Funny Events of the "Woke" world

[Dreiko]

That isn't happening, and never was.

What did happen, and is happening, is if someone has a life-threatening medical emergency, like for example a stroke or heart attack, or as you mentioned a car accident that results in life-threatening trauma, and an emergency room or intensive care unit has to triage that patient out because they're already over-capacity from Covid patients. Or, someone has a life-threatening chronic condition and has to be refused life-saving palliative care due to pharmaceutical, PPE, and labor-hour shortages because hospitals are over-capacity treating Covid patients. That person dies because they lacked access to life-saving medical treatment.

That is absolutely a Covid-related death; were it not for the intervening factor of Covid (as a phenomenon), their life could have been saved. Those deaths count as excess mortalities, but as what they don't count are Covid-related deaths. That's why Covid represented such an elderly die-off as it did, without every elder necessarily dying of Covid: they had other life-threatening medical problems which couldn't be treated, thanks to the strain Covid put on health care systems and national infrastructures.

But covid is not the sole thing birthing the circumstances you describe. You can also blame things like, for example, understaffing, the rising costs of providing healthcare limiting its supply, the country just not having as many hospitals as it should. It not paying doctors enough or not bringing forth the next generation in such a way where enough of them end up becoming doctors and nurses so that there's enough staff to tackle pandemics. So on and so forth.

Why the need to just blame this complex set of multifaceted problems on covid instead of spreading the blame around more fairly and tackling each and every factor that contributed to the problem?

To keep the car crash metaphor going, this is like someone crashing onto a building and blaming the building. There had to have been a series of failures on the way that lead to the crash, and while, sure, if there was an empty lot there instead of a building you wouldn't have crashed, that's...reeeealy not the actual cause of the crash. You're supposed to drive in such a way that avoids crashing into buildings. Even badly built buildings that jut out into the street in a blind spot.



And finally, no, if someone is out in an isolated island and dies because their treatable affliction wasn't treated in time, we do not count that as a helicopter death, because in fantasy utopia land a helicopter should have gotten to the guy and transported him to treatment. His cause of death is whatever injury or ailment he sustained on that island, that and only that.

 

[Eacaraxe]

But covid is not the sole thing birthing the circumstances you describe. You can also blame things like, for example, understaffing, the rising costs of providing healthcare limiting its supply, the country just not having as many hospitals as it should. It not paying doctors enough or not bringing forth the next generation in such a way where enough of them end up becoming doctors and nurses so that there's enough staff to tackle pandemics. So on and so forth.

Ah, bullshit. Our health care system and infrastructure, and that of most Western countries, for all of its failings were more than adequate to handle the Covid pandemic, had people taken lockdowns seriously and behaved with an iota of respect for other human beings. We did in fact learn from H1N1 and had prepared for another major public health crisis, and for as utterly donkey-fucked as Obama left strategic PPE and medical device reserves, we had sufficient emergency supply and redundancy to make it through...again, had people taken lockdowns seriously and behaved like grown-ups.

Our health care system didn't get overwhelmed and collapsed, until after the "oh it's just the flu hurdy-durr" people decided to start "protesting" common fucking sense.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Ah, bullshit. Our health care system and infrastructure, and that of most Western countries, for all of its failings were more than adequate to handle the Covid pandemic, had people taken lockdowns seriously and behaved with an iota of respect for other human beings. We did in fact learn from H1N1 and had prepared for another major public health crisis, and for as utterly donkey-fucked as Obama left strategic PPE and medical device reserves, we had sufficient emergency supply and redundancy to make it through...again, had people taken lockdowns seriously and behaved like grown-ups.

Our health care system didn't get overwhelmed and collapsed, until after the "oh it's just the flu hurdy-durr" people decided to start "protesting" common fucking sense.

Not to mention the failure of the government to act appropriately. There was some of that all over, but the US (and UK) had it particularly bad.

 

[Dreiko]

Ah, bullshit. Our health care system and infrastructure, and that of most Western countries, for all of its failings were more than adequate to handle the Covid pandemic, had people taken lockdowns seriously and behaved with an iota of respect for other human beings. We did in fact learn from H1N1 and had prepared for another major public health crisis, and for as utterly donkey-fucked as Obama left strategic PPE and medical device reserves, we had sufficient emergency supply and redundancy to make it through...again, had people taken lockdowns seriously and behaved like grown-ups.

Our health care system didn't get overwhelmed and collapsed, until after the "oh it's just the flu hurdy-durr" people decided to start "protesting" common fucking sense.

Sweden never locked down at all and they somehow managed fine though. And hey, I'm not against lockdowns, I don't go out much anyways unless it's at a convention or something, or at a fancy restaurant a couple times a year, but I think it's oversimplifying it to just say all of it was just due to this one reason.

 

[Silvanus]

You're talking out of both ends of your mouth. First to say that it isn't happening, and then to say that it is, but not "significantly enough" (according to whom?).

Oh, please. "Isn't really happening" and "isn't happening to any significant degree" are obviously interchangeable shorthand in a wider post that provides exact detail of the incidence.

The truck thing is an example of a clear misalignment of cause and effect, I coulda easily said gunshot or falling from a bridge, so on and so forth, my point wasn't that specifically car accidents are the entirety of the misreported covid deaths. That's pretty obvious and to pretend I wasn't including all conveivable forms of death in my point by overfocusing on just the car accident stats is dishonestly misinterpreting my point in bad faith, and hence, deceptive.

Think about it.

How exactly is one supposed to counter or disprove the allegation that non-covid deaths are being arbitrarily reported as covid deaths?

Literally the only way to disprove it is to look at specific allegations and sift through the stats. You gave one specific example, and I provided a specific and direct counter.

It is literally not conceivably possible for someone to provide stats to prove "all conceivable forms of death" haven't been conflated with covid, isn't it? You've essentially just put forward an allegation that's utterly impossible to prove or disprove... and then refused to accept stats that show its not happening in the one example you did actually specify.

Again, you're working with the aim of finding a way to attribute a death to covid, so as soon as something is plausably attributable you cease looking further, because by it being plausably attributable you feel that's good enough to justify all the measures you have in mind that flow out of that potentiality, you don't actually care to find the truth, just reasonable doubt. That. Is. The. Problem.

Except you haven't established that's happening at all; You're just presuming it is. All you have is an allegation so vague as to be unfalsifiable.

 

[Dreiko]

Oh, please. "Isn't really happening" and "isn't happening to any significant degree" are obviously interchangeable shorthand in a wider post that provides exact detail of the incidence.



Think about it.

How exactly is one supposed to counter or disprove the allegation that non-covid deaths are being arbitrarily reported as covid deaths?

Literally the only way to disprove it is to look at specific allegations and sift through the stats. You gave one specific example, and I provided a specific and direct counter.

It is literally not conceivably possible for someone to provide stats to prove "all conceivable forms of death" haven't been conflated with covid, isn't it? You've essentially just put forward an allegation that's utterly impossible to prove or disprove... and then refused to accept stats that show its not happening in the one example you did actually specify.



Except you haven't established that's happening at all; You're just presuming it is. All you have is an allegation so vague as to be unfalsifiable.

What we have here is a well that has been poisoned. One does not get to poison the well and then bemoan the impossibility of sifting through every drop of water being used to find the poisoned ones.


This is why we should not falsely report any at all deaths, cause now reasonable people who follow the rules and recommendations like me are left doubtful of the accounts being shared.


Again, I wasn't bringing up car deaths in particular, it was just a random and in fact intentionally absurd example to illustrate my point. I had no concept of car deaths having ever been linked to covid at all, it was meant to be hyperbole to illustrate my point, not a fact based argument but a rhetorical one, so that you even found some car deaths of all things, having been linked to covid at all is in fact surprising and just goes to show what must have happened when people who would have died of a myriad real illnesses died with, but not due to, covid.


And that's the thing, it shouldn't be impossible to disprove, because you should have already proved a covid death was because of covid before you declared it as a covid death. You just show the proof for each case and you're done.

 

[Gergar12]

In a Worldwide War of Words, Russia, China and Iran Back Hamas (Published 2023)

Officials and researchers say the deluge of online propaganda and disinformation is larger than anything seen before.

www.nytimes.com

It's funny Russian Iranian and Chinese misinformation is rampant all over the internet. And maybe's not in this article, but the implicit assumption is that we will solve it somehow.

The only problem is I haven't run into one plan without holes in it.

If you wall off the internet to just the free world, the liberals in those countries who are often very capable people won't be able to resist their governments and move to the free world/most likely the Anglo world. The five-eyes countries are screwed in the long run from getting talent across the world.

If you just attack, attack, and attack you end up teaching your opponent more about your methods and gaining very little besides a delaying action which is why the US military limited it towards important times like during elections. (2018 and 2020 for example)

Active defense is useful but takes up lots of resources. There is a reason there are so many security updates to Windows 11 for example.

 

[tstorm823]

Ah, bullshit. Our health care system and infrastructure, and that of most Western countries, for all of its failings were more than adequate to handle the Covid pandemic, had people taken lockdowns seriously and behaved with an iota of respect for other human beings. We did in fact learn from H1N1 and had prepared for another major public health crisis, and for as utterly donkey-fucked as Obama left strategic PPE and medical device reserves, we had sufficient emergency supply and redundancy to make it through...again, had people taken lockdowns seriously and behaved like grown-ups.

Our health care system didn't get overwhelmed and collapsed, until after the "oh it's just the flu hurdy-durr" people decided to start "protesting" common fucking sense.

The health care system didn't collapse, we did get through it, and everyone was always going to contract the virus regardless of how "grown-up" we behaved. There really isn't a better result we could have reasonably gotten to aside from having a younger/healthier population to begin with.

Trying to find people, especially regular normal powerless people, to blame for a global pandemic is neither reasonable nor helpful.

 

[Silvanus]

What we have here is a well that has been poisoned. One does not get to poison the well and then bemoan the impossibility of sifting through every drop of water being used to find the poisoned ones.

But you haven't established any poison and don't even really have any reason to suspect it. You're just assuming it's there.

To use your well analogy: you claim a well is poisoned. I extract a sample of the water (traffic accident deaths) and test it, and the tests show there's no poison at all. You then respond that because I haven't tested every water droplet, therefore I can't say it wasn't poisoned.

This is why we should not falsely report any at all deaths, cause now reasonable people who follow the rules and recommendations like me are left doubtful of the accounts being shared.

You have no reason to think deaths have been falsely reported as covid. You're operating solely on assumption.

Again, I wasn't bringing up car deaths in particular, it was just a random and in fact intentionally absurd example to illustrate my point. I had no concept of car deaths having ever been linked to covid at all, it was meant to be hyperbole to illustrate my point, not a fact based argument but a rhetorical one, so that you even found some car deaths of all things, having been linked to covid at all is in fact surprising and just goes to show what must have happened when people who would have died of a myriad real illnesses died with, but not due to, covid.

No, it doesn't support your point at all that ~125 death certificates featured both covid and car accidents.

Death certificates routinely list multiple factors. That's because multiple factors very often play a role in someone's death. If you're saying doctors should just only ever list one, and ignore all contributing factors, you're essentially demanding that they be dishonest.

There are numerous scenarios in which both a traffic collision and covid could be significant in someone's death. I even described one such scenario specifically in my last post.

And that's the thing, it shouldn't be impossible to disprove, because you should have already proved a covid death was because of covid before you declared it as a covid death. You just show the proof for each case and you're done.

Doctors (or in some circumstances coroners) already do come to a medical, professional conclusion about what caused the death. They already do this before an underlying cause is listed on a death certificate. They literally already do what you're asking them to, and you're simply refusing to believe them.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Which is just bullshit, because you really have no idea at all.

"Medical intervention" is essentially synonymous with "medical treatment", encompassing diagnoses, tests, therapies, etc. See for instance in terms of legal defintions: https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/medical-intervention



Could you logically flail around more?



Slightly correct. Decisions should be evidence-based wherever possible - hence why we might do mask studies to see what sort of impact they might have. However, there's a substantial difference between "evidence" and "proof". In crisis, we might do things that are plausible or reasonable, with partial evidential basis, because it's almost certainly better to try something reasonable than sit around and wait for things to possibly go horribly wrong.

This is also really funny because there was equally no "proof" of "massive costs" either. There was a potential massive cost of letting covid run rampant and a potential massive cost of a public health policy to prevent it. How big any of those were going to be is only something that can be discovered after the fact, and even then, only the one of them that was actually done.



It's amazing you're still pumping this utter bullshit after all this time and all this debate. It's in ignorance of the body of scientific literature.



Okay, but think about your own arguments here that "natural immunity" (from catching the virus) was better than vaccines, and last an incredibly long time (for instance, all that time you spent dissing boosters). In order to be consistent with your own arguments, you should believe that reinfections have barely any mortality. Just to give you and idea of what you're talking about here, if we take the data that prior infection or being vaccinated reduces mortality chance 90%, this would mean that if a naive immune system had IFR 0.2%, everyone has been infected with covid 8 times.

But the bottom line is that you aren't remotely consistent. You're basically saying whatever you need to be right at the time on individual points with no coherence and no grasp whatsoever of the bigger picture. It's just a load of hot air to pretend things should have been done the way you wanted and to pretend you're never wrong.

As ever, you are totally full of shit on this topic.

Face coverings for covid-19: from medical intervention to social practice

Helene-Mari van der Westhuizen and colleagues argue that face coverings should be considered not as medical equipment but as a social practice informed by norms and expectations ### Key messages Covering the mouth and nose is a public health measure designed to capture respiratory droplets...

www.bmj.com

You said "Asking for "proof" in this area of policy is, bluntly, fucking stupid. It's beyond stupid. It is a demand for total paralysis." All the stuff we did caused more harm than benefit but asking and trying to find proof of such things is "fucking stupid"? Not my logic, that's your logic.

Masks never showed evidence of working before, nor do they now. It was not plausible or reasonable to demand/force everyone to mask. Even in other countries when top expert was asked why they didn't mask kids, they said only an idiot would do that. Yeah shutting down society has no evidence of massive costs... stop gaslighting.

You're the one that said it's plausible for the IFR to be 1% at one point, which was ridiculous when you said it and not even remotely true. There is still literally no evidence boosters helps most people, the only data of boosters actually helping is in vulnerable (not even old people, Paul Offit doesn't even get boosters and he's 70-something). I have no grasp of the bigger picture when I'm literally trying to get you all to prove on a bigger picture how these interventions did anything.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7947934/pdf/BLT.20.265892.pdf/

I think all this arguing about covid makes little sense if you don't specify which variant you're actually talking about, and bunching it all together is fallacious either way you argue. Basically, the early strains that caused lockdowns and a drive for the vaccine were most deadly, but the later ones were more contagious but less deadly, so yeah obviously when most people caught the more contagious variants that were less lethal that will bring the average down but that doesn't mean the Alpha or Beta variants were equally innocuous.

Same thing with the vaccines, yeah, you do need boosters to not catch variants, but that also means that when a newer new variant arises the booster will be not enough and you're still likely to catch the virus, like how you need a new flue shot each winter cause it's a different strain of the flue. And while a vaccine to the deadly varians is more useful, now that variants are less deadly the utility of the vaccine is also gonna go down proportional to how less deadly the virus is, so acting as if the vaccine is perma-locked to the utility it had when the variants were deadly is just as wrong as counting the deathtoll of each variant as a single "covid" deathtoll and not breaking it down on a variant by variant basis.


I got 2 vaccines back during the heavy lethality era and caught I think the omicron strain about a year after that, back like a year and a half ago, when it was so weak a strain that I was back to 100 %in 2 days and did not take any medicine at all to heal myself, and all it did was cause a cough and light fever. It was literally the lightest cold I've ever had, and the closest thing to it I've felt was the reaction to taking the second shot of the vaccine, where I was a little feverish for like a day. Since then I just decided to rely on natural immunity and I've not been sick, with anything, for the last year and a half. Not even had a headache for that matter. Hurray for eating good and getting enough sleep and water.

It's really hard to get good data showing the difference between the variants because of course, the newer variants will spread more because as covid spread initially, people stayed in more. As more and more got covid and got vaccinated, the more people got back to normal, so a variant spreading more is gonna happen even if it has the same infection ability. You need data of a variant against those that weren't ever infected or vaccinated to compare to that initial wave, and that data is hard to come by. Newer strains are probably a bit less deadly and a bit more infectious.

Vaccines nor boosters stop you from catching covid, it probably stops infection for like the 1st month much the same way catching a cold (like covid or the flu or standard head cold) makes you immune to getting sick for a month or so in the winter. So unless you can predict the future and know when you're gonna get covid, boosters are pointless (besides the vulnerable).

I got the original strain (or whatever strain initially came to the US) as I got it the week before all the lockdowns happened in the US (early March 2020); I just had a mild fever and cough for 3-4 days, no sniffles or sore throat, it was basically the least annoying cold I've ever had. I got the J&J shot because it was one and done, and I was forced to get it even though I knew it was pointless due to natural immunity. Eating properly is key to avoiding most sicknesses. I'm 40 and I've never even taken an over-the-counter pain medication let alone ever taken a prescription medication. This one insurance guy thought I was fucking with him when he asked me if I took any medications and I said I don't even have a Tylenol in the house.

 

[Eacaraxe]

Sweden never locked down at all and they somehow managed fine though. And hey, I'm not against lockdowns, I don't go out much anyways unless it's at a convention or something, or at a fancy restaurant a couple times a year, but I think it's oversimplifying it to just say all of it was just due to this one reason.

"At all?" From the beginning Sweden instituted facility, event, and venue capacity limits; restricted access to at-risk populations like those of retirement communities; had partial curfews; and enforced social distancing. In other words, far more restrictive than what was actually in practice in the United States and United Kingdom. Even the Cato Institute had no choice but to admit this.

Then, Sweden got shellacked in the first wave. That's what happens when a large chunk of the country vacationed in Italy, and promptly took their cases straight to retirement communities. Having learned its lesson, Sweden decided "more of what the rest of the world was doing" was in order...and got shellacked in the second wave anyways. That's a far fucking cry from "somehow managed fine".

Why didn't Sweden's health care system collapse like the US's and UK's? Probably because it's a low-population density Nordic country, with one of the most developed and redundant health care systems on the planet. One with, by the way, excellent education and a strong sense of civic duty fostered in its populace...which meant that unlike people in the US and UK, they actually acted like grown-ass adults.

The health care system didn't collapse, we did get through it...

Apparently someone already decided to forget refrigerated trucks being used as makeshift morgues, mass graves, the strategic national PPE reserve running bone-dry, medical personnel working 100+ hour weeks and while having Covid themselves, and China buying PPE in bulk to sell right back to the US at premium.

 

[Gordon_4]

which meant that unlike people in the US and UK, they actually acted like grown-ass adults.

Uh, I think you can count us on the same side as you. We did not comport ourselves with the dignity I’d hoped we would.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Uh, I think you can count us on the same side as you. We did not comport ourselves with the dignity I’d hoped we would.

Not as bad as the US or UK, though. They both suffered from even more appalling governments than we had.

 

[Gordon_4]

Not as bad as the US or UK, though. They both suffered from even more appalling governments than we had.

Which is truly saying something. We did okay but boy could we have done better. Or maybe I’m just melancholy today for some stupid reason.

 

[Eacaraxe]

Uh, I think you can count us on the same side as you. We did not comport ourselves with the dignity I’d hoped we would.

I mean, did you have people protesting the idea of washing their hands after taking a piss, as a matter of personal freedom?

 

[Gordon_4]

I mean, did you have people protesting the idea of washing their hands after taking a piss, as a matter of personal freedom?

I don’t think that happened, but most of 2020 is kind of a hazy blur. So I won’t discount the possibility.

 

[Ag3ma]

Face coverings for covid-19: from medical intervention to social practice

Helene-Mari van der Westhuizen and colleagues argue that face coverings should be considered not as medical equipment but as a social practice informed by norms and expectations ### Key messages Covering the mouth and nose is a public health measure designed to capture respiratory droplets...

www.bmj.com

Fucking hell, do you even read your sources?

The article is criticising, er, you and people like you. It is making the point that the public narrative of debating masks in the same terms of a medical intervention was a mistake. I mean, do you not feel remotely embarrassed that you keep doing this sort of thing? What is the point of citing scientific and healthcare articles if you're too incompetent to even gather the correct interpretation.

All the stuff we did caused more harm than benefit but asking and trying to find proof of such things is "fucking stupid"? Not my logic, that's your logic.

Go back and read properly. I said that it is very unlikely or impossible that proof can be acquired, at least within the timescale where action needs to be taken.

Masks never showed evidence of working before, nor do they now.

You're the one that said it's plausible for the IFR to be 1% at one point

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7947934/pdf/BLT.20.265892.pdf/

This is exactly why you are full of shit and you have no grasp of the wider picture. You don't know the literature, you don't read thoroughly. You just cherry pick whatever suits you. Ioannidis was wrong: really, really wrong. At least by this point he was revising up into the area of plausibility after numerous papers that were catastrophically out. He stated at one point, off his evidence, only about 10,000 Americans would die of covid. He was off by two orders of magnitude, that's how wrong he was. You have no idea what a load of pathetic, bullshitty nonsense it is for you to just selectively post stuff that suits the lies you want to pump out.

I have absolutely no problem with the fact I said the IFR could be as high as 1%, because that's what the data supported. If you wanted to go back and check, I think I said that something in the region of 0.3-0.7% was probably most likely (again, assuming naive respiratory systems, and an age distribution typical to Western countries). And you know what? I was almost certainly right. Or rather, I correctly interpreted the wider scope of the scientific literature, which overall got it right. And that's the difference between you and me. I actually read the damn science properly.

And for Ioannidis on IFR, you have that twat Vinay Prasad and his absurd cult on masks, and again pay no fucking attention to the reams of other work out there - because of course they don't pay attention to reams of the scientific work out there, because they're a cult.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

"At all?" From the beginning Sweden instituted facility, event, and venue capacity limits; restricted access to at-risk populations like those of retirement communities; had partial curfews; and enforced social distancing. In other words, far more restrictive than what was actually in practice in the United States and United Kingdom. Even the Cato Institute had no choice but to admit this.

Then, Sweden got shellacked in the first wave. That's what happens when a large chunk of the country vacationed in Italy, and promptly took their cases straight to retirement communities. Having learned its lesson, Sweden decided "more of what the rest of the world was doing" was in order...and got shellacked in the second wave anyways. That's a far fucking cry from "somehow managed fine".

Why didn't Sweden's health care system collapse like the US's and UK's? Probably because it's a low-population density Nordic country, with one of the most developed and redundant health care systems on the planet. One with, by the way, excellent education and a strong sense of civic duty fostered in its populace...which meant that unlike people in the US and UK, they actually acted like grown-ass adults.


Apparently someone already decided to forget refrigerated trucks being used as makeshift morgues, mass graves, the strategic national PPE reserve running bone-dry, medical personnel working 100+ hour weeks and while having Covid themselves, and China buying PPE in bulk to sell right back to the US at premium.

The 1st 30 seconds or so of this video is literally how it was to walk through Sweden in 2020. Much much different than the US.

Fucking hell, do you even read your sources?

The article is criticising, er, you and people like you. It is making the point that the public narrative of debating masks in the same terms of a medical intervention was a mistake. I mean, do you not feel remotely embarrassed that you keep doing this sort of thing? What is the point of citing scientific and healthcare articles if you're too incompetent to even gather the correct interpretation.



Go back and read properly. I said that it is very unlikely or impossible that proof can be acquired, at least within the timescale where action needs to be taken.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7947934/pdf/BLT.20.265892.pdf/

This is exactly why you are full of shit and you have no grasp of the wider picture. You don't know the literature, you don't read thoroughly. You just cherry pick whatever suits you. Ioannidis was wrong: really, really wrong. At least by this point he was revising up into the area of plausibility after numerous papers that were catastrophically out. He stated at one point, off his evidence, only about 10,000 Americans would die of covid. He was off by two orders of magnitude, that's how wrong he was. You have no idea what a load of pathetic, bullshitty nonsense it is for you to just selectively post stuff that suits the lies you want to pump out.

I have absolutely no problem with the fact I said the IFR could be as high as 1%, because that's what the data supported. If you wanted to go back and check, I think I said that something in the region of 0.3-0.7% was probably most likely (again, assuming naive respiratory systems, and an age distribution typical to Western countries). And you know what? I was almost certainly right. Or rather, I correctly interpreted the wider scope of the scientific literature, which overall got it right. And that's the difference between you and me. I actually read the damn science properly.

And for Ioannidis on IFR, you have that twat Vinay Prasad and his absurd cult on masks, and again pay no fucking attention to the reams of other work out there - because of course they don't pay attention to reams of the scientific work out there, because they're a cult.

Just linked to show you calling masks a medical intervention is a thing and what's the point of a stupid semantics argument? A lot of takes about covid in 2020 (like when that article was written) were downright stupid in hindsight; masks being one of them, schools being another.

We had studies on mask use against respiratory viruses before covid and they said masks don't work (I don't know why you roll your eyes on that, that is literally the science). And now, so do the covid mask studies, to really no one's shock that actually cares about science.

You just posted the US IFR is 0.36% and Ioannidis is more wrong than when you said it was plausible that it was 1%? The overall IFR in the world is going to be lower than the US IFR because the US has a rather old population compared to the average in the world. No fucking data supported a 1% covid IFR ever.

 

[Ag3ma]

Just linked to show you calling masks a medical intervention is a thing and what's the point of a stupid semantics argument?

You are playing a stupid semantics argument, because it's you attempting to stretch the term "medical intervention" beyond normal means. You may as well describe the sewer system as medical intervention if that's where you're going.

We had studies on mask use against respiratory viruses before covid and they said masks don't work (I don't know why you roll your eyes on that, that is literally the science). And now, so do the covid mask studies, to really no one's shock that actually cares about science.

On the contrary, there was evidence suggesting masks could be effective before, and there is more now.

You just posted the US IFR is 0.36%

No, I said that 0.36% of the US population has died of covid-19. Are you a deliberate liar, do you not understand what IFR is, or are you just that incompetent at reading comprehension?

and Ioannidis is more wrong than when you said it was plausible that it was 1%? The overall IFR in the world is going to be lower than the US IFR because the US has a rather old population compared to the average in the world. No fucking data supported a 1% covid IFR ever.

I said it was plausible it was 1%, but more likely it was substantially lower - you are just dishonest to ignore that. Providing ranges is normal in the field. Amongst the stupidest of stupid things you are arguing here is to say there was "no data" supporting a 1% covid IFR, having cited a meta-analysis that includes in its data set studies which showed an IFR over 1%. Wow. Just wow.

Secondly, the IFR that matters is the IFR for the individual location. Western countries are age-heavy and should not be relying on IFRs for much younger population countries to decide policy. Here again you show you don't actually know your sources: the very study you cited to claim an IFR under 0.2% breaks down its figures into three groups, and shows that some places (Western) have a median IFR of 0.57%.

Again, your statements betray the fact you don't even know your own sources, never mind the wider science. You are truly incompetent on this subject.

 

[Trunkage]

Big different between Cletus the Yokel shooting some-one who walked across his land and Mugger mike who shot some-one to steal their wallet though.

Also gun violence by population only matter so much because if there's 99 shootings but more people in the smaller area there was still 99 shooting in the area so you're still more likely to see those shootings to to the density of the area the shootings are occurring in.

Or to use an analogy just because there's more water in a river doesn't mean I'm more concerned about getting wet walking home past one than I am getting wet walking home in the rain.

Just so we are all aware of the statistics, here's what I want you to do. Show me how many people dying to gun shots due to mugging and then how many happen due to tresspassing

Because there is a narrative you just wrote here and I would like to know how true it is