|
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. |
Norway28674 Posts
On October 01 2021 01:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2021 00:52 Liquid`Drone wrote:On October 01 2021 00:37 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 30 2021 23:19 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 30 2021 22:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 30 2021 21:24 BlackJack wrote:On September 30 2021 19:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 30 2021 18:53 BlackJack wrote:On September 30 2021 07:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 30 2021 06:10 BlackJack wrote:
[quote]
I considered it a privilege to get the COVID vaccine, not a hassle. I didn't miss any work and I had zero side effects minus a little anxiety.
But on the whole, no, I consider it much less oppressive and much less of an assault on bodily autonomy to require mask-wearing than to require an injection into your body. It basically comes down to the giving up liberty for safety idea. Except here the safety you are getting is marginal at best. I already feel quite protected from COVID-19 after being double vaccinated and I'll probably get a booster soon. Basically every adult has the same opportunity for this protection. So it just comes down to how much authority I would want to give to the government over this. I agree with Magic Powers that during times of crisis is when the government is most eagerly looking for ways to increase their power and once they have more power they don't like to give it up. Dying of terrorism is also incredibly rare but it got people to go along with the Patriot Act and foreign wars that cost trillions. I think these are the times you have to be most vigilant about what the government is doing. We know that the additional safety from being vaccinated is actually incredibly important and significant, since it nearly guarantees that you won't become severely ill or die, and it helps protect those around you, too. It's not marginal for the individual, and lowering the infection rate of covid is not marginal for those of us who are vaccinated but are still forced to be near unvaccinated people (or for those who are immunocompromised and can't get the vaccine, who are forced to rely on the rest of us). The fact that this is a team effort is one of the reasons why I feel it's important to push harder for more people getting vaccinated. Also, what liberty is someone giving up by being vaccinated? Isn't it even more liberating to get vaccinated? To be free from the worst-case scenarios of a deadly disease? To be able to see loved ones again, without needing to worry about infecting and killing each other? To be able to work again? And even if getting a vaccine is a hassle, dealing with masks seems to be significantly more disruptive to one's life than getting a shot. The liberty you are giving up with a hypothetical vaccine mandate is the liberty to choose for yourself what you want to put into your body instead of having the government decide for you. I think that's self-evident. Every adult already has the opportunity to get vaccinated. The only thing that changes is who makes the decision. How do you decide which liberties are okay to restrict (seat belt / air bag laws, previous vaccine mandates, etc.) and which ones we ought not to restrict? Do you have any specific criteria? For example, my primary criterion has to do with the trade-off of personal liberty vs. how others are affected by one's "personal liberty" decision. The freedom to swing my arm ends at the tip of your nose, and I think this is particularly relevant during an infectious disease pandemic, when one's personal liberty to stay unvaccinated infringes on other people's personal liberty to stay safe and healthy. At that point, an anti-vaxxer's personal freedom is restricting the freedom of others. Thoughts? And, as an aside: Would you consider an enforced government mandate to be generally indistinguishable from all businesses and shops and supermarkets voluntarily enforcing their own mandates (without government pressure)? There have been roughly 3-4k breakthrough deaths so far in the 9-10 months we've been vaccinating people. It seems unlikely that 100% of those cases were contracted from an unvaccinated person and 100% of those deaths could have been prevented if we had forced vaccinations so at best you are saving some fraction of that 3-4k. A bad flu season can kill 50k+ people. Relatively speaking, If you're double vaccinated, COVID is not that big of a threat to you and therefore the unvaccinated are not that big of a threat to you. Vaccine mandates only make this relatively small risk marginally smaller. If you're double vaccinated you might be better off fighting for flu vaccine mandates than COVID vaccine mandates (being facetious with that last sentence) For the aside: businesses and shops and supermarkets should be free to have whatever policies they want in terms of enforcing enforcing vaccine mandates, masks, etc. Coronavirus is astronomically more dangerous than the flu, but I think that's a little off-topic. Keep in mind that the vaccinated covid deaths you're focusing on don't also include hospitalizations or even milder side-effects that go away after a few days. I don't think it's appropriate to tell someone who's vaccinated "so what if you miss a few days of work or get sick for a little while; you didn't die", when the situation was preventable in the first place. I find the negatives of that situation to be far worse than someone throwing an arbitrary temper tantrum over a vaccine with no serious risks. I don't think I'd be able to tell a few thousand families "oh well; you just have to pay the price for other people being selfish". And keep in mind that new variants of covid can be more resistant to our vaccines, which would make even those who are vaccinated more vulnerable than they currently are, and these new variants would emerge due to the unvaccinated. For the aside: Could you please elaborate on what the actual difference is between the government having everyone getting vaccinated, vs. every business, shop, and supermarket insisting everyone get vaccinated for a job or service? Aren't they both pragmatically the same in terms of removing an unvaccinated person's right to stay unvaccinated, if they wish to participate in society? Edit: Is GoTuNk! arguing in good faith? Or is this trolling? The assertion that the government is deciding what's factual - given the countless scientific and medical experts who spent their entire lives researching infectious diseases and running experiments and gathering data - seems too ridiculous to be taken seriously. Covid is not astronomically more dangerous for a vaccinated individual than the flu is for an unvaccinated individual. If anything it's the other way around. The point BJ is making is that we are okay with virtually no restrictions during flu season (at-risk individuals getting a flu shot, people who are sick staying home), yet people who are vaccinated against covid (who have less probability to get sick from covid than they, as unvaccinated individuals, have from the flu) still have to comply to more restrictions (than what we see during a normal flu season). The points about 'what about the people who can't get vaccines' or 'people in risk groups that are still at risk even when vaccinated' are fair, but I'm not convinced they're really numerous enough to justify social distancing (when I speak of restrictions, it's not masks, it's whatever restricts social activity and human closeness) as a general recommendation - even if that might seem kinda cold and callous. Why would we ever compare a person not vaccinated for one disease to a person vaccinated for a completely different disease? We should control for vaccination status by either comparing two vaccinated groups (vaccinated for both covid and flu), or comparing two unvaccinated groups (vaccinated for neither covid nor flu). In either of those cases, covid is way more dangerous than the flu. The flu should also be taken seriously (everyone should get their annual flu shot too), but it hasn't shut down the entire world; it's pretty bad on an absolute scale, but relatively-speaking, it's not "global pandemic" bad, hence far fewer restrictions than our covid situation. Both side effects and infection rates tend to be significantly more substantial for covid than the flu, hence the greater emphasis on restrictions for everyone when it comes to protecting from covid. Personally, I'm still not going to hang out with anyone who has the flu, and it's strongly discouraged that students with flu-like symptoms attend school (even if they only have the flu and not covid), but given the name of this thread, I'd like to focus on covid  I mean if you want to argue that that's a silly comparison to make, that's fine, but it is the one that was made, and from the point of view of an individual living in a country where others aren't willing to vaccinate, I think it's reasonable. Like, I got my vaccines pretty much as early as I could. I did it both for me, and for the rest of society. But if the rest of society were a bunch of idiots not willing to vaccinate, then my options would be a) live my life normally, berate them for being idiots, or b) live my life normally, wish that society would force those other jerks to vaccinate. Option C, 'socially distance because I still worry about covid', was not an option - after getting double vaccinated the chances that I get seriously ill are really low - much lower than what the chances that I get ill from the flu is - and I have never even contemplated getting a flu shot, although I think those make sense for people that are more at risk. I'm not quite sure about the whole option A vs. B dichotomy, since there's overlap there and berating might not be as effective as communicating / engaging / educating / convincing those anti-vaxxers. I think I don't understand what you were implying there. I would love for people to stop being idiots on their own accord, and that would be my preference, but depending on the risk of having those idiots coexisting alongside me and others, I might also approve of external pressures that push for change that apparently isn't happening voluntarily.
The A vs B dichotomy isn't important - the important thing is that C (which I took quite seriously for most of the 17 month period between march 2020 and august 2021- admittingly, I was reasonably social during the periods where Trondheim (200k people) had fewer than 5 daily infected people) is no longer an option for me now that I am double vaccinated and that nearly all vulnerable people are vaccinated and that everyone who for whatever reason thinks they are a superhuman who won't get sick anyway have had (and still have) the chance to get vaccinated. I had no problems adhering to all types of regulations prior to being double vaccinated, but now, I don't. The chance that I myself get really sick is really low, and the chance that I catch it and transfer it to someone else is really low (as virtually everyone I interact with is vaccinated), and if I catch it and some unvaccinated jerk gets it from me and he (they're all guys) gets really sick, then I think that's on him for not vaccinating, not on me for not socially distancing.
|
Norway28674 Posts
On October 01 2021 01:26 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2021 00:55 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Jimmy, I see no point in responding to that. I don't think you understand what I think about Covid, I don't think it's my fault for not expressing myself clearly enough, but I also don't care enough about going further with this. It's entirely cool with me that you think Covid is a much bigger problem than what I think it is, and if you want to think it's as big of a deal today as the spanish flu was 102 years ago, that's also fine with me. That is not what I think, not what I said and your continual use of it as a strawman helps to show why you are both disenegious and fake. I think what I said. I put far more more effort into it, I ACTUALLY source my claims and back them with ACTUAL data. It is clear at this point that either through confirmation bias or lack of horse power you can't even bother to argue your point. You choosing ignorance is not on me. But so obvious when you jump to strawman instead of trying to back up your extremely incorrect claims with evidence. You said that Covid was less dangerous to vaccinated people than the Flu. I showed with actual real world data that is not even close to be true when spread is high. You are wrong, you are stating your faulty assumptions as facts, your posting quality on this subject is horrible which makes the arrogance and condensing attitude so much worse .
What I said (it might not have been with exactly those words, but it was the implied meaning to anyone not extremely deficient in the 'interpret people in a reasonable way' department) was that if you are a fully vaccinated individual, getting covid is less bad for you than what getting the flu is for an individual who is not vaccinated. Spread is not a factor. Surgery availability is not a factor. It's a small statement, one I am confident is right. There's no 'covid is just the flu' statement in there. My statement is one of strongly supporting the vaccines, that I think they work.
If I were to engage with you with an ounce of the lack of charitability you give me, I would proceed posting a page long diatribe about how you are an anti-vaxxer, because you apparently don't think the covid vaccine is very efficient. To be clear, I don't think you are one. I think you're constantly looking for an argument and always interpreting people in the way that enables you to have an argument. It's extremely annoying.
|
On October 01 2021 01:33 Liquid`Drone wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2021 01:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 01 2021 00:52 Liquid`Drone wrote:On October 01 2021 00:37 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 30 2021 23:19 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 30 2021 22:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 30 2021 21:24 BlackJack wrote:On September 30 2021 19:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 30 2021 18:53 BlackJack wrote:On September 30 2021 07:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
[quote]
We know that the additional safety from being vaccinated is actually incredibly important and significant, since it nearly guarantees that you won't become severely ill or die, and it helps protect those around you, too. It's not marginal for the individual, and lowering the infection rate of covid is not marginal for those of us who are vaccinated but are still forced to be near unvaccinated people (or for those who are immunocompromised and can't get the vaccine, who are forced to rely on the rest of us). The fact that this is a team effort is one of the reasons why I feel it's important to push harder for more people getting vaccinated.
Also, what liberty is someone giving up by being vaccinated? Isn't it even more liberating to get vaccinated? To be free from the worst-case scenarios of a deadly disease? To be able to see loved ones again, without needing to worry about infecting and killing each other? To be able to work again? And even if getting a vaccine is a hassle, dealing with masks seems to be significantly more disruptive to one's life than getting a shot. The liberty you are giving up with a hypothetical vaccine mandate is the liberty to choose for yourself what you want to put into your body instead of having the government decide for you. I think that's self-evident. Every adult already has the opportunity to get vaccinated. The only thing that changes is who makes the decision. How do you decide which liberties are okay to restrict (seat belt / air bag laws, previous vaccine mandates, etc.) and which ones we ought not to restrict? Do you have any specific criteria? For example, my primary criterion has to do with the trade-off of personal liberty vs. how others are affected by one's "personal liberty" decision. The freedom to swing my arm ends at the tip of your nose, and I think this is particularly relevant during an infectious disease pandemic, when one's personal liberty to stay unvaccinated infringes on other people's personal liberty to stay safe and healthy. At that point, an anti-vaxxer's personal freedom is restricting the freedom of others. Thoughts? And, as an aside: Would you consider an enforced government mandate to be generally indistinguishable from all businesses and shops and supermarkets voluntarily enforcing their own mandates (without government pressure)? There have been roughly 3-4k breakthrough deaths so far in the 9-10 months we've been vaccinating people. It seems unlikely that 100% of those cases were contracted from an unvaccinated person and 100% of those deaths could have been prevented if we had forced vaccinations so at best you are saving some fraction of that 3-4k. A bad flu season can kill 50k+ people. Relatively speaking, If you're double vaccinated, COVID is not that big of a threat to you and therefore the unvaccinated are not that big of a threat to you. Vaccine mandates only make this relatively small risk marginally smaller. If you're double vaccinated you might be better off fighting for flu vaccine mandates than COVID vaccine mandates (being facetious with that last sentence) For the aside: businesses and shops and supermarkets should be free to have whatever policies they want in terms of enforcing enforcing vaccine mandates, masks, etc. Coronavirus is astronomically more dangerous than the flu, but I think that's a little off-topic. Keep in mind that the vaccinated covid deaths you're focusing on don't also include hospitalizations or even milder side-effects that go away after a few days. I don't think it's appropriate to tell someone who's vaccinated "so what if you miss a few days of work or get sick for a little while; you didn't die", when the situation was preventable in the first place. I find the negatives of that situation to be far worse than someone throwing an arbitrary temper tantrum over a vaccine with no serious risks. I don't think I'd be able to tell a few thousand families "oh well; you just have to pay the price for other people being selfish". And keep in mind that new variants of covid can be more resistant to our vaccines, which would make even those who are vaccinated more vulnerable than they currently are, and these new variants would emerge due to the unvaccinated. For the aside: Could you please elaborate on what the actual difference is between the government having everyone getting vaccinated, vs. every business, shop, and supermarket insisting everyone get vaccinated for a job or service? Aren't they both pragmatically the same in terms of removing an unvaccinated person's right to stay unvaccinated, if they wish to participate in society? Edit: Is GoTuNk! arguing in good faith? Or is this trolling? The assertion that the government is deciding what's factual - given the countless scientific and medical experts who spent their entire lives researching infectious diseases and running experiments and gathering data - seems too ridiculous to be taken seriously. Covid is not astronomically more dangerous for a vaccinated individual than the flu is for an unvaccinated individual. If anything it's the other way around. The point BJ is making is that we are okay with virtually no restrictions during flu season (at-risk individuals getting a flu shot, people who are sick staying home), yet people who are vaccinated against covid (who have less probability to get sick from covid than they, as unvaccinated individuals, have from the flu) still have to comply to more restrictions (than what we see during a normal flu season). The points about 'what about the people who can't get vaccines' or 'people in risk groups that are still at risk even when vaccinated' are fair, but I'm not convinced they're really numerous enough to justify social distancing (when I speak of restrictions, it's not masks, it's whatever restricts social activity and human closeness) as a general recommendation - even if that might seem kinda cold and callous. Why would we ever compare a person not vaccinated for one disease to a person vaccinated for a completely different disease? We should control for vaccination status by either comparing two vaccinated groups (vaccinated for both covid and flu), or comparing two unvaccinated groups (vaccinated for neither covid nor flu). In either of those cases, covid is way more dangerous than the flu. The flu should also be taken seriously (everyone should get their annual flu shot too), but it hasn't shut down the entire world; it's pretty bad on an absolute scale, but relatively-speaking, it's not "global pandemic" bad, hence far fewer restrictions than our covid situation. Both side effects and infection rates tend to be significantly more substantial for covid than the flu, hence the greater emphasis on restrictions for everyone when it comes to protecting from covid. Personally, I'm still not going to hang out with anyone who has the flu, and it's strongly discouraged that students with flu-like symptoms attend school (even if they only have the flu and not covid), but given the name of this thread, I'd like to focus on covid I mean if you want to argue that that's a silly comparison to make, that's fine, but it is the one that was made, and from the point of view of an individual living in a country where others aren't willing to vaccinate, I think it's reasonable. Like, I got my vaccines pretty much as early as I could. I did it both for me, and for the rest of society. But if the rest of society were a bunch of idiots not willing to vaccinate, then my options would be a) live my life normally, berate them for being idiots, or b) live my life normally, wish that society would force those other jerks to vaccinate. Option C, 'socially distance because I still worry about covid', was not an option - after getting double vaccinated the chances that I get seriously ill are really low - much lower than what the chances that I get ill from the flu is - and I have never even contemplated getting a flu shot, although I think those make sense for people that are more at risk. I'm not quite sure about the whole option A vs. B dichotomy, since there's overlap there and berating might not be as effective as communicating / engaging / educating / convincing those anti-vaxxers. I think I don't understand what you were implying there. I would love for people to stop being idiots on their own accord, and that would be my preference, but depending on the risk of having those idiots coexisting alongside me and others, I might also approve of external pressures that push for change that apparently isn't happening voluntarily. The A vs B dichotomy isn't important - the important thing is that C (which I took quite seriously for most of the 17 month period between march 2020 and august 2021- admittingly, I was reasonably social during the periods where Trondheim (200k people) had fewer than 5 daily infected people) is no longer an option for me now that I am double vaccinated and that nearly all vulnerable people are vaccinated and that everyone who for whatever reason thinks they are a superhuman who won't get sick anyway have had (and still have) the chance to get vaccinated. I had no problems adhering to all types of regulations prior to being double vaccinated, but now, I don't. The chance that I myself get really sick is really low, and the chance that I catch it and transfer it to someone else is really low (as virtually everyone I interact with is vaccinated), and if I catch it and some unvaccinated jerk gets it from me and he (they're all guys) gets really sick, then I think that's on him for not vaccinating, not on me for not socially distancing.
I think that's reasonable. Besides the obvious health benefits of being vaccinated, I would like to see positive reinforcement for those who are vaccinated and/or negative reinforcement for those who remain unvaccinated. We know that these things tend to work well, especially since there are plenty of potential consequences that could convince many unvaccinated people to change their minds (e.g., not being able to fly/travel, losing jobs, etc.). I went from seeing zero people recreationally (before vaccines were available) to occasionally seeing a few people (as long as everyone was vaccinated or recently tested negative). I know a lot of other people are being less careful and less methodical about it, but I'd prefer to be overly cautious.
|
|
|
On October 01 2021 00:55 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Jimmy, I see no point in responding to that. I don't think you understand what I think about Covid, I don't think it's my fault for not expressing myself clearly enough, but I also don't care enough about going further with this. It's entirely cool with me that you think Covid is a much bigger problem than what I think it is, and if you want to think it's as big of a deal today as the spanish flu was 102 years ago, that's also fine with me.
Smart move. You'll realize it's a huge waste of time to engage with him. The guy is literally posting flu statistics from the last week in September to argue that the flu is not that bad. Maybe I'll argue that heat-related illness is not that bad by posting some statistics from Norway in the winter. People want to call out GoTunk for arguing in bad faith but then they let this bullshit slip by. I can't be the only person in this thread that knows how a typical flu season progresses.
On October 01 2021 00:52 JimmiC wrote:
Georgia is part of the Influenza monitoring network. 2018-2019 was a bad year for the flu. Georgia has had lots of Covid spread lets compare the numbers.
In week 40 Sept 29- oct 5 2019 they had 0 deaths and 3 hospitalizaons.
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/qKtK0TG.jpg)
On October 01 2021 03:23 JimmiC wrote:
I clearly showed in Georgia with over the same amount of time 3 people died from the flu and 553 fully vaccinated people died from Covid.
You clearly showed that you're arguing in bad faith and it's embarrassing.
|
|
|
I'll be honest, I stopped reading here:
number of people Chances of contracting Chances of Dying Deaths
100,000 _______________ .1% _________________ .1%____1000
100,000 _______________ .02%________________ .2 % ____400
0.1% of 0.1% of 100,000 is 0.1. 100 people get infected, one-tenth of one dies.
0.2% of 0.02% of 100,000 is 0.004. 20 people get infected, four-thousandths of one dies.
I appreciate the figure to try and support the point, but when the figure is that far off, I have a hard time believing the point will be able to make up for it.
|
|
|
On October 01 2021 09:08 Fleetfeet wrote:I'll be honest, I stopped reading here: Show nested quote +number of people Chances of contracting Chances of Dying Deaths
100,000 _______________ .1% _________________ .1%____1000
100,000 _______________ .02%________________ .2 % ____400 0.1% of 0.1% of 100,000 is 0.1. 100 people get infected, one-tenth of one dies. 0.2% of 0.02% of 100,000 is 0.004. 20 people get infected, four-thousandths of one dies. I appreciate the figure to try and support the point, but when the figure is that far off, I have a hard time believing the point will be able to make up for it.
I can barely read it due to being on mobile right now but without a breakdown by age it’s pointless.He’s directing comment to a poster here presumably under 40 or around 40 when the vast majority of deaths occur in 80 and 90 year olds (Average age of covid deaths in Australia : 85 https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/facts-on-covid-19-politicians-won-t-tell-you-20210705-p586za )
As i said from the start, restrictions and vaccine recommendations should be mostly for 65+.People younger than 65 are supposed to be working, paying taxes to support pensions and healthcare of those over 65.
In my country half of it has been in lockdown for months and the majority under 65 in those places are not currently working.What is going on is absolute insanity and it doesn’t surprise me at all to see the supply chain issues continuing to get worse.We’re very close to crisis point with the supply chain problems now, even CNN is admitting that now.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/29/business/supply-chain-workers/index.html
The workers who keep global supply chains moving are warning of a 'system collapse'
|
|
|
The flu is dangerous!
But most people don't have it. They maybe get a "common cold". Or there is a German word I can't translate... "Grippaler Infekt" ... something like "flu-like infection"?
Basically the main difference to Covid is the infection rate. We have to talk about absolut numbers and not relative ones!
|
On October 01 2021 16:19 Geisterkarle wrote:
The flu is dangerous!
But most people don't have it. They maybe get a "common cold". Or there is a German word I can't translate... "Grippaler Infekt" ... something like "flu-like infection"?
Basically the main difference to Covid is the infection rate. We have to talk about absolut numbers and not relative ones!
Is it really? The total number of US covid cases is now about equal to a bad flu season (44 million), but it COVID has lasted much longer than one season now.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/past-seasons.html
There can be up to 1 billon estimated cases of flu globally each season. The total number of confirmed covid 19-cases is now 234 million.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3278149/
We don't know how many would have been infected if no special measures were in place, but the difference is mainly the rate of serious disease and death, not the number of infections. With the vaccines, those differences have moved a lot closer.
|
When it comes to how 'dangerous' a disease is, you cannot look at the risks infection poses to a single individual, that's missing way too much context. Chance of infection is just as important, and JimmiC is right to argue that you have to look at both your odds of catching the disease as well as the odds of dying from the disease when trying to figure out how dangerous a disease is, not just on community but also on an individual level.
Like, imagine you need to travel from Moscow to Paris and you're trying to decide whether you should take the train or fly; you know that a plane crash is close to 100% guaranteed to kill you, whereas your chances of dying in a train crash are only 33%. If the train is 10 times as likely to crash as the plane is, you can say that a plane crash is more deadly than a train crash, but taking the train is still far more dangerous than flying -- it's the same thing with COVID. Just because a single case isn't particularly likely to end in a fatality doesn't mean the disease is suddenly not dangerous any more because the odds of getting it are incredibly high.
And folks like iPlay.NettleS circling back to how lockdowns are bad all the time... well, if people would just get their fucking shots done in sufficiently high numbers, the lockdowns wouldn't be needed any more. As it stands, with enough anti-vaxx morons going around, even being vaccinated yourself isn't a good enough guarantee of safety. I don't know what the exact numbers are now and there's obviously a lot of variance between countries (even cities) and different age groups etc, but even a risk of 1:10,000 or, heck, 1:100,000 is unacceptable (not to mention the significantly higher chances of suffering a variety of long-term complications post infection) when it could be significantly reduced if not avoided entirely if people would just get their fucking shots done.
|
On October 01 2021 18:06 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2021 16:19 Geisterkarle wrote:
The flu is dangerous!
But most people don't have it. They maybe get a "common cold". Or there is a German word I can't translate... "Grippaler Infekt" ... something like "flu-like infection"?
Basically the main difference to Covid is the infection rate. We have to talk about absolut numbers and not relative ones! Is it really? The total number of US covid cases is now about equal to a bad flu season (44 million), but it COVID has lasted much longer than one season now. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/past-seasons.htmlThere can be up to 1 billon estimated cases of flu globally each season. The total number of confirmed covid 19-cases is now 234 million. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3278149/We don't know how many would have been infected if no special measures were in place, but the difference is mainly the rate of serious disease and death, not the number of infections. With the vaccines, those differences have moved a lot closer.
Are you serious? The flu has an R0 of about 1.3. For the Delta variant it's around 5-8... Here's a comparison of the number of new cases for R0 = 2.7 and and 6. The gap between the flu and the Delta variant would be even bigger.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
1 of 100.000 deaths unacceptable? Really? How do you argue that smoking is allowed then? Or sending a soldier to war?
There are plenty of infections which kill a lot of people, and we typically did not worry the slightest about them. Note that the death rate is also among infected people, not the whole population.
I absolutely hate that COVID is considered in a completely different category than everything else in terms of how much resources it is considered appropriate to spend fighting it.
And the economic impact of this has not hit us full force yet. You can't print money and disrupt supply lines for over a year and expect everything to be fine. Brace yourselves for some very high prices for goods and services going forward, and don't expect your salary to follow suit.
|
On October 01 2021 08:24 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2021 07:26 BlackJack wrote:On October 01 2021 00:55 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Jimmy, I see no point in responding to that. I don't think you understand what I think about Covid, I don't think it's my fault for not expressing myself clearly enough, but I also don't care enough about going further with this. It's entirely cool with me that you think Covid is a much bigger problem than what I think it is, and if you want to think it's as big of a deal today as the spanish flu was 102 years ago, that's also fine with me. Smart move. You'll realize it's a huge waste of time to engage with him. The guy is literally posting flu statistics from the last week in September to argue that the flu is not that bad. Maybe I'll argue that heat-related illness is not that bad by posting some statistics from Norway in the winter. People want to call out GoTunk for arguing in bad faith but then they let this bullshit slip by. I can't be the only person in this thread that knows how a typical flu season progresses. On October 01 2021 00:52 JimmiC wrote:
Georgia is part of the Influenza monitoring network. 2018-2019 was a bad year for the flu. Georgia has had lots of Covid spread lets compare the numbers.
In week 40 Sept 29- oct 5 2019 they had 0 deaths and 3 hospitalizaons.
On October 01 2021 03:23 JimmiC wrote:
I clearly showed in Georgia with over the same amount of time 3 people died from the flu and 553 fully vaccinated people died from Covid.
You clearly showed that you're arguing in bad faith and it's embarrassing. I litterly compared this week to this week and 40 weeks to 40 weeks to show it is true in both. I specifically picked the worst 40 weeks again to further this point. I also am not trying to show the "flu is not that bad", I dont even know what that means. The flu was being used as a point of comparrision to show that Covid is not that bad, in this case for the unvaccinated. When comparing two things you need the information from both to make the comparrison, that is how it works. If you dont you end up making a lot of faulty conclusions based on a faulty assumption. (Which sadly is a good summary of your posting history on this thread). You seem to be mixing the week to day and 40 werk to 40 week together to try to prove a point. I hope its accidental but given your history and loose use of "disengenious" for people who disagree with you it seems unlikely. Also since the post is one page ago if you were being honest I struggle with why you wouldnt just quote it or link it rather then cut and paste it to make it say something diffetent. Here is a further explanation for those who dont want jump back a page and see the entire post The image shows 0 deaths for that week and 3 hospitalizations. I compared that to yesterday (so one day not a week) of deaths and hospitalizations with covid. Below is the full quote, I use the percentages stated of unvaccinated to come up with a estimation, explain that it is one and explain and show how I came up with it. I also post the sources. This is the opposite of disengenious, im not sure you understand the word. Im being generous to drones perspective by comparing a week of flu to a day of Covid. Show nested quote +
Notice I will be comparing a full week in 2019 to a single day and the day is WAY worse and it is much better then a few weeks ago!
Yesterday they had 265 total covid hospitalizations and 129 deaths'.
They do not on the daily release the numbers vaccinated vs unvaccinated but from the various news reports it ranges from 84-92% of the hospitalizations are unvaccinated. 13% of 265 is 34.5 DRAMATICLY higher than 3, agree?
Only 3% of the deaths since January have been vaccinated. So they would have 8 Vaccinated people die yesterday (based on averages) compared to 0 for the entire week in 2019. DRAMATICLY higher then 0, agree?
The reason being if this is just like the flu, or even less which is the point I was arguing about, covid should also be at a low point. That it is not should tell you about how accurate that comparisons is. Next I take two time periods both which include the the high times for the flu, which is winter and fall. If you notice I actually anticipate you will say it is just a strange week and to counter it and show this is not the case I do the entire HIGH period of the flu. Show nested quote +Maybe you are thinking it is a crazy week.
so lets look at 2021.
There were 10,055 covid deaths. 553 of those were fully vaccinated individuals. There were 2118 hospitalizations of vaccinated people.
At influenza including A B A nd B and unknown. This is cumulative data since sept 27,2020 40 weeks. Deaths from the flu 3, Hospitalizations 38!!!!! Im hoping because in the weekly to one comparrison and the 40 week comparrison (the 12 weeks I didnt use was from may to the end of aug for the flu and tge 40 weeks for covid were jan to last friday. I cant do a full year because the vaccine has not existed that long) they both have a 3 you got confused. But in the weekly one it is hospitalizations and in the other it is dealths. In the future you should reread the posts and make sure you fully understand them before jumping to conclusions. It will save you insulting someone and actually doing what you are accusing them of doing. Which is quite embarassing. Another thing you might want to do is quote the entire post. You can then either highlight the important part or if you want to make it shorter you can spoiler the other part. This will keep the context and allow you to not be disengenious by pulling random sentences out. It can also help you well you are posting because you can then easily read the entire posts and if this is an accident it can help you from making it because you can read the whole thing instead of making up the context. Do not worry about apologizing, the laughs are well worth the effort! 
Am I supposed to read all this? You can post all the verbal diarrhea you want to obfuscate that you were arguing in bad faith. Everybody here is smart enough to know that flu propagates in the winter. You seriously took the time to upload a data table to tell us that nobody died from the flu in Georgia from the week of Sep 29 to Oct 5 2019 as if that means anything. Guess what, nobody died of the flu in Georgia in all of September 2019, and all of August, and all of July, and all of June. I don't even need to look up statistics to know this. Then you even have the nerve to write "Im being generous to drones perspective by comparing a week of flu to a day of Covid." lol
|
On October 01 2021 19:05 Slydie wrote:
1 of 100.000 deaths unacceptable? Really? How do you argue that smoking is allowed then? Or sending a soldier to war?
There are plenty of infections which kill a lot of people, and we typically did not worry the slightest about them. Note that the death rate is also among infected people, not the whole population.
I absolutely hate that COVID is considered in a completely different category than everything else in terms of how much resources it is considered appropriate to spend fighting it.
And the economic impact of this has not hit us full force yet. You can't print money and disrupt supply lines for over a year and expect everything to be fine. Brace yourselves for some very high prices for goods and services going forward, and don't expect your salary to follow suit.
Do you see me arguing that smoking is acceptable? No? Then why are you even bringing that up? Besides, I'm fairly certain that smoking isn't infectious, unlike COVID. And if you'd like to start a debate about dangers of second-hand smoke and whether existing provisions for dealing with it are truly sufficient, go right ahead in a separate thread -- you'll see me very strongly advocating for all sorts of restrictions if not outright bans on smoking for as long as it presents a threat to those of us who do not smoke, personal liberties be damned.
I actually agree with you that spending too many resources on fighting COVID is silly. My personal stance is that governments around the world should grow a fucking pair and make vaccinations mandatory, instead of tip-toeing around all the anti-vaxx bullshit and the supposed 'freedoms' of all the idiots who think they know better than actual medical professionals. Unfortunately, governments around the world don't seem to believe that is an option, and so we are stuck with well over a year of shitty half-measures and start-stop restrictions.
The problem with the idea of letting everyone do whatever they want is that not only it needlessly endangers people's lives, but also comes with significant and on-going economic impacts. The average cost of a COVID-related hospitalization in the US is around 20-25k -- and that's without considering the extra strain that COVID puts on many hospitals, the delays in treatments for other conditions etc; while a two-shot vaccination costs well under $200.
From June through August 2021, preventable COVID-19 hospitalizations among unvaccinated adults cost over $5 Billion
https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/brief/unvaccinated-covid-patients-cost-the-u-s-health-system-billions-of-dollars/
But hey, let's keep complaining about the economic costs of the lockdowns while simultaneously blaming the government for excessive meddling with people's liberties and bodies, 'cus that's just so fucking reasonable, right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://thumbor.forbes.com/thumbor/711x532/https://specials-images.forbesimg.com/imageserve/60ede7ed5ad8610a239c5277/A-model-comparing-the-R0-of-the-Delta-variant--6--with-that-of-the-original-strain/960x0.jpg?fit=scale)
