EPT(Just some quick math to back up my point - the past 3 months in the US saw 67k deaths. With 650 of them being children, that's nearly 1% of the deaths. Germany in 2021 has seen 92k deaths. Of those 92k, only 26 were younger than 18. That's something like 0.028% as opposed to 1%.) source
Coronavirus and You - Page 465
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control. It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you. Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly. This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here. Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28674 Posts
(Just some quick math to back up my point - the past 3 months in the US saw 67k deaths. With 650 of them being children, that's nearly 1% of the deaths. Germany in 2021 has seen 92k deaths. Of those 92k, only 26 were younger than 18. That's something like 0.028% as opposed to 1%.) source | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10568 Posts
On September 16 2021 03:28 Magic Powers wrote: A very recent dip in hospitalizations means I was wrong about hospitalizations climbing? I see you're far more rigorious with my knowledge than your own. If we applied your own standard to your own claims, this thread would quickly turn into a garbage pile of myth busting (we've seen a glimpse of it during your ping pong with JimmiC). Yes. The fact that hospitalizations are declining means you were wrong about hospitalizations climbing. Very little of what I have said is objectively untrue. Most of the "bullshit" JimmiC claims I posted are predictions about COVID I made 6-8 months ago before the Delta variant even existed. Being wrong about a prediction is not the same as spreading falsehoods. JimmiC was wrong about predictions he believed too, the only difference is I don't constantly bring them up the way he does about my predictions. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15690 Posts
| ||
|
BlackJack
United States10568 Posts
On September 16 2021 03:38 Liquid`Drone wrote: if the US has had 650 children die from covid in the past 3 months (I'm not disputing this, to be clear) then American children seem to be a lot more vulnerable than ones in Europe. (I could see this be the case, tbh.. ) (Just some quick math to back up my point - the past 3 months in the US saw 67k deaths. With 650 of them being children, that's nearly 1% of the deaths. Germany in 2021 has seen 92k deaths. Of those 92k, only 26 were younger than 18. That's something like 0.028% as opposed to 1%.) source Per the CDC all COVID deaths involving children aged 0-17 since the start of the pandemic are 439. Isn't it interesting the discrepancy of the so-called "Fact checking" in this thread. Magic Powers can say COVID hospitalizations in Florida are rising and nobody corrects it. JimmiC can pull out some numbers that he heard from his doctor which are completely off-base from the official CDC numbers. Meanwhile people have called "bullshit" on my posts for: Saying "Florida went through a COVID wave" instead of "Florida is going through a COVID wave" or "1.4 billion children missing out on school" instead of "1.4 billion children had their schooling interrupted." It's almost comical how much of an echo chamber this place is where one side gets to make up any fucking numbers they want and the other side (basically just me) gets nitpicked over the most insignificant phrasing. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Arghmyliver
United States1077 Posts
On September 16 2021 04:06 BlackJack wrote: Per the CDC all COVID deaths involving children aged 0-17 since the start of the pandemic are 439. Isn't it interesting the discrepancy of the so-called "Fact checking" in this thread. Magic Powers can say COVID hospitalizations in Florida are rising and nobody corrects it. JimmiC can pull out some numbers that he heard from his doctor which are completely off-base from the official CDC numbers. Meanwhile people have called "bullshit" on my posts for: Saying "Florida went through a COVID wave" instead of "Florida is going through a COVID wave" or "1.4 billion children missing out on school" instead of "1.4 billion children had their schooling interrupted." It's almost comical how much of an echo chamber this place is where one side gets to make up any fucking numbers they want and the other side (basically just me) gets nitpicked over the most insignificant phrasing. "1.4 billion children missing out on school" implies that there are 1.4 billion children in the world who are not in school at all when they otherwise would be. "1.4 billion children had their schooling interrupted" correctly describes the situation. An echo chamber is blind sycophantism. What's happening here is known colloquially as a "scientific consensus." They are not the same thing. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4167 Posts
On September 16 2021 04:06 BlackJack wrote: Per the CDC all COVID deaths involving children aged 0-17 since the start of the pandemic are 439. Isn't it interesting the discrepancy of the so-called "Fact checking" in this thread. Magic Powers can say COVID hospitalizations in Florida are rising and nobody corrects it. JimmiC can pull out some numbers that he heard from his doctor which are completely off-base from the official CDC numbers. Right, everyone else is treating you unfairly. I know the "I'm alone in my fight against the world" tune front to back. The reason you're being corrected more than others is because you have a record of saying things that aren't true. Meanwhile you compare that to me saying one inaccurate thing and not immediately getting fact checked over that, and you're treating that like I'm spreading a big falsehood. You're receiving so much more criticism because you deserve it, not because there's an echo chamber in here. When I first started posting in this thread I got fact checked left and right, and that despite relying on reputable sources the majority of the time. There are a bunch of people posting here who are in opposition to various commonly held ideas and beliefs. We also criticize each other when we're in the "same camp" so-to-speak. You're not the one who's up against all others. You're not that important, just like none of the rest of us is. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25474 Posts
On September 16 2021 04:06 BlackJack wrote: Per the CDC all COVID deaths involving children aged 0-17 since the start of the pandemic are 439. Isn't it interesting the discrepancy of the so-called "Fact checking" in this thread. Magic Powers can say COVID hospitalizations in Florida are rising and nobody corrects it. JimmiC can pull out some numbers that he heard from his doctor which are completely off-base from the official CDC numbers. Meanwhile people have called "bullshit" on my posts for: Saying "Florida went through a COVID wave" instead of "Florida is going through a COVID wave" or "1.4 billion children missing out on school" instead of "1.4 billion children had their schooling interrupted." It's almost comical how much of an echo chamber this place is where one side gets to make up any fucking numbers they want and the other side (basically just me) gets nitpicked over the most insignificant phrasing. Saying x body is against lockdowns by and large is a degree removed from x body saying that lockdowns are an undesirable, but ultimately potentially necessary measure to keep in the pocket. It’s absolutely not nitpicking to call you on that, rather sizeable difference in what was presented. In certain domains I think you’re on the money, but I don’t see how you’re treated atypically in this thread. | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28674 Posts
But if we instead of 650 out of 67k we go with 439 out of 682k, then the difference in percentage (still notable, tbh) can be explained by higher prevalence of comorbidities and hospitals being more overrun or worse health care and whatever else. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10568 Posts
On September 16 2021 04:47 WombaT wrote: Saying x body is against lockdowns by and large is a degree removed from x body saying that lockdowns are an undesirable, but ultimately potentially necessary measure to keep in the pocket. It’s absolutely not nitpicking to call you on that, rather sizeable difference in what was presented. In certain domains I think you’re on the money, but I don’t see how you’re treated atypically in this thread. Can you quote the post where I said "X body is against lockdowns?" What I said was the WHO recommends against lockdowns as a primary method for controlling the virus and they should be used as a last resort. What you and Magic Powers are doing is this: "BlackJack claims The WHO recommends against lockdowns This is not even nitpicking, this is just manipulating a quote by taking a few words out of context. Yet you don't think I'm treated atypically in this thread? | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21705 Posts
On September 16 2021 06:04 JimmiC wrote: Blackjack thinks that Florida's level of deaths are acceptable and therefor no country should be using lockdowns to control Covid because no one is doing as bad as Florida.Nope, what everyone has been asking you and you keep dodging is what places other than Australia have used lockdowns as primary? We have also showed you the doctor you quoted and the WHO in its total context showing that your version of last resort and WHO's version of not primary are not remotely in the same ballpark. This argument entirely resolved around that his and the rest of threads idea of 'last resort' are widely different. Most here think 1 in 500 Americans dying is horrible. He thinks its just another Tuesday. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
BlackJack
United States10568 Posts
The point of that quote was directed at all the people saying shit like "We should do everything in our power to minimize this disease." "Preventing human deaths and suffering is the most important thing to do" or whatever, these aren't exact quotes. My response is for the people that believe those things, they should support full-scale lockdown 24/7 with the National Guard patrolling the streets. That is THE ABSOLUTE BEST WAY to minimize death and spread of the disease. Then I rightly point out that not even the WHO supports this and it doesn't mean they are "warped and twisted" for not doing more to prevent death. Whether or not Australia or whoever else is using lockdowns in whatever way is irrelevant to my point. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4167 Posts
On September 16 2021 05:58 BlackJack wrote: Can you quote the post where I said "X body is against lockdowns?" What I said was the WHO recommends against lockdowns as a primary method for controlling the virus and they should be used as a last resort. What you and Magic Powers are doing is this: "BlackJack claims The WHO recommends against lockdowns This is not even nitpicking, this is just manipulating a quote by taking a few words out of context. Yet you don't think I'm treated atypically in this thread? No, even with the context of the complete quote, you're wrong. Do you want to go over this again? The only time we believe a lockdown in justified is to buy you time to reorganise, regroup, rebalance your resources; protect your health workers who are exhausted," Dr Nabarro said. "But by and large, we'd rather not do it." Dr Nabarro told The Spectator the economic impact on small countries that rely on tourism and increased poverty levels are two major effects of shutting communities down. "We really do appeal to all world leaders, stop using lockdown as your primary method of control," he said. To reiterate: 1) You used present tense. The quote was from 11 months ago. When Dr. Nabarro was quoted, the overall situation appeared to be improving, so the idea of not focusing on lockdowns may've made sense back then to Nabarro and many other experts. That situation from back then no longer exists, the context has changed. To really know how his views have shifted (or not), we'd have to ask him whether or not he made his statement in regards to the situation 11 months ago. 2) Nabarro also said a few other things for further context. For example he was concerned not only about deaths but also long-covid (and very rightfully so). Also this: "The only time we believe a lockdown in justified is to buy you time to reorganise, regroup, rebalance your resources; protect your health workers who are exhausted," Dr Nabarro said. "But by and large, we'd rather not do it."" So he put his statement (this one: "We really do appeal to all world leaders, stop using lockdown as your primary method of control") into context. He had an alternate scenario in mind where there was enough time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance the resources, and protect the health workers (and possibly a few other things he didn't mention). Unless that alternate scenario was in effect, he would NOT recommend against lockdowns as a primary means of control. Do you understand this nuance or will you double down once more? 3) Scientists are not clairvoyant. Scientific research is always shifting, always moving. A good scientist allows himself to change his mind in the presence of conflicting information. In order to know if he still believes that lockdowns shouldn't be a primary method of control, we'd have to ask him today, not quotemine him from 11 months ago. Since the pandemic clearly hasn't ended but rather gotten a lot worse, it'd be absurd to assume that Nabarro wouldn't at least consider correcting statements he made previously during a different time. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
BlackJack
United States10568 Posts
On September 16 2021 06:26 Magic Powers wrote: No, even with the context of the complete quote, you're wrong. Do you want to go over this again? To reiterate: 1) You used present tense. The quote was from 11 months ago. When Dr. Nabarro was quoted, the overall situation appeared to be improving, so the idea of not focusing on lockdowns may've made sense back then to Nabarro and many other experts. That situation from back then no longer exists, the context has changed. To really know how his views have shifted (or not), we'd have to ask him whether or not he made his statement in regards to the situation 11 months ago. 2) Nabarro also said a few other things for further context. For example he was concerned not only about deaths but also long-covid (and very rightfully so). Also this: "The only time we believe a lockdown in justified is to buy you time to reorganise, regroup, rebalance your resources; protect your health workers who are exhausted," Dr Nabarro said. "But by and large, we'd rather not do it."" So he put his statement (this one: "We really do appeal to all world leaders, stop using lockdown as your primary method of control") into context. He had an alternate scenario in mind where there was enough time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance the resources, and protect the health workers (and possibly a few other things he didn't mention). Unless that alternate scenario was in effect, he would NOT recommend against lockdowns as a primary means of control. Do you understand this nuance or will you double down once more? 3) Scientists are not clairvoyant. Scientific research is always shifting, always moving. A good scientist allows himself to change his mind in the presence of conflicting information. In order to know if he still believes that lockdowns shouldn't be a primary method of control, we'd have to ask him today, not quotemine him from 11 months ago. Since the pandemic clearly hasn't ended but rather gotten a lot worse, it'd be absurd to assume that Nabarro wouldn't at least consider correcting statements he made previously during a different time. I'd rather not have an argument over whether or not I should have used present-tense or past-tense and over whether I should quote someone 11 months ago because they could have changed their mind since then. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10568 Posts
On September 16 2021 06:18 Gorsameth wrote: Blackjack thinks that Florida's level of deaths are acceptable and therefor no country should be using lockdowns to control Covid because no one is doing as bad as Florida. This argument entirely resolved around that his and the rest of threads idea of 'last resort' are widely different. Most here think 1 in 500 Americans dying is horrible. He thinks its just another Tuesday. Yep, pretty much. Although I wouldn't call it just another Tuesday. More like a once-in-a-100-year pandemic. But now I'm the one splitting hairs. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4167 Posts
On September 16 2021 06:18 Gorsameth wrote: This argument entirely resolved around that his and the rest of threads idea of 'last resort' are widely different. Most here think 1 in 500 Americans dying is horrible. He thinks its just another Tuesday. Right, and what BJ doesn't understand is that the covid situation changes very drastically over time according to the measures taken. This means that for example 1 in 500 will turn into 1 in 400, then perhaps 300, 200, 100 and so on, unless of course measures are taken. In many countries, vaccination hasn't made enough progress as of late. That's a very big part of why cases are going back up and deaths are also on the rise. I believe no other known measures exist that are as effective as lockdowns and mass vaccination (in that order). Maybe a complete border shutdown? Perhaps. Anything else? China's approach of forced mass home quarantines may've actually worked better (in terms of combatting the outbreak) than I'd previously thought, but we're not receiving enough useful information from them to say anything for sure. Many more children will get vaccinated in the coming months, but will that be enough in a place like the US? I don't know, but I have strong doubts. So to the argument that right now the situation is good enough and therefore lockdowns are unwarranted: time and time again covid has returned with a vengeance whenever people felt like it was safe enough to reopen. It started with the UK, then India, and Brazil, and now apparently even Australia (which makes the contrast to NZ's strong response especially noteworthy). I mean I just don't get it. I want to end all lockdowns right now as much as anyone else, but the data simply doesn't support that approach. I predicted that Texas would see a surge in infections. It came weeks later than I had anticipated (I assume due to a significant delay in the arrival of Delta, which I'd argue speaks for stronger border control), but it did, and very strongly so. Infections and deaths are going up like mad in Texas. And to be completely honest, can we even trust Florida's daily infection count? I'd hope so, but seeing that the reporting method on deaths is specifically designed to obfuscate reality, I'm starting to have serious doubts. This morning I decided to write down the daily infections from Sept 1 onwards so that I can double-check the numbers with future worldometer updates. | ||
| ||
