The Wuhan virus—how are we doing? - Page 42 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Provision of the two UN HDI indicators other than GNP.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15123707
Rancid wrote:The premise/idea is that news organizations are here to objectively inform


Whose premise is that? It's certainly not the premise of the oligarchs who created all the news organizations. When was that ever the premise? That's more of a naive preconception than a premise.
#15123718
Sivad wrote:Whose premise is that? It's certainly not the premise of the oligarchs who created all the news organizations. When was that ever the premise? That's more of a naive preconception than a premise.

That was a creation of the television era. Before the rise of television when every major city had at least two newspapers with morning and evening editions, everyone knew that the paper had a preferred party. But with the rise of TV with just a few stations, they tried to pretend that their reporting was unbiased. With the rise of cable and the internet, we’re returning to the previous days where the best we can hope for is that they’re factual—and as the MSM(D) has repeatedly demonstrated in their crusade to destroy the Trump administration, for many even that is something of a pipe dream.
Last edited by Doug64 on 30 Sep 2020 03:43, edited 1 time in total.
#15123844
@Sivad, in my kid's school, there are a few parents that are pediatricians that are advocating for opening up the school. Basically saying that the science is showing that teachers and kids are simply not a high risk for spread assuming basic precautions are taken. They even alluded to say that the popular media is fear mongering a bit much and too many parents are falling for it.

What do you think? Heroes?

Many of the counties around us are already doing it for the last few weeks.
#15123859
Speaking of whether we should have ever shut everything down the way most everyone did, to go along with the latest CDC survivability numbers (age 0-19: 99.997%, 20-49: 99.98%, 50-69: 99.5%, 70+: 94.6%), there's a new book coming from a biochemist and a microbiologist, Corona, False Alarm?: Facts and Figures. The book has been published in Germany, English version coming out in October, but some have already had a look at it:

    What if the world vastly overestimated the seriousness of the coronavirus and effectuated countermeasures that wrought far more damage than the disease itself? That is the central question that Karina Reiss and Sucharit Bhakdi, a biochemist and microbiologist, respectively, set out to answer in Corona: False Alarm? Facts and Figures.

    Needless to say, they do so affirmatively.

    From a lay perspective, I admit to having long been skeptical of most countries’ responses to the virus, believing that the consequences of locking down societies for months or even years on end would far outweigh the benefits, if not at present, certainly in the long run. But I accepted the common wisdom that the virus, while no more dangerous than the flu to those under 50, presents a significant risk to those over 60 years old.

    The authors argue, however, that SARS-CoV-2 is akin to a run-of-the-mill respiratory virus, as most of its victims are already so ill that it is “almost always the last straw that breaks the camel’s back” (30). This is a controversial thesis, even amongst experts who are critical of extreme policies implemented in response to the virus. Nevertheless, the authors make a persuasive case....

    ... The most compelling and original parts are the first several chapters, in which the authors explain how flaws in diagnostics and criteria for attributing deaths to the virus led to a distorted picture of the disease’s dangerousness.

    In violation of “all international medical guidelines” “every deceased person who had tested positive for the virus entered the official records as a coronavirus victim” (16). When deaths are counted properly, Reiss and Bhakdi argue, it becomes evident that only those with serious underlying conditions are at risk of dying, and those “without severe preexisting illness need fear the virus no more than young people.” Stated otherwise, the virus simply does not present a significant risk, beyond those we take in everyday life, to healthy, older people, much less young healthy people (16-25, 30-35)....

    I agree with Reiss and Bhakdi that those pressing for lockdowns and other restrictions, often members of the educated elite, vastly underestimate the hardship such measures inflict upon those less fortunate (83-85).

    Not only do they cause substantial harm, but suppressive measures are ineffective (49-54, 60-61, 91-98). The authors pay particular attention to Sweden, which never adopted widespread mask usage and did not lock down. Instead, only gatherings of over 50 people were prohibited and citizens were relied upon to behave responsibly.

    Reiss and Bhakdi correctly observe that the “press relentlessly emphasized that Sweden would pay a high price for its liberal path,” while noting that in reality, “Sweden without lockdown is not significantly different when compared to countries with lockdown” (93-94). Indeed, Sweden now has fewer deaths per million than the United States, fewer infections per capita than its Nordic neighbors, and its 7-day coronavirus-related death average is zero.
Last edited by Doug64 on 30 Sep 2020 05:27, edited 1 time in total.
#15123865
Rancid wrote:@Sivad, in my kid's school, there are a few parents that are pediatricians that are advocating for opening up the school. Basically saying that the science is showing that teachers and kids are simply not a high risk for spread assuming basic precautions are taken. They even alluded to say that the popular media is fear mongering a bit much and too many parents are falling for it.

What do you think? Heroes?

Many of the counties around us are already doing it for the last few weeks.


The boring studies I read seem to indicate that a lot depends on community spread in the community being served by the school. If the community already had a high rate of infection, the school will act as an additional vector, such as the high schools where I live. But if the community has a low rate, the school should be safe.
#15123970
Godstud wrote:"If someone is an asshole, they're an asshole, if everyone is an asshole, you're the asshole." :D I think this applies to the "total fucking idiots" thing, as well.

Just think, Godstud, if you "win" the argument by using vulgarities and pop culture, you might get to be locked down for the rest of your life.

What a victory you are working for. You remind me of all those rotten-teeth British boys who went off to WW1 to be heroes, thinking they were entering a soccer game that could be easily won with charisma and machismo.

Likewise, you are trying to win a war of propaganda AGAINST YOU by using intimidation and an incredible loyalty to a corrupt media and governance structure.

You need to believe someone, and even a liar will do.

Sivad wrote:Whose premise is that? It's certainly not the premise of the oligarchs who created all the news organizations. When was that ever the premise? That's more of a naive preconception than a premise.

The thinking is: "If I really believe the lies of rich people, they might let me be rich too."

This type of docile "thinking" is the real pandemic.
#15124001
Rancid wrote:@Sivad, in my kid's school, there are a few parents that are pediatricians that are advocating for opening up the school. Basically saying that the science is showing that teachers and kids are simply not a high risk for spread assuming basic precautions are taken. They even alluded to say that the popular media is fear mongering a bit much and too many parents are falling for it.

What do you think? Heroes?



Yeah, they should be commended for standing up and speaking out against this hysteria. They're taking a big professional risk by doing that because even though they know that there's no real public health threat, they also know that the public health authorities and the media can spin up a big bullshit hoax out of nothing more than false positive pcr tests and some deliberately misattributed deaths. My advice to them would be to go the whole hog and use whatever influence they have to debunk the whole hoax, don't try to hedge an pretend that it was a serious crisis but now the worst is over because that will leave the babbitts enough credibility to hoax up a second wave and hang it around their necks.
#15124004
Doug64 wrote:CDC survivability numbers (age 0-19: 99.997%, 20-49: 99.98%, 50-69: 99.5%, 70+: 94.6%)


That 70+ age group has the highest comorbidity rate so that's the group being used to inflate the death count with bogus covid attributions. I bet the real survivability rate for 70+ is over 99% .

We also have to keep in mind that state governments were forcing covid infected people into nursing homes so that substantially drove up mortality for that age group. They also forced DNRs on a lot of those people, they're still mistreating the disease with mechanical ventilation which has led to a lot of unnecessary deaths, they're denying effective therapeutics, and they're forcing already lonely people into extreme isolation. A lot of the deaths are more due to incompetence and malfeasance in treatment and care than to the disease itself.
#15124056
@QatzelOk No one can possibly be edgier than you. Don't worry. I'll never be able to compete with your addiction/obsession with MSM and pop culture. I simply don't engage in it enough, despite what your intellect thinks.
#15124197
BeesKnee5 wrote:There are plenty of sources that enable both to be seen in the same chart, which I think is very useful in determining trend.

Capture.PNG


I thought I'd post some data for the US:

Image
Image
Image
Image

Sources: Cases and deaths come from the CDC. Data on tests and positivity is from the COVID Tracking Project.

Red line: Estimated trend using a kernel smoother

Blue lines: Confidence band for the estimated trend. I'm also not assuming the data is homoscedastic (it clearly isn't).

I can try to post this on a daily or weekly basis if there is any interest.
#15124255
wat0n wrote:I can try to post this on a daily or weekly basis if there is any interest.

I think we all really appreciated your Jihad-o-meter a few years back, so keep up the good work.

It doesn't matter if there is any interest from readers. Pharma will always show you the kind of "interest" that buys diamond rings and real estate.
#15124263
QatzelOk wrote:Just think, Godstud, if you "win" the argument ... you might get to be locked down for the rest of your life.

What a victory you are working for.


Godstub doesn't think that far ahead, Godstud just wants to feel smart and fit in. But some of these characters do get off on seeing people dominated, even if they're not a member of the inner party that gets to pull the levers and crank the dials, they still derive a sick thrill just from being an insignificant cog in the big face stomping machine.
#15124265
Sivad wrote:Godstub doesn't think that far ahead, Godstud just wants to feel smart and fit in. But some of these characters do get off on seeing people dominated, even if they're not a member of the inner party that gets to pull the levers and crank the dials, they still derive a sick thrill just from being an insignificant cog in the big face stomping machine.

I wonder if he runs a sweatshop in Vietnam, and is really bragging about how none of his employees took even a day off for sickness because they're so healthy... or else.

There is a lot of pressure in sweatshop-harboring countries to not allow even the idea of a pandemic to get in the way of production lines of thousands of overtime-workers.
#15124295
I won't even respond to your stupidity, @QatzelOk and @Sivad because neither of you are intelligent enough to actually address the issues. Right-wing babbits is all you guys are... and yes, @QatzelOk you fit right in there with them. You must have loads of self-loathing to do that.
#15124432
Godstud wrote:I won't even respond to your stupidity, @QatzelOk and @Sivad because neither of you are intelligent enough to actually address the issues. ...

We have different opinions than you do, and than each other.

For you, this must be dumbness because "smart people all have the same opinions." Experts can be quoted for you, and that's the end of any debate.

And the expression "address the issues" here, is actually newspeak for "believing the stories that we are told to believe without any internal moral activity allowed to intervene or question the logic or intent of our leaders."

As soon as you were scared, Godstud, you were willing to give up all your civil liberties to a central authority, and you didn't even allow yourself to examine both sides of any "facts" you were fed by possibly interested parties, which you have never identified or interrogated.

That you are a most willing slave is noted, but not celebrated.
#15124516
:lol: @QatzelOk scared to led doctors tell me what I should do during a pandemic? Do you tell your doctor how to treat you when you go to the hospital? Most people don't study for a decade simply so they can second guess their doctor, too.

What civil liberties did I give up? :?:

None. That's how many.

Your assumptions are ridiculous, and based on opinion and ignorance, not actual facts and reality. I cannot argue with belief, as it doesn't rely on facts.

You're a bigger follower and consumer of MSM than anyone else, as that's where you form your messed up opinions. Think about that. Maybe it's not everyone else. Maybe it's just you and @Sivad who have it all wrong as you look for individuals who also hold your beliefs, instead of relying on actual facts.
#15124522
Sivad wrote:The selfish hypocrisy of champagne lockdownism is demolishing our society
Duplicitous virtue-signalling is now the biggest obstacle to a sane response to Covid
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... g-society/


the UN expects that the political reaction to the pandemic may put the livelihood of up to 1.6 billion people at immediate risk and may, by the end of 2020, push an additional 130 million people “to the brink of starvation” and an additional 150 million children into poverty.
  • 1
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 69

That's not an anti-vaxxer view but part of common[…]

Right decision. Give birth to a cripple damages th[…]

EU-BREXIT

I hope the Brits will vote again in 6-7 Years, com[…]

Election 2020

I was unaware you were even willing to engage on […]