KB, I said I would clear this up so I will.Originally Posted by Kallie Bloomquist
No, not the reported INFECTION RATE. In fact, that is WAY WAY WAY too low. As Ioannidis and tons of the other scientists I cited have said the infected number globally is likely upward of 300MN people already. Infected/Recovered (not FATALITIES). You don't just have to go off the Stanford study either, there are over 50-60 serology studies at this point to confirm the data from all manner of institution and global governments and various epicenters.
The reported INFECTION FATALITY RATE is too high.
See? I said it would be simple.
Thank you for the apology about Trump. If you read any of my posts you will see that is indeed the case. Not only is a child, he is so infinitesimally mentally feeble, that I *literally* cannot even stand to listen to him speak (I mean literally - I have to change the channel most of the time or turn off the video if online).
However, what bothers me most is I know you haven't read the data b/c I basically said already pointed out in the original essay that this is exactly the problem. The virus is new. I even pointed out that many peer-reviewed studies have to be retracted (I gave 1-2 examples iirc). I said the SAME THING with an ENTIRE SECTION ON THIS TOPIC.
Yet..... to say pre-prints "dont mean shit" is ALSO a bit absurd b/c then WHERE is your so called "expert" data coming from if not these studies?
Look, if you are not a scientist and you can't read the studies that's fine, or if you can't weed out the quack stuff (which I DO agree with you on about a large majority of shit out there - why do you think I mentioned the 180K studies - that's insane). That was the ENTIRE point of my section described BAD SCIENCE RUSHED SCIENCE (see you didn't read it at all). I addressed this matter in more or less the same way you did but I explain in more detail. And, regardless of anything, this is EXACTLY why EVERYONE (even non-scientists) need to try to take a critical eye to anything they read.
Nope, it doesn't count as conspiracy. Not at all. I'm not the one that came up with that idea either (though I also postulated the idea myself). However, many psychiatrists have this view as well as psychologists and other people in the scientific field.
Death happens every day. The US has ~10K people on any given day that day of all sorts of things. 3.5-4Mn+ per year die of all manner of things.
My contention, along with all the other scientists I've cited, and the ones I haven't yet been able to cite, is that the deaths are simply being swapped for other diseases which kill people. You don't get freaked out everyday prior to this knowing that 600-700k per year die of heart disease or that 40-80k die of the flu, or that 500k-800k get hospitalized b/c of the flu, or that half a million die of cancer, or pneumonia, or renal failure, or hypertension, or diabetes, or or or...... did you? No. That's the point.
The deaths are not occurring at any more "significant" rate than previously. THAT is the point. The thing KB is right about in his last (?) comment is that we won't know some of this until a true post mortem can be done. I totally agree with that statement. I disagree that it requires the vaccine, the reason we can't is b/c it takes ~18mos for our CDC to properly compile stats. See that's the other guys. Don't you realize that all these numbers are off as well? You don't really think the CDC actually counts the FLU do you? Or that they will even count every single case of COVID right now? They can't. Granted, there is a close eye on COVID.
Still, read the science. If you don't believe pre-prints then where are your EXPERTS getting their data? There is little to none that is peer-reviewed and most of the ones that did come out have had to be retracted b/c THOSE *WERE* quack science.
The stock market sell-off frenzy analogy was to show how a psychological event can drive something that has "real consequences". It was NOT to compare DEATH to STOCKS. You missed the point. It was to show how mass psychological events, particularly in our age of social media and viral info, can cause REAL & SUSTAINED IMPACT.
Look guys, bottom line, it doesn't surprise me one bit that a few men here are against this. Why? This is a "hobby board". I would take a stab that the average age of our users here (especially active users) is likely 60+. So, naturally, you are scared, cautious, nervous. I get that. I totally get that. However, if you believe pre-prints are all shit, which is virtually all there is right now, very few peer-reviewed data are complete, and some of the major ones which went into the Lancet and such, have had to be retracted. I talked all about this in my BAD SCIENCE/RUSHED SCIENCE section. Sheesh
What bothers me most is not that a few of you disagree. I don't mind debate or disagreement at all.
The problem is it's so obvious some of you guys have not read any of it much less even a solid portion of it. Yet you comment on the essay? You don't call that hypocrisy?
The best example of this is how "haveacold" mentions the pre-prints and that they were worthless. I talked at great length all about BAD SCIENCE/RUSHED SCIENCE. That is EXACTLY what Ioannidis and his entire team, Mitteldorf, Wittkowski, Hambur, Alexov and his team, etc.... etc... are ALL saying too. You didn't read any of that and that's extremely ridiculous to comment on my post when you haven't read it. Especially when I point out that VERY fact. And, further, the problem still remains that where does your "expert" data come from then? Fauci? Fox? CNN? Are you kidding me?
Again, it doesn't really surprise that a section of men here are going to be fearful as most of you are elderly anyway. So I get that part. My dad is an elderly man (of course as I'm 40) and he constantly talks about this much the way you guys do. I have to constantly reassure him and show him the data. And daily he gets worried again. Not surprisingly after watching some total tool like Fauci or Birx or Trump or some other asshat clown who got their initial data from that idiot Ferguson OR the Imperial College OR the initial Washington study that projected millions upon millions that should already be dead. Ugh. Sheesh. Ferguson is a well known scientist, yes. However, he has been prone to error over and over. I have no idea why they allowed that fucking study to precipitate all this BS. He was wrong about H1N1 (bird flu). Also H1N1 (swine variety). Also Mad Cow. Wrong about this when he said 500K deaths in UK and 2-3Mn in US within months (that time has come and gone and the UK has less than .1% dead) and they didn't lockdown like we did, and the US doesn't have anywhere near 2-3Mn dead either.
I understand that many of you men here are elderly and will naturally be worried. It's okay to be worried and to be cautious. However, MY point isn't even just about that part. It's also about the psychology of social viral events and BAD SCIENCE in the era of viral info phenoms (and I wish you guys would actually read that part - or go do your own critical thinking and research). The other thing that surprises me immensely is that if so many of our male hobbyist here average age >60-65+ why are you here now? If you are so scared then why are you on this board right now?
I don't expect many of you to agree - especially the elderly male hobbyists here (which are the large majority). I'm just happy to share with those who do appreciate the information and who are being silent about it. I don't need the praise. I don't care about that. I care about sharing good, solid, information, and spreading information that is not panic inducing.
Reply With Quote