Funny Events of the "Woke" world

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
9,029
800
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
Sure. And while you're at it, call my decision whether to buy a packet of sweets is a cost-benefit analysis, whether the 80p I spend is worth the enjoyment of the sweets. :rolleyes:
Standard deflection. Is that not the point of a drug trial to see if it produces overall benefits? It's the same reason there's a discussion over whether colonoscopies are actually worth doing. Tons of medical things we've done for a long time, we end up finding out it didn't have benefits or worse produced overall harm.

Also, where is this proof that lockdowns provided any actual overall benefit? Been waiting on this evidence for like 3 years now and still nada...
You've heard the saying "correlation is not causation", right?
The massive costs of lockdowns are very well known. You think every other disease just stopped happening during the covid pandemic?
 

Ag3ma

Elite Member
Jan 4, 2023
2,512
2,177
118
Standard deflection. Is that not the point of a drug trial to see if it produces overall benefits?
No, you even pretty much said it yourself. A treatment must be proven to work, and it cannot have sufficiently severe side effects. A treatment will fail clinical trials even if the benefits outweigh the costs if the benefit is sufficiently small, and may fail clinical trials even if the benefit outweights the costs if the costs are sufficiently bad. So it's really not a cost-benefit analysis.

A cost-benefit analysis is actually a fully structured concept in economics to help with organisational decision-making. (Read it up in your own time.) What you are attempting to do is redefine cost-benefit analysis in some loose format that essentially just describes a general rational process of making decisions: do I want X or do I want Y? Should I buy that? Should I get married to my partner?

Now, cost-benefit analyses often accompany clinical trials, because the economics of treatment is a big deal as well as it's effectiveness. And clinical trials can themselves be subjected to cost-benefit analysis, e.g. to improve efficiency. A treatment that's too expensive for health services, or that doesn't make enough profit for the company, is not worthwhile (and some treatments are withdrawn because the economics of them don't pan out). But a clinical trial itself just does not work by the model of a cost-benefit analysis.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
8,697
2,881
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
Grab a collared work shirt with a pen slot on the pocket. Those are perfect to put your lanyard zinger on.
Good idea but I have a uniform shirt with no pockets

I can wear cargo pants with so many pockets.... I just fail to use them
 

Gergar12

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
3,368
809
118
Country
United States
The New Yorker's hit piece failed.


 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
9,029
800
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
No, you even pretty much said it yourself. A treatment must be proven to work, and it cannot have sufficiently severe side effects. A treatment will fail clinical trials even if the benefits outweigh the costs if the benefit is sufficiently small, and may fail clinical trials even if the benefit outweights the costs if the costs are sufficiently bad. So it's really not a cost-benefit analysis.

A cost-benefit analysis is actually a fully structured concept in economics to help with organisational decision-making. (Read it up in your own time.) What you are attempting to do is redefine cost-benefit analysis in some loose format that essentially just describes a general rational process of making decisions: do I want X or do I want Y? Should I buy that? Should I get married to my partner?

Now, cost-benefit analyses often accompany clinical trials, because the economics of treatment is a big deal as well as it's effectiveness. And clinical trials can themselves be subjected to cost-benefit analysis, e.g. to improve efficiency. A treatment that's too expensive for health services, or that doesn't make enough profit for the company, is not worthwhile (and some treatments are withdrawn because the economics of them don't pan out). But a clinical trial itself just does not work by the model of a cost-benefit analysis.
Yes, so give me exactly what you do for other medical interventions for lockdowns or masks to prove they work. That is what I've been asking for for years now and still nothing.

And yeah, I know a drug just doesn't pass if it has just any benefit, I'm just keeping it simple (IIRC, a new drug has to do better than the current drug/treatment/standard of care to get approved). And yes, I know there's a lot deeper cost-benefit analyses out there. I'm asking for the standard we do with other medical inventions, I'm not asking for more because that wouldn't be fair to demand more of XYZ invention vs ABC intervention. The general thing you do for anything is asking if the benefits outweigh the costs, which doesn't mean doing some full-blown top level cost-benefit analysis all the time.

---

More Stupid DEI bullshit
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
8,697
2,881
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
More Stupid DEI bullshit
It's got very little to do with culture and more to do with money. (I am currently in a situation at work where the families celebrate birthdays with increasingly extravagant gifts to try and out-compete each other. It's a really dumb toxic gift competition hell hole that I have fallen into.... so I kinda get why they focus on the money)

But I agree, the logic here is nonsense. You can find ways to do Halloween that don't involve the parents spending money

DEI means you SHOULD be celebrating Halloween, Hannukah, Eid, nromal and Lunar New Year, Easter, Diwali, Australia Day (Independence Day for you) all together, with the exception of Seventh Day etc, who don't celebrate anything, including birthdays. Because that's respecting their culture.

This is as dumb as the parents in NY who wanted to get rid of reading time before bed for kids as this would advantage those readers over those parents who didn't read to their kids. It's not about disadvantaging people. It's about lifting people up to the same level
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,322
6,826
118
Country
United States
Standard deflection. Is that not the point of a drug trial to see if it produces overall benefits? It's the same reason there's a discussion over whether colonoscopies are actually worth doing. Tons of medical things we've done for a long time, we end up finding out it didn't have benefits or worse produced overall harm.

Also, where is this proof that lockdowns provided any actual overall benefit? Been waiting on this evidence for like 3 years now and still nada...

The massive costs of lockdowns are very well known. You think every other disease just stopped happening during the covid pandemic?
I mean, lockdowns work great against influenza and stuff, so yeah.

Look, SAR-Cov-1 killed 10% of the people who got it. Then we get SARS-Cov-2 spreading like wildfire. We weren't gonna wait for some idiots with dodgy math based on a teacher's strike in Bolivia or whatever to tell us whether or not it's cost-effective or not to use all of the anti-spread techniques we have to put a stop to that. Thank the merciful gods that Cov-2 wasn't nearly as lethal as Cov-1, and I say that as our current worldwide undercount of death is ~7 million worldwide and it was the third leading cause of death in the US in 2021.

We had more than enough waffling around trying to save the stock market economy as it was
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
9,029
800
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
This is as dumb as the parents in NY who wanted to get rid of reading time before bed for kids as this would advantage those readers over those parents who didn't read to their kids. It's not about disadvantaging people. It's about lifting people up to the same level
This was people wanting to stop other people from reading to their kids in their own homes?!?! Or was this in like pre-school and a teacher reading to kids before naptime? The former is beyond ridiculous and that people even think something like that is acceptable is just beyond words. You can't teach your kid piano because I'm not teaching my kid piano so it's not fair; how dare you!!!

I mean, lockdowns work great against influenza and stuff, so yeah.

Look, SAR-Cov-1 killed 10% of the people who got it. Then we get SARS-Cov-2 spreading like wildfire. We weren't gonna wait for some idiots with dodgy math based on a teacher's strike in Bolivia or whatever to tell us whether or not it's cost-effective or not to use all of the anti-spread techniques we have to put a stop to that. Thank the merciful gods that Cov-2 wasn't nearly as lethal as Cov-1, and I say that as our current worldwide undercount of death is ~7 million worldwide and it was the third leading cause of death in the US in 2021.

We had more than enough waffling around trying to save the stock market economy as it was
But do lockdowns offer overall benefit? You do realize lockdowns weren't even something ever done in response to a pandemic, it wasn't even in the playbook.

Sars-cov-1 CASE FATALITY RATE is ~10%, that does not mean 10% of those that got it died; it means 10% of those that we know got it (and tested) died from it. The case fatality rate of covid was never even close to 10% (before or after it coming to the US) let alone the actual infection fatality rate. Early seroprevalence studies showed the infection fatality rate for covid was much lower than initially thought as well.

It's funny how that the less and less dangerous covid got, the more ridiculous all the restrictions got. Here's Rachel Maddow on Jimmy Fallon (@3:20) on March 2, 2020 saying the covid will ONLY kill like 2% of people and we don't need to do anything more than we do for the flu. Yet the actual infection fatality rate was below 0.2% (that we learned April 2020) and we have stop everything and if you don't believe that, you're a murderer that only cares about money.

Why don't you guys ever consider that in the US doing lockdowns is even more greatly detrimental because millions of people were laid off, meaning they lost health coverage? And regardless if they got covid (which was inevitable) or got any number of other health issues (because those didn't stop), they were far less likely to get the care they needed. That's the thing with the US, you lockdown and people lose healthcare.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,322
6,826
118
Country
United States
But do lockdowns offer overall benefit? You do realize lockdowns weren't even something ever done in response to a pandemic, it wasn't even in the playbook.

*snip irrelevance*
Cute story. Entirely negated by the fact that we abso-fucking-lutely did lockdowns to curb SARS
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
9,029
800
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
Cute story. Entirely negated by the fact that we abso-fucking-lutely did lockdowns to curb SARS
Quarantining an area is not locking down a country. Notice how Beijing was locked down, not all of China. Also, it was just entertainment and cultural venues that were closed.

Again the for millionth time, WHERE THE FUCK IS YOUR EVIDENCE THAT ANY OF THIS SHIT WORKS?
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,322
6,826
118
Country
United States
Quarantining an area is not locking down a country. Notice how Beijing was locked down, not all of China. Also, it was just entertainment and cultural venues that were closed.

Again the for millionth time, WHERE THE FUCK IS YOUR EVIDENCE THAT ANY OF THIS SHIT WORKS?
Ya gotta read the whole article, drippy
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Ag3ma

Elite Member
Jan 4, 2023
2,512
2,177
118
Yes, so give me exactly what you do for other medical interventions for lockdowns or masks to prove they work. That is what I've been asking for for years now and still nothing.
1) Lockdowns and masks aren't medical interventions, though, are they? Masks are part public health policy and part personal protection equipment, lockdowns are public health policy.

2) Asking for "proof" in this area of policy is, bluntly, fucking stupid. It's beyond stupid. It is a demand for total paralysis.

What you are in effect arguing here is that if a respiratory disease arrives that is as infectious as covid but kills 50% of people infected, neither lockdowns nor masks should be mandated because they are not proven. This is not an absurd example: it is genuinely the inevitable result of the logic you are pushing of 'no proof, no policy.'

Your logic can also be applied to literally anything in policy. Raise interest rates 0.5%? Prove it works. Spend another $500 per pupil on education? Prove it works. Cut benefits 5%? Prove it works. All these policies have potentially serious long-term effects, from quality of life up to life itself for millions of people. "Prove it". The only result is a demand for zero governance, because no such proof exists, nor possibly could ever be revealed (after all, once a choice is made, no counterfactual exists to demonstrate what the alternative was), at least certainly not within the timeframe required for the policy to be enacted.

It's a way of looking at the world which is either incredibly stupid or deliberately fraudulent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Ag3ma

Elite Member
Jan 4, 2023
2,512
2,177
118
Yet the actual infection fatality rate was below 0.2% (that we learned April 2020) and we have stop everything and if you don't believe that, you're a murderer that only cares about money.
The population of the USA is ~330 million.
It has had ~1.2 million covid deaths to date.

(1.2 / 330) * 100 = 0.36%

Just to put into context your claims about us "knowing" the IFR was below 0.2%.

Fucking, fucking hell... 😣
 

Ag3ma

Elite Member
Jan 4, 2023
2,512
2,177
118
Quarantining an area is not locking down a country. Notice how Beijing was locked down, not all of China. Also, it was just entertainment and cultural venues that were closed.
That's a form of lockdown.

Lockdowns don't suddenly become not lockdowns whenever it's convenient to you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
8,697
2,881
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
That's a form of lockdown.

Lockdowns don't suddenly become not lockdowns whenever it's convenient to you.
When Queensland went into a lockdown, it was usually just the one city that got lockdown. Not the whole state

This is exactly what a lockdown is. I don't know why this is so hard
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
8,697
2,881
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
This was people wanting to stop other people from reading to their kids in their own homes?!?! Or was this in like pre-school and a teacher reading to kids before naptime? The former is beyond ridiculous and that people even think something like that is acceptable is just beyond words. You can't teach your kid piano because I'm not teaching my kid piano so it's not fair; how dare you!!!
It wasn't like a policy. It was a 'helpful suggestion' with ads and everything. Not a government policy, just some busy bodies who thought they had a good idea. It was about 10 years ago so details are now fuzzy in my memory

It was only aimed at parents. They were saying something like: it was the teacher job, and you're just giving your child advantages

It feels like Sam Bankman-Fried twisted ideology of altruism. He wanted to get all the money so he could help others. Sounds rather counterproductive to me. Like, let the others get money so they can help themselves instead of taking money from them

It was all very stupid
 

Gergar12

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
3,368
809
118
Country
United States
I am so sick of scammers from Nigeria, China, India, the Philippines, etc. I am not talking about everyone in those countries, but the call center scammers, the LinkedIn scammers, the Indeed Scammers.

What do they give to their societies, let alone the global commons?

They scam their own countries more yes, but why don't they get some skills and an actual job?
 

Ag3ma

Elite Member
Jan 4, 2023
2,512
2,177
118
They scam their own countries more yes, but why don't they get some skills and an actual job?
For the same reason that many people turn to crime: it earns money, and often more money than they would earn doing an honest job.

Particularly when you consider that these are often countries where the median wage is well under $10,000 a year, if not in some cases under $1000. It's not like they need a lot of victims to make them rich by the standards of their country. Manage to twit the right victim...