A Group of 270 Scientists, Doctors, etc. Submit Open Letter to Spotify Regarding Joe Rogan (JRE)
- Thread starter hanselthecaretaker
- Start date
Not impossible. It's possible but only if everyone cooperates. But some people think cooperating is for suckers, so, we all are losing against the virus (including those people, including yourself). So the only choice we have now is to reduce causalities and hospitalizations as much possible, while we wait the virus to mutate into a much more benign variant.
By the symptomatic people you were in contact with. Everyone symptomatic with Covid was an asymptomatic spreader the day before the symptoms first appeared. Checking when you entered in contact with that person, you can estimate how long your body will be a silent virus factory.
The only way it's possible would be to have everyone on earth assume they have covid at all times until prove otherwise. How would you do that?
But what if you got infected by another asymptomatic person. Hell they said that you were infectious up to 40 hours or some shit BEFORE symptoms. How the fuck can you prepare for that besides my previous statement.
Expect when infected by a random guy at the supermarket who would be impossible to track. Or someone in a parking lot, or someone at a restaurant. How would you track it? And how long would it take to be tracked? Could reliable tracking be done in a reasonable timeframe? I doubt it.
We already have been doing it for 2 years. Or did you miss the mask mandates? Even if they aren't 100% effective, they AREN'T 0% EFFECTIVE EITHER. If it's impossible to defeat, you minimize the damage as much as possible.
No. It did.
When faced with modicum, necessary restrictions of their freedom "Average Joes" threw a fit. And because there's enough of them, goverments decided to game and introduce half-assed measures, in fear of losing popular(and bussiness) support.
I can blame the "Average Joe", and i will.
What about the failure of totalarian governments to contain it? You make a valid argument in the U.S. but in other places where failure to obey is strictly punished why did the virus not face defeat there?
"Average Joe"? More like "Fringe Joe". The majority of the people take the precautions seriously, but the fringes from all levels vehemently oppose (from fringe truck drivers to fringe celebrities and millionaires).
Last edited:
The fear of losing business support was a big one as well, and has little to do with the Average Joe. Not to say that the Average Joe couldn't cause problems, but in at least some places it wasn't predominately them.
They did? Vietnam did well. So did Cuba. Many so called "Banana Republics" done better.
China's numbers are skewy, but i doubt they could do worse than the west.
And you don't have to limit yourself to "totalarians". South Korea, Japan, New Zealand, Australia, all have done significantly better than Europe and the USA.
Pretty sure they are fucking with people and beating people who are unvaccinated right now. Also spiders.
Because the "Average Joe" bs started taking the root there.
Whatever, the argument still stands, just chalk down AU as one of your totalitarian countries.
Meh. These days the only criteria for a country to be totalitarian in the eyes of conservatives is legalizing gay marriage and banning lynching.
Critical decided to only worry about those that have died instead of apply that same percentage to the whole child population to gain a prediction. Which, to me very much explains why they dont take it seriously. Also, I didn't know I would have to explain that, during a segment talking about CHIDLRN only in the US, I would also have to explain that the population I chose was the total population of children in the US. I thought people might know there was around 100million children in America. Clearly, this was a bad assumption
EDIT: So Critical using that percentage against the total deaths of covid doesn't make sense. The percentage is for the number of children who die from the total who contract COVID. What they are doing is giving us a random number that doesnt mean anything. It's why I'm being so flippant here
Last edited:
I don't know where your ".2%" actually came from, but Critical's use of that number made way more sense than yours. 0.2% of minors who get covid aren't dying. The number is approximately 1/100th of that, even before the current downward trends in case severity. 200,000 dead children in America alone is not an actual number. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2918-0
Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications - PubMed
Determine age-specific infection fatality rates for COVID-19 to inform public health policies and communications that help protect vulnerable age groups. Studies of COVID-19 prevalence were collected by conducting an online search of published articles, preprints, and government reports that...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
These are I think official government statistics. The caveat is you have to know what the criteria are for recording a covid death in different countries.
Belgium, for instance, is so broad it's potentially heavily overestimating - if it used the same criteria as most other Western countries, it's estimated it could be about half that. Russia is defining them as declared by autopsy only, so it's figures are exceptionally low: perhaps half what they would be by normal Western criteria. Although Russia semi-admits that: I think they've also revealed that excess deaths since covid are vastly higher (did I read somewhere one million people?)
China's figures are a big, fat, load of crap... although almost certainly the reality is still far better than North America and Europe.
Define "fucking with", and source for "beating people who are unvaccinated", please.
So... you think its going to be 2,000 if it goes through every kid?I don't know where your ".2%" actually came from, but Critical's use of that number made way more sense than yours. 0.2% of minors who get covid aren't dying. The number is approximately 1/100th of that, even before the current downward trends in case severity. 200,000 dead children in America alone is not an actual number. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2918-0
Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications - PubMed
Determine age-specific infection fatality rates for COVID-19 to inform public health policies and communications that help protect vulnerable age groups. Studies of COVID-19 prevalence were collected by conducting an online search of published articles, preprints, and government reports that...
Edit: as a round number, as the 100 million kids is a round number
Depending on the time scale. As an endemic virus, that number will almost certainly be passed in a couple decades, but if in the short term every child in the US was exposed, that is the statistical expectation, yes.
Edit: Or significantly less at this point, as that statistic is before vaccines got involved.
Well, see here's my problem with that
Provisional COVID-19 Deaths by Sex and Age | Data | Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (cdc.gov)
So far its 770 person 17 and under have died already. I believe that the US has had around 2 million under 17 contract the virus. I dont think the math checks out at (without vaccines) 2K, if every child got it (assuming its quicker than 5 years, because it gets to other problems I cant be f'd to calculate). For the current number to be true, we'd have to be almost half way through the population. I think your out by order of magnitude, similarly, I'm out an order magnitude. (Back of the envelope calculations here) the estimated total might be 20K+
Ive rechecked what you said and what I said, and I dont think it was with our decimals.