Our Covid Response

CriticalGaming

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 28, 2017
8,105
3,077
118
You've literally come in here making the dumb ass fucking claim that we don't restrict people's freedom to drink and drive. And now you've just shifted to "the laws don't stop people." Okay, but you'll still get arrested if you do it. So we restrict people's freedom to do it. Do you think about anything that you say?
Okay let's put it another way.

Masks and social distancing was supposed to stop covid. Didn't work so we tried lockdowns. Didn't work, so now we are on a vaccine....it's kind of working? sort of.

Point is, you say there are laws against drunk driving. Okay it's not working, why aren't we trying to do something else then? Or is there some acceptable level of drunk driving deaths? Like, okay we have laws and they help and it reduces the number of deaths. If you are saying the laws are good enough even though people still drive and drive and people still die. Then the vaccine is available for those that want it and that should be good enough because it will prevent most of the covid deaths and the few that don't get it (aka still drink and drive) they'll die or kill others but that'll be acceptable so long as the overall incident rate is reduced.

Or we ban all alcohol sales everywhere with no exceptions (which would be the vaccine passport required for doing literally anything in your day to day life) and maybe we get those drunk driving incidents to 0.01%.
 

CriticalGaming

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 28, 2017
8,105
3,077
118
We don't allow people to smoke wherever they want.
But people are still allowed to smoke, because you can still buy cigarettes almost everywhere. So by allowing that you are allowing deaths by smoking. It isn't a matter of limiting where you can smoke, it's the fact that you are allowed to smoke at all.
 

Cheetodust

Elite Member
Jun 2, 2020
1,113
1,521
118
Country
Ireland
My point is if Drunk driving is such a problem despite the rules and laws against it? Why do we continue to allow Alcohol to be sold and consumed freely?
We literally don't allow it to be freely sold and consumed. It's restricted where it can be sold, to whom and also when you can drink it. It cannot be consumed freely because if you consume it while driving your car you will go to jail. We limit people's freedom to consume alcohol exactly where it becomes dangerous to others.

If we know smoking will kill you, why to we allow the free sale to people who want it?
because what we restrict is where they consume it based on it being harmful to others. Smoking is regulated with the same logic the vaccine is. You are free to do things that harm yourself. Being unvaccinated doesn't just put you at risk and smoking in a crowded room doesn't just put you at risk. You wanted a line! That's the line, when your behaviour harms others.

The reason junk food gets a pass is that you eating 10 mcdoubles won't give me a heart attack.

If the idea is to enforce a vaccine because it will save lives and in order to ensure we save as many people as possible we should ENFORCE a vaccine mandate. Then what justification do we have to allow the free use of other things that would 100% save lives if we mandated their removal as well?
We don't allow the free use of them!



Shitting your pants isn't against the law, it's just embarassing.
no but dropping trou and shitting on the pavement is.


Point is, you say there are laws against drunk driving. Okay it's not working, why aren't we trying to do
No that isn't the point, that's you moving the goal posts AGAIN. You made a claim that we don't limit people's freedom in regards to other health issues. We fucking do. And now you're just scrambling to pull any argument out of your ass to make what you said not seem completely half baked with no thought put into it whatsoever.

Even the Joe Biden shit. You claimed he told people he would NEVER (your emphasis) take the vaccine, when it was pointed out that that's not true you just said it wasn't the point. Starting to feel like you just never have a point and are just an angry reactionary who doesn't put a second's thought into the things you believe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheMysteriousGX

Cheetodust

Elite Member
Jun 2, 2020
1,113
1,521
118
Country
Ireland
But people are still allowed to smoke, because you can still buy cigarettes almost everywhere. So by allowing that you are allowing deaths by smoking. It isn't a matter of limiting where you can smoke, it's the fact that you are allowed to smoke at all.
We. Limit. It. When. It. Harms. Other. People.

We. Have. Vaccine. Mandates. Because. Being. Unvaccinated. Harms. Other. People.

You. Are. Free. To. Smoke. When. It. Doesn't. Harm. Other. People.

The. Line. Is. When. Your. Actions. Harm. Other. People.
 

Buyetyen

Elite Member
May 11, 2020
2,692
1,885
118
Country
USA
The point is they put the DOUBT in people's heads.
Bullshit. You're just moving the goalposts again.

Masks and social distancing was supposed to stop covid. Didn't work so we tried lockdowns. Didn't work, so now we are on a vaccine....it's kind of working? sort of.
No, no, and it would be working better if we didn't have anti-vaxx stupidity. Masks and social distancing were meant to mitigate the effects of the pandemic, not stop it. Whoever told you different is going to hell for lying. And the US never had proper lockdowns at any point.
 

CriticalGaming

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 28, 2017
8,105
3,077
118
We. Limit. It. When. It. Harms. Other. People.

We. Have. Vaccine. Mandates. Because. Being. Unvaccinated. Harms. Other. People.

You. Are. Free. To. Smoke. When. It. Doesn't. Harm. Other. People.

The. Line. Is. When. Your. Actions. Harm. Other. People.
And how is being unvaccinated harm other people? If other people are vaccinated, then they are protected against your unvaccinated butt. If you cannot be vaccinated because of a medical reason, then you are resposible for taking extra precautions because you aren't in danger of just covid.

People are responsible for THEMSELVES. Like you said, I can eat 10 Mcgangbangs if i want because it wont give you a heart attack. But you do pay into the public medicare fund which means if I can't pay for my heart attack, you will. So it does affect other people.

I don't think the argument of "When it affects other people we limit it" stands because everything effects other people.

Look whatever, you guys want mandates fine. We're going to get them despite anything I say so it doesn't really matter now. Let's see how the rest of this plays out.
 

XsjadoBlayde

Intersectional Multidimensional Pansexual Alliance
Apr 29, 2020
2,375
2,320
118
Britannialand
*le sigh*


The authors of a study purportedly showing that ivermectin could treat patients with SARS-CoV-2 have retracted their paper after acknowledging that their data were garbled.

The paper, “Effects of a Single Dose of Ivermectin on Viral and Clinical Outcomes in Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infected Subjects: A Pilot Clinical Trial in Lebanon,” appeared in the journal Viruses in May. According to the abstract:


A randomized controlled trial was conducted in 100 asymptomatic Lebanese subjects that have tested positive for SARS-CoV2. Fifty patients received standard preventive treatment, mainly supplements, and the experimental group received a single dose (according to body weight) of ivermectin, in addition to the same supplements the control group received. …
Results results results … and:

Ivermectin appears to be efficacious in providing clinical benefits in a randomized treatment of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2-positive subjects, effectively resulting in fewer symptoms, lower viral load and reduced hospital admissions. However, larger-scale trials are warranted for this conclusion to be further cemented.
However, in early October, the BBC reported — in larger piece about the concerns about ivermectin-Covid-19 research — that the study:

was found to have blocks of details of 11 patients that had been copied and pasted repeatedly – suggesting many of the trial’s apparent patients didn’t really exist.
The study’s authors told the BBC that the ‘original set of data was rigged, sabotaged or mistakenly entered in the final file’ and that they have submitted a retraction to the scientific journal which published it.
That’s not quite what the retraction notice states:

The journal retracts the article, Effects of a Single Dose of Ivermectin on Viral and Clinical Outcomes in Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infected Subjects: A Pilot Clinical Trial in Lebanon [1], cited above.
Following publication, the authors contacted the editorial office regarding an error between files used for the statistical analysis.
Adhering to our complaints procedure, an investigation was conducted that confirmed the error reported by the authors.
This retraction was approved by the Editor in Chief of the journal.
The authors agreed to this retraction.
Ali Samaha, of Lebanese University in Beirut, and the lead author of the study, told us:

It was brought to our attention that we have used wrong file for our paper. We informed immediately the journal and we have run investigations. After revising the raw data we realised that a file that was used to train a research assistant was sent by mistake for analysis. Re-analysing the original data , the conclusions of the paper remained valid. For our transparency we asked for retraction.
About that BBC report? Samaha said:

The BBC article was generated before the report of independent reviewers who confirmed an innocent mistake by using wrong file.
Samaha added that he and his colleagues are now considering whether to resubmit the paper.

The article has been cited four times, according to Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science — including in this meta-analysis published in June in the American Journal of Therapeutics, which concluded that:

Moderate-certainty evidence finds that large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin. Using ivermectin early in the clinical course may reduce numbers progressing to severe disease. The apparent safety and low cost suggest that ivermectin is likely to have a significant impact on the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic globally.
That article was a social media darling, receiving more than 45,000 tweets and pickups in 90 news outlets, according to Altmetrics, which ranks it No. 7 among all papers published at that time.

The retraction marks the 189th for papers on Covid-19, by our count.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
7,725
2,249
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
And how is being unvaccinated harm other people? If other people are vaccinated, then they are protected against your unvaccinated butt. If you cannot be vaccinated because of a medical reason, then you are resposible for taking extra precautions because you aren't in danger of just covid.

People are responsible for THEMSELVES. Like you said, I can eat 10 Mcgangbangs if i want because it wont give you a heart attack. But you do pay into the public medicare fund which means if I can't pay for my heart attack, you will. So it does affect other people.

I don't think the argument of "When it affects other people we limit it" stands because everything effects other people.

Look whatever, you guys want mandates fine. We're going to get them despite anything I say so it doesn't really matter now. Let's see how the rest of this plays out.
So, the Libertarian streak in me says that mandates are terrible. But the Libertarian streak in me says that America Libertarian is fucked up and is just out to kill people. It has never been about freedom.

Libertarianism is meant to be about freedom WITH RESPONSIBILITY. Thus, Libertarians would be against mask mandate but everyone should be wearing a mask anyway. Because that's what RESPONSIBILITY means. And it's quite clear that the anti-maskers don't understand freedom.

If a employee/er turns up with a gun or knife to work, they should be held accountable for an injury it causes. Covid is just as dangerous as a knife, so any worker/owners who spreads Covid to customers should be treated like they have a deadly weapon. Jail time and paying out damages

Or, to put it another way, most customers WILL NOT turn up to buy anything if it leads to them being hospitalized. Some sort of mitigation is necessary or it will cripple the ecomony.

Also, you don't own a knife or gun and throw it around indiscriminately. You, being the owner, are EXPECTED to handle it safely and not injure others.

I would love mandates not to be necessary. But anyone who doesn't show how they can be responsible for others in society needs to pay the price for the damage they are causing
 

MrCalavera

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 30, 2020
864
884
98
Country
Poland
Libertarianism is meant to be about freedom WITH RESPONSIBILITY.
"Responsibility for MYSELF, not responsibility for OTHER people."
Let's not pretend - this here is what the loudest Libertarians actually believe.
 

CriticalGaming

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 28, 2017
8,105
3,077
118
If a employee/er turns up with a gun or knife to work, they should be held accountable for an injury it causes.
I assume you mean if they come in with a weapon and use it to harm right?

Every restuarant has a shitload of knives everywhere, and they aren't really that dangerous. Even if used in properly the worst that happens is you loose some skin or MAYBE a fingertip. Painful and gross, not fatal.

Or, to put it another way, most customers WILL NOT turn up to buy anything if it leads to them being hospitalized.
Ok let's be real though. Covid is comparitively rarely a hospitalization, much less a death sentence.

2% death rate world wide. And that doesn't factor any contributing conditions that lead to complications and death.

Yes Covid can be fatal, but fatalities are the outliers of Covid cases.

The attitude of your statement is fearmongering and hyperbole. Because the odds of that being the situation if you get Covid are about the same as the odds of you getting into a car accident everytime you drive. Obviously car accidents happen and they happen everyday all the fucking time, but because of the sheer numbers involved the individual odds on a day to day basis are very low.

And just like with Covid, taking personal responsibility (careful driving, wearing a seatbelt, etc) greatly lowers your risk of injury if you do get into an accident, the same way personal responsibility will greatly lower your chances of consequences if you should get Covid.
 

Buyetyen

Elite Member
May 11, 2020
2,692
1,885
118
Country
USA
Ok let's be real though. Covid is comparitively rarely a hospitalization, much less a death sentence.

2% death rate world wide. And that doesn't factor any contributing conditions that lead to complications and death.

Yes Covid can be fatal, but fatalities are the outliers of Covid cases.
5 million people dead in 18 months. Covid has killed more than the 1918 pandemic. It has cost more lives in America than World War II did. And it has been explained to you that there are long-term complications common to surviving Covid. Overloaded hospitals, overloaded morgues, triage deciding who to treat and who has to wait... That's a lot of death and suffering that could have been avoided had we been smart when this whole goatfuck started.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bluegate

Avnger

Trash Goblin
Legacy
Apr 1, 2016
1,909
1,025
118
Country
United States
5 million people dead in 18 months. Covid has killed more than the 1918 pandemic. It has cost more lives in America than World War II did. And it has been explained to you that there are long-term complications common to surviving Covid. Overloaded hospitals, overloaded morgues, triage deciding who to treat and who has to wait... That's a lot of death and suffering that could have been avoided had we been smart when this whole goatfuck started.
But none of that has personally affected him, so why should he care? Honestly, society needs to show more empathy for the non-victims of COVID; their mild inconvenience is far more important than the suffering of those millions of "outliers."

/s
 

CriticalGaming

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 28, 2017
8,105
3,077
118
5 million people dead in 18 months. Covid has killed more than the 1918 pandemic. It has cost more lives in America than World War II did. And it has been explained to you that there are long-term complications common to surviving Covid. Overloaded hospitals, overloaded morgues, triage deciding who to treat and who has to wait... That's a lot of death and suffering that could have been avoided had we been smart when this whole goatfuck started.
Correct and that is because the media fuckered the messaging. Mandates now, do not erase the failures of the past. But the resistance signifies the inconsistancy in messaging that was done for political gain, when it should have been united, but the government has no desire to protect the people, it only wants to control them. If they wanted to protect us they would have kept their stories straight.
 

bluegate

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 28, 2010
2,066
642
118
Correct and that is because the media fuckered the messaging. Mandates now, do not erase the failures of the past. But the resistance signifies the inconsistancy in messaging that was done for political gain, when it should have been united, but the government has no desire to protect the people, it only wants to control them. If they wanted to protect us they would have kept their stories straight.
🤔... ... ... 🤷‍♂️
 

Cheetodust

Elite Member
Jun 2, 2020
1,113
1,521
118
Country
Ireland
So, the Libertarian streak in me says that mandates are terrible. But the Libertarian streak in me says that America Libertarian is fucked up and is just out to kill people. It has never been about freedom.

Libertarianism is meant to be about freedom WITH RESPONSIBILITY. Thus, Libertarians would be against mask mandate but everyone should be wearing a mask anyway. Because that's what RESPONSIBILITY means. And it's quite clear that the anti-maskers don't understand freedom.

If a employee/er turns up with a gun or knife to work, they should be held accountable for an injury it causes. Covid is just as dangerous as a knife, so any worker/owners who spreads Covid to customers should be treated like they have a deadly weapon. Jail time and paying out damages

Or, to put it another way, most customers WILL NOT turn up to buy anything if it leads to them being hospitalized. Some sort of mitigation is necessary or it will cripple the ecomony.

Also, you don't own a knife or gun and throw it around indiscriminately. You, being the owner, are EXPECTED to handle it safely and not injure others.

I would love mandates not to be necessary. But anyone who doesn't show how they can be responsible for others in society needs to pay the price for the damage they are causing
unfortunately, culturally, the Western world isn't ready for libertarianism. You can't have freedom without responsibility and individualism has been far too ingrained in our culture for total freedom to not be a complete disaster. To clarify, I don't think that means humans are incapable of living without mandates and threats, just that we've spent the last half a century or so driving home the idea that we're meant to be in competition with each other.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
8,598
5,951
118
Correct and that is because the media fuckered the messaging. Mandates now, do not erase the failures of the past. But the resistance signifies the inconsistancy in messaging that was done for political gain, when it should have been united, but the government has no desire to protect the people, it only wants to control them. If they wanted to protect us they would have kept their stories straight.
You're right, the Trump government was inconsistent.

One of the reasons they were inconsistent is because of the large chunk of the US populace offended at the idea that the government might make them do things. So the Trump administration prevaricated and vacillated rather than offend their own voters, and the end was a distinctly slushy mess than both damaged the effectiveness of measures and trust in the government. The media were also inconsistent for the same reason, because Fox News is likewise very aware of what its viewers think and that it needs to please them, and would be busy pumping out a bespoke message to them irrespective of the truth, what the government did, and how many of their countrymen they helped die early.

This is also an apposite time to remind you that you were one of those people fighting a great deal of the measures that the government sort of knew was probably the best thing to do.