in the UK. Democracy doesn't really exist without people debating other sides.
But I will add this has left a physical & emotional scar across the UK (and I suspect the US, Europe etc) that those that aren't here can't fully comprehend.
It is very easy for people in NZ and Australia to dismiss the impact of the disease, considering our low fatality numbers. Talk to anyone in the medical profession and they were all very scared of the power of this virus. Even now they have not returned to anything resembling a normal footing
-
@canefan yep. This is the international thread and I watch many people so much more adversely affected by human decisions and reasons (wielded with a stick) than biological reasons.
Too much censorship, too much fear mongering via the media, too many illogical authoritarian rules, too little looking at different strategies - Taiwan, South Korea, Florida, Texas and Sweden to name a few data points never addressed in the media.
The quickest path to beating covid and regaining a rational life is for the media to find another hot topic. Watch for climate change to be the next lucrative feature in the media, supplanting others before it such as WMD, Trump, Russian electoral influence.
The feature of this pandemic is not the virus, but the response of those in charge and the upheaval of life for the 97%
-
@majorrage said in Coronavirus - Overall:
@siam said in Coronavirus - Overall:
@crucial ok. I thought it was a visual representation of the incredibly low fatality rate of those who contract covid and then die. Yes they added comments about the incredibly high average age of death.
Basically the message was to question why all the measures and sacrifices of the populace for a virus that kills a specific and tiny range of people - compared to who gets it and doesn't die.
I think that is different from what you're talking about which is all about becoming infected by this virus that kills less people than poor nutrition.
I think you're confusing man made and socially engineered disruptions to life vs the fact that as far as killer viruses go, this one is a pussy, if you're not 10 years away from dying "naturally".
So yeah, let's continue to change everyone's life for a disease that kills less kids than falling off a table or down a flight of stairs. Maybe we should ban all kids on stairs?
The UK government has always been clear that their policy has been to ensure the NHS can cope. That's it. know many NHS workers and it barely coped. It's fair to say that in some areas, it didn't.
Whether or not all the disruption to humanity was worth it, only time will tell. What I do know is that the human race is incredibly resilient and will bounce back strong, hard and with gusto. What I also know is that many thousands of people were also taken before their time. It may be that before their time may only be a few years, but it's still not right.
I fully respect peoples opinions like yours above, and even the lockdown skeptics media group in the UK. Democracy doesn't really exist without people debating other sides.
But I will add this has left a physical & emotional scar across the UK (and I suspect the US, Europe etc) that those that aren't here can't fully comprehend.
Thank you mate. I know how easy it is to deride my contributions but in essence is all I'm asking for is answers to some questions that have been either heavily censored or brushed off as wacky conspiracies.
Im ok to be labelled as dumb but I'm just asking questions of topics not properly discussed and teased out to satisfaction. -
@majorrage said in Coronavirus - Overall:
@siam said in Coronavirus - Overall:
@crucial ok. I thought it was a visual representation of the incredibly low fatality rate of those who contract covid and then die. Yes they added comments about the incredibly high average age of death.
Basically the message was to question why all the measures and sacrifices of the populace for a virus that kills a specific and tiny range of people - compared to who gets it and doesn't die.
I think that is different from what you're talking about which is all about becoming infected by this virus that kills less people than poor nutrition.
I think you're confusing man made and socially engineered disruptions to life vs the fact that as far as killer viruses go, this one is a pussy, if you're not 10 years away from dying "naturally".
So yeah, let's continue to change everyone's life for a disease that kills less kids than falling off a table or down a flight of stairs. Maybe we should ban all kids on stairs?
The UK government has always been clear that their policy has been to ensure the NHS can cope. That's it. know many NHS workers and it barely coped. It's fair to say that in some areas, it didn't.
Whether or not all the disruption to humanity was worth it, only time will tell. What I do know is that the human race is incredibly resilient and will bounce back strong, hard and with gusto. What I also know is that many thousands of people were also taken before their time. It may be that before their time may only be a few years, but it's still not right.
I fully respect peoples opinions like yours above, and even the lockdown skeptics media group in the UK. Democracy doesn't really exist without people debating other sides.
But I will add this has left a physical & emotional scar across the UK (and I suspect the US, Europe etc) that those that aren't here can't fully comprehend.
Big question marks over this statement mate.
Why the concern now? Why the specifics of this population cohort? How does this new found concern for life and premature death stack up with: government sanctioned wars and bombings, car accidents, alcohol deaths, gang violence, murders, fast food, smoking, treatment of Uighurs, Mexican cartel deaths, prescription opiod deaths, tuberculosis etc.
Are we justified in shutting down the world to prevent these premature deaths? -
@siam said in Coronavirus - Overall:
too little looking at different strategies - Taiwan, South Korea, Florida, Texas and Sweden to name a few data points never addressed in the media.
There have been numerous articles here about the success of Taiwan and to a lesser extent South Korea. Even more about the different route taken by Sweden. Firstly because it was promising so much then because it delivered so little.
There has been plenty about the different strategies adopted by various states in the USA. Don't see that Texas or Florida have been particularly successful. There death rates are pretty much the country average and worse than the likes of California. Point of fact Florida's (in)actions are largely blamed for the initial spread of the virus. Economically those two states seem to have fared OK better than a few worse than some - nothing significant.
-
Had the Covid outbreak occurred before the advent of the Internet and smartphones I have no doubt the international breadth of extreme response would have been massively less.
It is by no means clear that Covid is any worse than the Hong Kong flu of 1968. Which was seen off without wide ranging lockdowns.
The mind boggles to think of the reaction had we been hit with something as nasty as the Spanish flu!
-
@pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:
Had the Covid outbreak occurred before the advent of the Internet and smartphones I have no doubt the international breadth of extreme response would have been massively less.
It is by no means clear that Covid is any worse than the Hong Kong flu of 1968. Which was seen off without wide ranging lockdowns.
The mind boggles to think of the reaction had we been hit with something as nasty as the Spanish flu!
Big difference in the global mobility between now and even 1968, let alone 1919.
-
@pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:
Had the Covid outbreak occurred before the advent of the Internet and smartphones I have no doubt the international breadth of extreme response would have been massively less.
It is by no means clear that Covid is any worse than the Hong Kong flu of 1968. Which was seen off without wide ranging lockdowns.
The mind boggles to think of the reaction had we been hit with something as nasty as the Spanish flu!
It's long covered ground, but in the 1918 flu epidemic they had lockdowns too
-
@canefan said in Coronavirus - Overall:
@pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:
Had the Covid outbreak occurred before the advent of the Internet and smartphones I have no doubt the international breadth of extreme response would have been massively less.
It is by no means clear that Covid is any worse than the Hong Kong flu of 1968. Which was seen off without wide ranging lockdowns.
The mind boggles to think of the reaction had we been hit with something as nasty as the Spanish flu!
It's long covered ground, but in the 1918 flu epidemic they had lockdowns too
Nothing like the international breadth.
-
@catogrande said in Coronavirus - Overall:
@pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:
Had the Covid outbreak occurred before the advent of the Internet and smartphones I have no doubt the international breadth of extreme response would have been massively less.
It is by no means clear that Covid is any worse than the Hong Kong flu of 1968. Which was seen off without wide ranging lockdowns.
The mind boggles to think of the reaction had we been hit with something as nasty as the Spanish flu!
Big difference in the global mobility between now and even 1968, let alone 1919.
True. But in NZ in 1918/9 the cruise ships still managed to import a significant dose.
-
@pakman we probably have been hit with something as nasty as the Spanish flu just medical procedures are far more advanced.
Interesting the arguments around mortality rates and old fucks ignore long COVID and the very real long term health damage that is apparently being done to around 30% of all those that catch COVID
-
@siam said in Coronavirus - Overall:
@majorrage said in Coronavirus - Overall:
@siam said in Coronavirus - Overall:
@crucial ok. I thought it was a visual representation of the incredibly low fatality rate of those who contract covid and then die. Yes they added comments about the incredibly high average age of death.
Basically the message was to question why all the measures and sacrifices of the populace for a virus that kills a specific and tiny range of people - compared to who gets it and doesn't die.
I think that is different from what you're talking about which is all about becoming infected by this virus that kills less people than poor nutrition.
I think you're confusing man made and socially engineered disruptions to life vs the fact that as far as killer viruses go, this one is a pussy, if you're not 10 years away from dying "naturally".
So yeah, let's continue to change everyone's life for a disease that kills less kids than falling off a table or down a flight of stairs. Maybe we should ban all kids on stairs?
The UK government has always been clear that their policy has been to ensure the NHS can cope. That's it. know many NHS workers and it barely coped. It's fair to say that in some areas, it didn't.
Whether or not all the disruption to humanity was worth it, only time will tell. What I do know is that the human race is incredibly resilient and will bounce back strong, hard and with gusto. What I also know is that many thousands of people were also taken before their time. It may be that before their time may only be a few years, but it's still not right.
I fully respect peoples opinions like yours above, and even the lockdown skeptics media group in the UK. Democracy doesn't really exist without people debating other sides.
But I will add this has left a physical & emotional scar across the UK (and I suspect the US, Europe etc) that those that aren't here can't fully comprehend.
Thank you mate. I know how easy it is to deride my contributions but in essence is all I'm asking for is answers to some questions that have been either heavily censored or brushed off as wacky conspiracies.
Im ok to be labelled as dumb but I'm just asking questions of topics not properly discussed and teased out to satisfaction.I'm not labelling you as dumb (if you were referring to my reaction to the video you posted).
The concept of the video is dumb though, and could also be deemed as dangerous.The main fallacy in the logic is this.
He is saying that the outcome (two aged coins) is a pointer as to why the big pot of coins shouldn't have had lockdowns/masks etc. However the two coins result is AFTER lockdowns/masks etc were used.
If the point is to hold any semblance of validity it needs to use a modelled result of NOT having lockdowns/masks etc.
This, of course also means that his pot of 'caught the virus' is also AFTER the measures he deems unnecessary.Now to pick around the edges of his so called factual representation.
The big pot is the total world population when we know that there are vast population areas that have avoided being at risk (so far) simply by geography or not being affected.
Also many of those coins were barely affected by containment measures so the later claims that 'this big pot have suffered' becomes even more exaggerated.
Even in NZ I know people who have barely been affected in their daily lives over the past 18 months.
I would need to go back and check again but I'm pretty sure his math is wrong.
If you want a better idea of what happens if the virus gets away on you (which is the risk that measures are mitigating) look no further than India and the example of an overwhelmed health system.. The 'lost freedom'of mask wearing is infinitely better than than the lost freedom to live. -
@crucial no, he is saying that look at what 8000 coins must do to reduce 2 coins to 1 or 1.5.
Death rate of infected. Not infection rate.
If we did nothing at all, the "dead" would only be 2 coins.
When, in life, do you fuck up everything for the sake of less than 3 percent? ( and that's being generous).
When do government policies severely disadvantage the futures of 97% in order to accommodate a frail or comorbid 3 %? ( except corporate tax🙂)We could have, (can still) gamble a little bit but the overreaction, fear mongering and illogical hysteria to a death threat so small and specific is nuts.
Death rate in lockdown vs non is the same.
Who risks all they have for 3% gamble?
I just wish these governments and health departments and media would stay the fuck out of my life and my family's life, like they were founded to do. We can take care of ourselves for this minuscule existential threat.
That's what took from the video.
No mate you didn't call me dumb, no sweat anyway.
-
@siam said in Coronavirus - Overall:
@crucial no, he is saying that look at what 8000 coins must do to reduce 2 coins to 1 or 1.5.
Death rate of infected. Not infection rate.But how does he know that when he is using data from the world that he is arguing against? That 2 coins could be many more.
Also ignores that health and economic impacts of higher infection rates leading to overwhelmed health services. COVID isn't a binary live/die impact.As for the rest which I put in the 'your opinion' bucket what do you mean by 'fuck up everything'? My life hasn't been fucked up. This has had far less impact on my family's wellbeing than say the GFC.