|
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. |
On September 18 2021 00:04 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2021 00:01 Amumoman wrote:On September 17 2021 23:36 JimmiC wrote:On September 17 2021 23:17 Amumoman wrote:On September 17 2021 22:29 JimmiC wrote:On September 17 2021 21:24 Amumoman wrote:
Q3: what do you think about how little ‘authorities’/media has focused on what can be done to improve the immune system: exercise, eating good stuff, getting good sleep, being out in sunlight/nature, being w friends/family, not worrying, etc?
Think it was perfectly appropriate to not talk much (if at all) about these things? That talking more or less exclusively about social distancing, vaccines and such was the way to go?
For the record, Im not even necessarily opposed to distancing and vaccines (i just think mandates are a extremely bad precedent which i think on balance pose a far greater threat than the virus itself).
I recommended my grandmother and father to get vaccinated but I am not convinced it’s the sound call for people not at risk to get vaccinated.
Another edit:
All that said, I do hope I am overestimating the threat to liberty and adverse effects of vaccines etc. That’d be great They are been talking about doing at that for decades, for the most part people just ignore. Governments have treid and put in some rules about it as well, the same people fighting vaxx and masks were fighting those. You are at risk. The big societal issue is you are at risk to others. The personal risk for you exists as well and is far greater than the risks of the vaccine. This is just fact know there is enough data out. Your liberty is at no more threat then if the Government decides to not let people smoke inside anymore, or lower speed limits. Our assessment of reality differs; as do our sense of what values best lead to health and flourishment of Life. How can you so categorically and hubristically postulate things like I am at risk without even knowing the circumstances of my health situation? You proclaim me to be in denial of the data while - in my estimation - denying that your postulates are merely that and not undisputable facts? It’s curious how allergic the Mind is capable of being to uncertainty. Because every age group is at at greater risk from Covid than from the vaccine. I'm not a soothsayer, I just read the research and don't ignore the parts I don't like. Your risk comment is so lame, of course we are always at risk. Hell you're more at risk driving to your vaxx appointment then you are getting vaxxed but which one are you scared of? Life is about balancing risk and considering reward. There is more risk in being unvaccinated then there is getting vaccinated. It is also much better for society. You have a phobia and trying to make it sound like a reasonable decision, you cannot because it is not logical. This tends to people having to believe all sorts of nonsense instead of just confronting their fears. If all there were to health were not dropping death, I’d agree with your assessment. I will gladly without hesitation get vaccinated the moment I am convinced that decision is in my best interest. For now, I remain unconvinced. What would it take to convince you?
Thats a good question. I honestly do not know.
|
|
|
On September 18 2021 00:08 Amumoman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2021 00:04 Simberto wrote:On September 18 2021 00:01 Amumoman wrote:On September 17 2021 23:36 JimmiC wrote:On September 17 2021 23:17 Amumoman wrote:On September 17 2021 22:29 JimmiC wrote:On September 17 2021 21:24 Amumoman wrote:
Q3: what do you think about how little ‘authorities’/media has focused on what can be done to improve the immune system: exercise, eating good stuff, getting good sleep, being out in sunlight/nature, being w friends/family, not worrying, etc?
Think it was perfectly appropriate to not talk much (if at all) about these things? That talking more or less exclusively about social distancing, vaccines and such was the way to go?
For the record, Im not even necessarily opposed to distancing and vaccines (i just think mandates are a extremely bad precedent which i think on balance pose a far greater threat than the virus itself).
I recommended my grandmother and father to get vaccinated but I am not convinced it’s the sound call for people not at risk to get vaccinated.
Another edit:
All that said, I do hope I am overestimating the threat to liberty and adverse effects of vaccines etc. That’d be great They are been talking about doing at that for decades, for the most part people just ignore. Governments have treid and put in some rules about it as well, the same people fighting vaxx and masks were fighting those. You are at risk. The big societal issue is you are at risk to others. The personal risk for you exists as well and is far greater than the risks of the vaccine. This is just fact know there is enough data out. Your liberty is at no more threat then if the Government decides to not let people smoke inside anymore, or lower speed limits. Our assessment of reality differs; as do our sense of what values best lead to health and flourishment of Life. How can you so categorically and hubristically postulate things like I am at risk without even knowing the circumstances of my health situation? You proclaim me to be in denial of the data while - in my estimation - denying that your postulates are merely that and not undisputable facts? It’s curious how allergic the Mind is capable of being to uncertainty. Because every age group is at at greater risk from Covid than from the vaccine. I'm not a soothsayer, I just read the research and don't ignore the parts I don't like. Your risk comment is so lame, of course we are always at risk. Hell you're more at risk driving to your vaxx appointment then you are getting vaxxed but which one are you scared of? Life is about balancing risk and considering reward. There is more risk in being unvaccinated then there is getting vaccinated. It is also much better for society. You have a phobia and trying to make it sound like a reasonable decision, you cannot because it is not logical. This tends to people having to believe all sorts of nonsense instead of just confronting their fears. If all there were to health were not dropping death, I’d agree with your assessment. I will gladly without hesitation get vaccinated the moment I am convinced that decision is in my best interest. For now, I remain unconvinced. What would it take to convince you? Thats a good question. I honestly do not know.
Would it be enough if you were convinced that the average danger of vaccination to someone in your position is lower than the average danger of infection? What kind of criteria would these studies need to fulfill?
|
I suppose I’d have to be convinced there’s a risk from the virus thats worth even considering. The data and evidence does not seem to suggest that as far as i can tell
|
|
|
On September 18 2021 00:01 Amumoman wrote:
If all there were to health were not dropping death, I’d agree with your assessment.
I will gladly without hesitation get vaccinated the moment I am convinced that decision is in my best interest. For now, I remain unconvinced.
Covid-19 contains more risks than just dropping dead. Vaccination (especially Pfizer) contains no risk other than a sore arm for a few days and in few cases maybe a day of (harmless) side effects.
There's no risk from vaccination. There's only risk from infection. To you and to others.
Explain to us the gap in this reasoning. The concrete gap. No more vague talk about unknown unknowns that are unknown. Be concrete.
|
On September 18 2021 00:17 Amumoman wrote:
I suppose I’d have to be convinced there’s a risk from the virus thats worth even considering. The data and evidence does not seem to suggest that as far as i can tell
That is BS. Provide a source for your claim.
|
On September 18 2021 00:21 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2021 00:17 Amumoman wrote:
I suppose I’d have to be convinced there’s a risk from the virus thats worth even considering. The data and evidence does not seem to suggest that as far as i can tell That is BS. Provide a source for your claim.
Im mostly familiar with data from my own country denmark so i’ll go with those.
85 percent of ppl who died were 70 y or older.
Avg age of ppl who died is 82.
For ppl lower than 40, there’s been 10 deaths in total half of whom had comorbidities.
Want me to go more in depth?
Edit: these are publicly available official figures
|
On September 18 2021 00:32 Amumoman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2021 00:21 Magic Powers wrote:On September 18 2021 00:17 Amumoman wrote:
I suppose I’d have to be convinced there’s a risk from the virus thats worth even considering. The data and evidence does not seem to suggest that as far as i can tell That is BS. Provide a source for your claim. Im mostly familiar with data from my own country denmark so i’ll go with those. 85 percent of ppl who died were 70 y or older. Avg age of ppl who died is 82. For ppl lower than 40, there’s been 10 deaths in total half of whom had comorbidities. Want me to go more in depth? Edit: these are publicly available official figures
How many deaths have there been in Denmark from the vaccines?
|
On September 18 2021 00:45 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2021 00:32 Amumoman wrote:On September 18 2021 00:21 Magic Powers wrote:On September 18 2021 00:17 Amumoman wrote:
I suppose I’d have to be convinced there’s a risk from the virus thats worth even considering. The data and evidence does not seem to suggest that as far as i can tell That is BS. Provide a source for your claim. Im mostly familiar with data from my own country denmark so i’ll go with those. 85 percent of ppl who died were 70 y or older. Avg age of ppl who died is 82. For ppl lower than 40, there’s been 10 deaths in total half of whom had comorbidities. Want me to go more in depth? Edit: these are publicly available official figures How many deaths have there been in Denmark from the vaccines?
Dunno havent looked into that — feel free to share if you do
|
On September 17 2021 21:32 Amumoman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2021 18:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 17 2021 16:48 Amumoman wrote:
Q: do you guys think the virus situation is being exploited by politicians to further their own agendas (enriching themselves, scoring points w other politicians whose appproval they crave, undermining liberty to expand the reach of states, etc) and by pharma company shareholders who historically speaking have demonstrated little to no concern for people’s health so long as they make as much money as possible and by media companies who historically speaking have been happy to resort to fear-mongering and scare tactics to do propaganda or simply to make money?
Q2: how severe a threat do you guys think the virus poses ranked against all the other health problems we’re seeing: obesity, sleep irregularities, hormonal disruptions, etc and ranked against the threat to liberty?
Have a great day Q2: I think infectious diseases can be more devastating, especially when one's neighbor is apathetic towards others, or anti-science. Of course, there are plenty of non-infectious health issues that need to be addressed, too. Infectious diseases are more of a threat to liberty, as I have a right to not have my life endangered by morons who can't be bothered to take basic safety precautions. And who gets to be the ultimate authority on what constitutes sound basic safety precautions?
If we're talking about health and infectious diseases, I would think that those medical experts ought to be viewed as authority figures, and that politicians should probably respect what they say.
|
On September 17 2021 21:24 Amumoman wrote:
Q3: what do you think about how little ‘authorities’/media has focused on what can be done to improve the immune system: exercise, eating good stuff, getting good sleep, being out in sunlight/nature, being w friends/family, not worrying, etc?
Think it was perfectly appropriate to not talk much (if at all) about these things? That talking more or less exclusively about social distancing, vaccines and such was the way to go?
For the record, Im not even necessarily opposed to distancing and vaccines (i just think mandates are a extremely bad precedent which i think on balance pose a far greater threat than the virus itself).
I recommended my grandmother and father to get vaccinated but I am not convinced it’s the sound call for people not at risk to get vaccinated.
Another edit:
All that said, I do hope I am overestimating the threat to liberty and adverse effects of vaccines etc. That’d be great
I think, in general, promoting healthy lifestyles (nutrition, exercise, not smoking, etc.) is a great idea. Those healthy lifestyles reduce the risk of developing health problems (heart disease, etc.). That being said, these things aren't a substitute for social distancing, masking, and vaccinating during a global pandemic with infectious diseases; these are more for things like how to reduce your cholesterol, maintain/develop muscle mass, etc.
|
On September 18 2021 01:00 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2021 21:32 Amumoman wrote:On September 17 2021 18:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 17 2021 16:48 Amumoman wrote:
Q: do you guys think the virus situation is being exploited by politicians to further their own agendas (enriching themselves, scoring points w other politicians whose appproval they crave, undermining liberty to expand the reach of states, etc) and by pharma company shareholders who historically speaking have demonstrated little to no concern for people’s health so long as they make as much money as possible and by media companies who historically speaking have been happy to resort to fear-mongering and scare tactics to do propaganda or simply to make money?
Q2: how severe a threat do you guys think the virus poses ranked against all the other health problems we’re seeing: obesity, sleep irregularities, hormonal disruptions, etc and ranked against the threat to liberty?
Have a great day Q2: I think infectious diseases can be more devastating, especially when one's neighbor is apathetic towards others, or anti-science. Of course, there are plenty of non-infectious health issues that need to be addressed, too. Infectious diseases are more of a threat to liberty, as I have a right to not have my life endangered by morons who can't be bothered to take basic safety precautions. And who gets to be the ultimate authority on what constitutes sound basic safety precautions? If we're talking about health and infectious diseases, I would think that those medical experts ought to be viewed as authority figures, and that politicians should probably respect what they say.
Which of the medical experts are you referring to? The Japanese ones who recently decided to try out Ivermectin or the American ones that think that is inappropriate for treating covid?
I have no dog in that fight but its very clear that those socalled experts to whom you would want us all to bow down dont agree among themselves
|
On September 18 2021 01:04 Amumoman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2021 01:00 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 17 2021 21:32 Amumoman wrote:On September 17 2021 18:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 17 2021 16:48 Amumoman wrote:
Q: do you guys think the virus situation is being exploited by politicians to further their own agendas (enriching themselves, scoring points w other politicians whose appproval they crave, undermining liberty to expand the reach of states, etc) and by pharma company shareholders who historically speaking have demonstrated little to no concern for people’s health so long as they make as much money as possible and by media companies who historically speaking have been happy to resort to fear-mongering and scare tactics to do propaganda or simply to make money?
Q2: how severe a threat do you guys think the virus poses ranked against all the other health problems we’re seeing: obesity, sleep irregularities, hormonal disruptions, etc and ranked against the threat to liberty?
Have a great day Q2: I think infectious diseases can be more devastating, especially when one's neighbor is apathetic towards others, or anti-science. Of course, there are plenty of non-infectious health issues that need to be addressed, too. Infectious diseases are more of a threat to liberty, as I have a right to not have my life endangered by morons who can't be bothered to take basic safety precautions. And who gets to be the ultimate authority on what constitutes sound basic safety precautions? If we're talking about health and infectious diseases, I would think that those medical experts ought to be viewed as authority figures, and that politicians should probably respect what they say. Which of the medical experts are you referring to? The Japanese ones who recently decided to try out Ivermectin or the American ones that think that is inappropriate for treating covid? I have no dog in that fight but its very clear that those socalled experts to whom you would want us all to bow down dont agree among themselves
The Japanese ones came out against it. The attempt at using it by the Japanese was a while ago and is extremely outdated and ended up not proving anything beneficial. There are no serious, randomized, controlled studies demonstrating that ivermectin is an effective way to deal with covid.
And either way, the medical consensus is that vaccination is the best way to deal with covid. Not ivermectin. Not hydroxychloroquine. Not bleach. Not thoughts and prayers. This is an overwhelming, international agreement across countless medical communities. There isn't in-fighting here.
|
|
|
|
|
On September 18 2021 00:32 Amumoman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2021 00:21 Magic Powers wrote:On September 18 2021 00:17 Amumoman wrote:
I suppose I’d have to be convinced there’s a risk from the virus thats worth even considering. The data and evidence does not seem to suggest that as far as i can tell That is BS. Provide a source for your claim. Im mostly familiar with data from my own country denmark so i’ll go with those. 85 percent of ppl who died were 70 y or older. Avg age of ppl who died is 82. For ppl lower than 40, there’s been 10 deaths in total half of whom had comorbidities. Want me to go more in depth? Edit: these are publicly available official figures
No need to go deeper. There are three things to consider:
1) Long-covid. I've been trying to find answers, and so far I couldn't find anything. I only know that it happens in many cases of infection, but I don't know what the risk is for healthy people. So this is a known unknown (at least for me), which means there's a possible risk factor for healthy people that doesn't exist with vaccination.
2) Healthy people may get infected asymptomatically, and those people can spread the disease to others. Those other people may or may not infect others, and they may or may not be asymptomatic, and so on. This means symptoms or no symptoms in an individual are not the end of the story, there are more dangers to consider.
We know that most infections take place at home. Infected individuals who don't live alone therefore pose a great risk. You need to ask yourself the question what the health status is of the people you interact with for several hours a day.
Those concerns are strongly reduced in vaccinated households.
3) One of the most likely reasons why the risk in Denmark is lower than in other countries is the high rate of vaccination. Unvaccinated people increase the risk for themselves and for others (not all vaccinated people are safe). This means the numbers you're using to justify not getting vaccinated are likely a result of people getting vaccinated in the first place. You're contributing to an increased risk by increasing the chance of infection. This means you're not only speaking from and benefitting from a position of privilege (that most others offered to you for free), but you're also actively shying away from offering the same privilege to others in return.
|
On September 18 2021 01:07 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2021 01:04 Amumoman wrote:On September 18 2021 01:00 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 17 2021 21:32 Amumoman wrote:On September 17 2021 18:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 17 2021 16:48 Amumoman wrote:
Q: do you guys think the virus situation is being exploited by politicians to further their own agendas (enriching themselves, scoring points w other politicians whose appproval they crave, undermining liberty to expand the reach of states, etc) and by pharma company shareholders who historically speaking have demonstrated little to no concern for people’s health so long as they make as much money as possible and by media companies who historically speaking have been happy to resort to fear-mongering and scare tactics to do propaganda or simply to make money?
Q2: how severe a threat do you guys think the virus poses ranked against all the other health problems we’re seeing: obesity, sleep irregularities, hormonal disruptions, etc and ranked against the threat to liberty?
Have a great day Q2: I think infectious diseases can be more devastating, especially when one's neighbor is apathetic towards others, or anti-science. Of course, there are plenty of non-infectious health issues that need to be addressed, too. Infectious diseases are more of a threat to liberty, as I have a right to not have my life endangered by morons who can't be bothered to take basic safety precautions. And who gets to be the ultimate authority on what constitutes sound basic safety precautions? If we're talking about health and infectious diseases, I would think that those medical experts ought to be viewed as authority figures, and that politicians should probably respect what they say. Which of the medical experts are you referring to? The Japanese ones who recently decided to try out Ivermectin or the American ones that think that is inappropriate for treating covid? I have no dog in that fight but its very clear that those socalled experts to whom you would want us all to bow down dont agree among themselves The Japanese ones came out against it. The attempt at using it by the Japanese was a while ago and is extremely outdated and ended up not proving anything beneficial. There are no serious, randomized, controlled studies demonstrating that ivermectin is an effective way to deal with covid. And either way, the medical consensus is that vaccination is the best way to deal with covid. Not ivermectin. Not hydroxychloroquine. Not bleach. Not thoughts and prayers. This is an overwhelming, international agreement across countless medical communities. There isn't in-fighting here.
Fair enough. I’ll take your word on this. More inportantly though is the point of whether there’s legitimate disagreement among experts which was my primory point of that paragraph.
|
On September 18 2021 01:13 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2021 01:04 Amumoman wrote:On September 18 2021 01:00 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 17 2021 21:32 Amumoman wrote:On September 17 2021 18:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 17 2021 16:48 Amumoman wrote:
Q: do you guys think the virus situation is being exploited by politicians to further their own agendas (enriching themselves, scoring points w other politicians whose appproval they crave, undermining liberty to expand the reach of states, etc) and by pharma company shareholders who historically speaking have demonstrated little to no concern for people’s health so long as they make as much money as possible and by media companies who historically speaking have been happy to resort to fear-mongering and scare tactics to do propaganda or simply to make money?
Q2: how severe a threat do you guys think the virus poses ranked against all the other health problems we’re seeing: obesity, sleep irregularities, hormonal disruptions, etc and ranked against the threat to liberty?
Have a great day Q2: I think infectious diseases can be more devastating, especially when one's neighbor is apathetic towards others, or anti-science. Of course, there are plenty of non-infectious health issues that need to be addressed, too. Infectious diseases are more of a threat to liberty, as I have a right to not have my life endangered by morons who can't be bothered to take basic safety precautions. And who gets to be the ultimate authority on what constitutes sound basic safety precautions? If we're talking about health and infectious diseases, I would think that those medical experts ought to be viewed as authority figures, and that politicians should probably respect what they say. Which of the medical experts are you referring to? The Japanese ones who recently decided to try out Ivermectin or the American ones that think that is inappropriate for treating covid? I have no dog in that fight but its very clear that those socalled experts to whom you would want us all to bow down dont agree among themselves So much miss information in one sentence. There are trials going on for Ivermectin all over the world, so far it does not look like it helps. What the American Media is saying along with with FDA is don't go to your barn and get the ivermectin that is dosed for farm animals and take it yourself. Because lots of them are doing this because they don't trust doctors and the stuff for the animals is cheaper, available and untested. Then when they get sick they go to the hospital. That is one of the stupidest parts of all of this, all of the non vaxxers don't trust doctors to safely prevent covid. But once they get sick they all pile into the hospitals trust doctors and take anything and everything they can, and none of it has been approved for covid except on an emergency basis. It is a politically driven phobia that sadly impacts us all and not just the ones with irrational fears and behaviors.
How are you calling me an anti-vaxxer? I literally wrote I recommend ppl at significant risk to take the vax. How about not arguing in bad faith?
|
On September 18 2021 01:19 Amumoman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2021 01:07 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 18 2021 01:04 Amumoman wrote:On September 18 2021 01:00 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 17 2021 21:32 Amumoman wrote:On September 17 2021 18:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 17 2021 16:48 Amumoman wrote:
Q: do you guys think the virus situation is being exploited by politicians to further their own agendas (enriching themselves, scoring points w other politicians whose appproval they crave, undermining liberty to expand the reach of states, etc) and by pharma company shareholders who historically speaking have demonstrated little to no concern for people’s health so long as they make as much money as possible and by media companies who historically speaking have been happy to resort to fear-mongering and scare tactics to do propaganda or simply to make money?
Q2: how severe a threat do you guys think the virus poses ranked against all the other health problems we’re seeing: obesity, sleep irregularities, hormonal disruptions, etc and ranked against the threat to liberty?
Have a great day Q2: I think infectious diseases can be more devastating, especially when one's neighbor is apathetic towards others, or anti-science. Of course, there are plenty of non-infectious health issues that need to be addressed, too. Infectious diseases are more of a threat to liberty, as I have a right to not have my life endangered by morons who can't be bothered to take basic safety precautions. And who gets to be the ultimate authority on what constitutes sound basic safety precautions? If we're talking about health and infectious diseases, I would think that those medical experts ought to be viewed as authority figures, and that politicians should probably respect what they say. Which of the medical experts are you referring to? The Japanese ones who recently decided to try out Ivermectin or the American ones that think that is inappropriate for treating covid? I have no dog in that fight but its very clear that those socalled experts to whom you would want us all to bow down dont agree among themselves The Japanese ones came out against it. The attempt at using it by the Japanese was a while ago and is extremely outdated and ended up not proving anything beneficial. There are no serious, randomized, controlled studies demonstrating that ivermectin is an effective way to deal with covid. And either way, the medical consensus is that vaccination is the best way to deal with covid. Not ivermectin. Not hydroxychloroquine. Not bleach. Not thoughts and prayers. This is an overwhelming, international agreement across countless medical communities. There isn't in-fighting here. Fair enough. I’ll take your word on this. More inportantly though is the point of whether there’s legitimate disagreement among experts which was my primory point of that paragraph.
I am unaware of any kind of data-driven disagreement. Are there any peer-reviewed studies showing that the general public being vaccinated and moving towards herd immunity isn't worth the negligible risks associated with the vaccines, especially compared to the non-negligible risks associated with covid (not just the death rate, but also long-term covid, hospitalization, and perpetuating the infection)? Because even if I'm personally in a relatively safe demographic, I should still be considering the well-being of my family, friends, neighbors, and co-workers who may be in unsafe demographics (or may live with people who are, etc.).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
