^ Yes that is sad what happened to your co-worker and their family. Very said indeed. However, it still didn't prove the Fauci/Birx party line assessment whatsoever. Not in the least bit. Even 100k, even 200k, deaths doesn't do that.
Confirmation bias? Seriously? Did either of you just Google that to find a nifty little psychological term to fit your own argument? Confirmation bias is EXACTLY the problem here with the science and the panic and public opinion. Do you two realize that what you did with both of those quotes is to PROVE and support my own point even further?
Look guys, you don't have to believe me (though I am a scientist & have both postdoc epidemiologist/geneticist colleagues & friends). But put that aside. you don't need to even care about that. I'm just asking you to read the data out there. Don't listen to some damn sycophantic quack publicity "docs" who are just trying to cover their own ass (and NOW have to continue in order to not ruin their careers for this horrible situation they caused).
I meant to discuss this earlier too: someone talked about how "pappy" dying (or some such) is morally unacceptable to promote this alternate scientific theory (and psychtheory - b/c it's really both) if the other one happens to be true (i.e. the absolutely absurd idiotic doom & gloom "Fauci", Ferguson precipitated, theory).
Ok, let's just say it was really super duper deadly to elderly, severely, and would kill 3-4MN people worldwide eventually (I think that's silly AF but for argument sake let's say it's true). Ok so IF that was true? Then what about this aspect here? By some estimates the anxiety toll, the significant increase in suicides (I believe last stat I saw was an ~14-16% increase post pandemic - iirc), due to foreclosures, lost businesses that have been built for 20yrs, divorces, increased medication usage for depression, starvations, homelessness, etc etc etc will affect over 10Mn people. And that's not even discussing the issue to children's health, both physical (no exercise - no school, PE) & mental, improper education (parents can't properly home school, social alienation (more depression, mental issues), and so on....
What of those issues? To save a very small percentage of extremely advanced in age (IF that were even the case - it's not but for argument sake lets keep saying it is). Don't go on about how young people die too guys. I posted the data, even from the CDC, those are all edge cases. I posted this stuff. If you don't read it you are just being stubborn AF. The total risk to those under 70 puts the flu at 2-3.7 times as deadly as this virus. The data is there. I linked it. GO READ IT. SHEESH MAN. Stop being so damn panicked and read please! Sheesh. I know you are scared. But look man, even if your precious Fauci/Birx party line were true (and I'd bet my own progeny it's not given data I've researched, followed, as well as been presented by my buddy & friends at Max Planck Institute) it STILL would be the MUCH lesser of two evils. Is it tragic for elderly people in their 80s and beyond? Absolutely. But you can't compare the damage. It's a no-brainer even IF that ridiculous apocalypse scenario were correct.
I am telling you now, mark my words, even if it takes 6mos or significantly longer for the data to get validated, those fuckers are covering their ass now b/c if (not if... WHEN) it comes out finally, meaning when all this study data I've linked is fully confirmed and is also too overwhelming in number to 'pretend' anymore, and the "dissenting" group of us scientists who are skeptical for numerous reasons, those political sycophantic "docs" are DONE. Careers over after what they caused this world over a [relatively] insignificant infection.
When I say 'pretend' an example, just one of many, is the constant discussion if lag times in the news, it's coming, it's coming, oh wait now some docs think this, oh wait now we decided it's this theory, the lag is gonna catch up, yadda yadda, it was delayed by blah blah.... I mean jesus dudes how many times do you have to listen to that nonsensical journalistic hyperbole and politico doc speak, and then when it never materializes you finally start to do some critical thinking for yourself? How many times?? Seriously. I ask my dad this crap all the time. He is every single bit as hard headed as some of you older dudes. Stop being so damn scared. Just read. I gave you the information. Read. I'm trying to help you. Sheesh. You act like I'm trying to hurt you. :/
That's why they have to beat that horse for all it's worth just like all the other smaller time docs have to do too (though admittedly they are at less career risk, but still, anyone wants to save themselves from egg on their face - human nature). That's another reason the "confirmation bias" comments are funny too. Do you really understand what confirmation bias is or did you just Google and read the summary from Wiki? As opposed to investigating it if you really wanted to use it in a valid sense? Because all you did there is prove my point further from two different angles.
I don't know why you few guys are so hard headed or why you are so disrespectful to me and/or hurt by this. If you would actually read the data and critically think for yourself, instead of relying on journalists, and instead of trying to decide whether or not I'm Stephen Hawking/Einstein or the equivalent in biosciences (btw lemme give you a hint - I'm damn close.... lol
) you would be doing yourself a world of good. I promise you.
Mark my words. Stay here long enough, on these boards, and the 2-4 of you guys will owe me an apology. Guaranteed. Okay not guaranteed. I concede I
could be wrong. But I'm not
(seriously).
Either way people I just want what is best for our society. And what's happening
now is not it... very sadly