|
|
Post by kirinke on Oct 7, 2020 19:03:46 GMT
You're being a moron for the sake of a moron. Covid-19 is a deadly disease. Quite frankly, I'm not dying for your orange messiah. Nor am I dying so some fat cat can enrich his stock options. The economy will recover. If I die from Covid-19, I'll be in the ground.
Fuck that shit.
My life is worth more than some fucking billionaire's portfolio. So is everyone else's.
Fuck you 3cat. You are firmly on the worst side of evil with that kind of thinking. You don't care. They're just the nameless masses to you. Hell, you'd even cheer if they were in your undesirable book.
Fuck you and your logic straight to hell, if hell would take you. At this point, even oblivion might hesitate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Oct 8, 2020 0:40:45 GMT
It doesn't matter. If they hadn't have gotten Covid-19, they would have lived that much longer. Covid-19 killed them. Get that through your brain. It's not rocket science. Hell, even I can grasp it. In the big picture, feeble skeletons who would have otherwise lived less than a year are no reason to have lockdowns or destroy economies. We didn't do it for flu, fast food, booze, cars, guns, or drugs, or roundup. Thankfully not everyone is a sociopath like you and so we shut down to save lives. |
|
|
|
Post by Libtard on Oct 8, 2020 0:58:46 GMT
It doesn't matter. If they hadn't have gotten Covid-19, they would have lived that much longer. Covid-19 killed them. Get that through your brain. It's not rocket science. Hell, even I can grasp it. In the big picture, feeble skeletons who would have otherwise lived less than a year are no reason to have lockdowns or destroy economies. We didn't do it for flu, fast food, booze, cars, guns, or drugs, or roundup. Wow, you really are a bona fide sociopath. Unfortunately, even if lots of people tell you that, you are unlikely to understand them. That's not because they're wrong; rather, it's because you're a sociopath. You need medication and/or counseling. That's not gaslighting, btw; but you won't understand, because you're a sociopath. |
|
|
|
Post by evileeyore on Oct 8, 2020 1:30:02 GMT
Where are the lockdowns due to cancer, car crashes and heroin overdoses? I mostly don't care about this slap [fight] because I agree that the lockdown is dumb and needs to be handled differently. That said... your argument here is really stupid. Of those three things, only car crashes will and have decreased due to lockdown. Cancer and heroin overdoses? Not so much. Now, while lockdown will directly decrease car crash deaths, it does so only during the locdown, whereas a sensible reduction in large gatherings and forced commingling, will continue to decrease COVID deaths (just as the lockdown has done) past the point of the initial reduction/lockdown once we can achieve herd immunity/inoculation. Inversely, the moment idiots can get back in their cars, deaths to cars jacks right back up because there is no herd immunity/inoculation to shitty drivers/accidents. Thus there is no point in establishing a lockdown/gathering reduction to stop the spread of car crashes, heroin suicide, or cancer. Pandemic spreading however.... |
|
|
|
Post by mustrumridcully on Oct 8, 2020 10:58:34 GMT
3cat is an idiot. It's no use trying to educate him. Just let him go his own way. While the rest of us stay as far away as possible.
Not quite true. Covid-19 is a big deal because it is new, meaning we don't have any immunity to it. It spreads quickly, across a wide spectrum of people (old young, healthy and unhealthy alike) and it is deadly. Plus we have no real effective treatment or vaccine for it. That what it boils down to.
Before you say "but Trump", he was treated with a wide range of experimental treatments, that were not FDA approved and weren't recommended and may have adverse affects. Psychosis being the least of the afore mentioned side effects (which is kinda hard to tell normally).
He also lies like shit, so there is no way of knowing if he is truly well or not. People with Covid-19 have been known to suddenly take dive health-wise after appearing healthy for a short time.
Not only that, but the dumb fucking moron is putting his entire staff, their families and people in their orbit at risk because of his stupidity. I'd be well surprised if they all don't come down with it.
That's not accurate, either. We didn't have any herd immunity or vaccine for SARS or the Swine Flu, either. Those even had higher death rates, but they didn't spread like a California wildfire, so many fewer died. This illness is entirely about how many are getting it. That's why we are locked down like this waiting for a vaccine. I remember listening to one of the podcasts with Christian Drosten, and he talked about the Spanish Flu and a "modern" Flu that was feared to become a pandemic that could be devestating but wasn't. I think that was the swine flu, cursory look on Wikipedia suggests so, too.
The interesting part about that was that it turned out we had people that were already immune against that new flu because it wasn't actually new, but a return of the Spanish Flu. And it wasn't its first return, it also returned in the 70s ,which lead to certain age groups being less affected by it than initially expected and which both reduced the wide-spread circulation and potential death. Basically the people most likely to die from it were already immune and a lot of the people most likely to spread it, were too.
The relationship between these strains was only uncovered once genetic evidence could be investigated and cross-referenced.
So we didn't had exactly a herd immunity in the strict sense, but we had enough resistances from previous occurences that we avoided the worst (at least in Europe and the US.)
|
|
|
|
Post by 3catcircus on Oct 8, 2020 11:27:36 GMT
That's not accurate, either. We didn't have any herd immunity or vaccine for SARS or the Swine Flu, either. Those even had higher death rates, but they didn't spread like a California wildfire, so many fewer died. This illness is entirely about how many are getting it. That's why we are locked down like this waiting for a vaccine. I remember listening to one of the podcasts with Christian Drosten, and he talked about the Spanish Flu and a "modern" Flu that was feared to become a pandemic that could be devestating but wasn't. I think that was the swine flu, cursory look on Wikipedia suggests so, too.
The interesting part about that was that it turned out we had people that were already immune against that new flu because it wasn't actually new, but a return of the Spanish Flu. And it wasn't its first return, it also returned in the 70s ,which lead to certain age groups being less affected by it than initially expected and which both reduced the wide-spread circulation and potential death. Basically the people most likely to die from it were already immune and a lot of the people most likely to spread it, were too.
The relationship between these strains was only uncovered once genetic evidence could be investigated and cross-referenced.
So we didn't had exactly a herd immunity in the strict sense, but we had enough resistances from previous occurences that we avoided the worst (at least in Europe and the US.)
To some extent, this. Coronaviruses have been around for millennia. The microbiome inside of people knows how to defeat it as shown by the evidence that 40-60% of people have t-cell immunity to covid-19 without ever having been infected to begin with. Viruses that have a huge fatality rate, such a ebola, are due to the virus killing the host too quickly for it to know how to fight, resulting in the virus not mutating to be less fatal and eventually, asymptomatic. That's what virii do - they mutate to not be fatal to their host so that they can continue to replicate - and in fact some of those virii infect the bacteria in human bodies or they infect human dna, resulting in everyone having a unique virome. |
|
|
|
Post by 3catcircus on Oct 8, 2020 11:42:52 GMT
Where are the lockdowns due to cancer, car crashes and heroin overdoses? I mostly don't care about this slap because I agree that the lockdown is dumb and needs to be handled differently. That said... your argument here is really stupid. Of those three things, only car crashes will and have decreased due to lockdown. Cancer and heroin overdoses? Not so much. Now, while lockdown will directly decrease car crash deaths, it does so only during the locdown, whereas a sensible reduction in large gatherings and forced commingling, will continue to decrease COVID deaths (just as the lockdown has done) past the point of the initial reduction/lockdown once we can achieve herd immunity/inoculation. Inversely, the moment idiots can get back in their cars, deaths to cars jacks right back up because there is no herd immunity/inoculation to shitty drivers/accidents. Thus there is no point in establishing a lockdown/gathering reduction to stop the spread of car crashes, heroin suicide, or cancer. Pandemic spreading however.... I was speaking more generally of those things rather than during this covid panic - the horseless carriage has been around for 100 years, with thousands of deaths each year - and we've never deemed the risks too great to ban them. We've mandated safety features and required a minimum level of training, but never said "no cars, they're deadly." Likewise, we've never decided that heart disease kills so many people that we'll en masse ban people from eating unhealthy food, forced them to exercise, or refused to let them pass on traits in their genes to their offspring known to result in increased risk of heart disease prevalence. Don't get me wrong - I hate people so not being forced to interact with them is fine, but mandating behavior not scientifically-proven to prevent the thing you are trying to prevent is utter stupidity. Unless you are using a mask in a clinical setting, with proper donning/doffing and changing after every interaction, they actually increase your risks. Forcing healthy people to quarantine doesn't reduce the risk - providing facts, quarantining sick people and proper contact tracing does. *That's* why South Korea, for example, did the best job of containment of any developed nation. They never mandated lockdowns. When they had a spike in August, the government announced that fact and people self distanced for two weeks and then back to normal - again with no government mandate. The US has done a shitty job because no administration has ever been prepared. Our history is one of fat dumb and happy until some crisis occurs. Then we flail about, fucking things up, before getting our act together. Because we rely upon "experts" who have never actually left the shelter of academia or government - their recommendations are generally never fully tested in a real world situation if they've never left the lab. |
|
|
|
Post by mustrumridcully on Oct 8, 2020 13:13:19 GMT
I remember listening to one of the podcasts with Christian Drosten, and he talked about the Spanish Flu and a "modern" Flu that was feared to become a pandemic that could be devestating but wasn't. I think that was the swine flu, cursory look on Wikipedia suggests so, too.
The interesting part about that was that it turned out we had people that were already immune against that new flu because it wasn't actually new, but a return of the Spanish Flu. And it wasn't its first return, it also returned in the 70s ,which lead to certain age groups being less affected by it than initially expected and which both reduced the wide-spread circulation and potential death. Basically the people most likely to die from it were already immune and a lot of the people most likely to spread it, were too.
The relationship between these strains was only uncovered once genetic evidence could be investigated and cross-referenced.
So we didn't had exactly a herd immunity in the strict sense, but we had enough resistances from previous occurences that we avoided the worst (at least in Europe and the US.)
To some extent, this. Coronaviruses have been around for millennia. The microbiome inside of people knows how to defeat it as shown by the evidence that 40-60% of people have t-cell immunity to covid-19 without ever having been infected to begin with. Viruses that have a huge fatality rate, such a ebola, are due to the virus killing the host too quickly for it to know how to fight, resulting in the virus not mutating to be less fatal and eventually, asymptomatic. That's what virii do - they mutate to not be fatal to their host so that they can continue to replicate - and in fact some of those virii infect the bacteria in human bodies or they infect human dna, resulting in everyone having a unique virome.
As I understand it, there are no cross-immunities at the same level as there were for the swine flu, however. There is a cross-reactivity, but it's too weak and unspecific for thethe effect to actually protect the patient. At least that's what apparently the authors of one of those studies that found these cross-reactivity concluded.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maxperson on Oct 8, 2020 13:18:44 GMT
That's not accurate, either. We didn't have any herd immunity or vaccine for SARS or the Swine Flu, either. Those even had higher death rates, but they didn't spread like a California wildfire, so many fewer died. This illness is entirely about how many are getting it. That's why we are locked down like this waiting for a vaccine. I remember listening to one of the podcasts with Christian Drosten, and he talked about the Spanish Flu and a "modern" Flu that was feared to become a pandemic that could be devestating but wasn't. I think that was the swine flu, cursory look on Wikipedia suggests so, too.
The interesting part about that was that it turned out we had people that were already immune against that new flu because it wasn't actually new, but a return of the Spanish Flu. And it wasn't its first return, it also returned in the 70s ,which lead to certain age groups being less affected by it than initially expected and which both reduced the wide-spread circulation and potential death. Basically the people most likely to die from it were already immune and a lot of the people most likely to spread it, were too.
The relationship between these strains was only uncovered once genetic evidence could be investigated and cross-referenced.
So we didn't had exactly a herd immunity in the strict sense, but we had enough resistances from previous occurences that we avoided the worst (at least in Europe and the US.)
That is really interesting. Thank you for sharing that. |
|
|
|
Post by kirinke on Oct 8, 2020 13:36:16 GMT
From what little I understand about diseases in general is you never really get rid of them. People loose immunity, get sick with it, pass it on and the cycle begins again and again.
|
|
|
|
Post by 3catcircus on Oct 8, 2020 14:08:18 GMT
To some extent, this. Coronaviruses have been around for millennia. The microbiome inside of people knows how to defeat it as shown by the evidence that 40-60% of people have t-cell immunity to covid-19 without ever having been infected to begin with. Viruses that have a huge fatality rate, such a ebola, are due to the virus killing the host too quickly for it to know how to fight, resulting in the virus not mutating to be less fatal and eventually, asymptomatic. That's what virii do - they mutate to not be fatal to their host so that they can continue to replicate - and in fact some of those virii infect the bacteria in human bodies or they infect human dna, resulting in everyone having a unique virome.
As I understand it, there are no cross-immunities at the same level as there were for the swine flu, however. There is a cross-reactivity, but it's too weak and unspecific for thethe effect to actually protect the patient. At least that's what apparently the authors of one of those studies that found these cross-reactivity concluded.
It depends upon the level of commonality of the makeup of each strain of virus. If I recall, covid-19 is like 80% common with Sars and is common enough with other coronaviruses to result in the aforementioned t-cell immunity. But, they don't have to be that closely related for cross reactivity - such as a type of flu-specific t-cell having cross reactivity with a hep c antigen. It would really have been better had Fauci stayed in the lab and have actual epidemiologists with real world experience provide advice on public policy over this wu-flu. |
|
|
|
Post by 3catcircus on Oct 8, 2020 14:31:20 GMT
From what little I understand about diseases in general is you never really get rid of them. People loose immunity, get sick with it, pass it on and the cycle begins again and again. Not true in all cases. Immune systems usually destroy viral invaders with memory-b cells and t-cells to kill future similar invaders. Some viruses hide and remain dormant - primarily HSV/chickenpox/shingles family. Coronaviruses and flu do not do this with the exception of RSV. |
|
|
|
Post by evileeyore on Oct 8, 2020 15:08:47 GMT
I was speaking more generally of those things rather than during this covid panic... Don't get me wrong, I'm with you. However it was an easy argument to make from the opposition side, so I figured I'd make it to firm up the "No Lockdowns" side. "Mandated safety features". That's actually been a tremendous step (with a commiserate pushback over the years) and we've spent decades, two entire generations, letting that percolate through the societal consciousness to the point that in my lifetime we've* gone from "never wearing a safety belt" to "instinctively reach for it"† when getting into a vehicle. And I've seen the same with helmet laws in the biker community. * Understand I'm generalizing. I know people who still refuse to safety belts, despite it being a Primary Enforcement law in Florida. † Again, generalizing. It is however code enforced as a Primary Enforcement in like 30 states, so over half the country, and the other half has it as a Secondary Enforcement (Primary means it's cause to pull you over and issue a ticket alone, secondary means once you've been pulled over for something else, they can then issue a ticket for no seat belt wearing). And only New Hampshire has it so 'unregulated' that it's only a secondary offense for children to be unbelted. And all that has happened in the last 40 years. Funny you should inadvertently mention New York banning large sodas at fast food restaurants... which was simply step 1 of making "eating unhealthily is illegal". It got so much pushback that the law was dropped, but how much of that push was consumers and how much from Big Soda? Agreed. However I'm fine for a request to reduce large gatherings and even putting sensible hard limits on large gatherings (frex, limiting large engagements such that minimum distancing can take place), and then letting business and customers handle their own risk assessments. I mean, if it's fine for stores, hotbeds of feral children germs (I've worked retail, do you know how many things children stick in their mouths and them put back on shelves... or just fucking run their animal tongues along while they walk!?!?!?!), to reopen... Only for idiots. Which is why I'm for training and allowing for social adjustment. I mean, seriously, even in China they still have older people who refuse to wear masks... and it was a criminal offense during the pandemic. It's just unreasonable to make it a criminal offense here. Social offense where Karen will get stupid on camera for you? "Sure, sure Karen, take off your mask to better shout at me over mask wearing darlin." Not to put too fine a point on it, but that would not work here. Asia constantly has pandemics, and high population density cities, so they have a inculcated social acceptance and requirement for pandemic procedures. I mean, you remember when The Glorious Leader Trump put China in the "no fly zone" and h was roundly denounced as a racist and an asshole, from the very people now overreacting to the pandemic. So asking for reasonable responses from a divided society is like slamming your genitals in a drawer and hoping this time it won't hurt. And because of our planned Decentralization of Authority, the administration can't even mandate things. Just suggest and try to assist by rolling in the equivalent of 'tanks' when 'go carts' are needed. So the response is usually, not always, disproportionate to the requirement, or is sloppy overkill, and when rolled in the wrong direction the results are worse than non-action. Exactly. Like I said, I got your point, but a metaphor/comparison that is (vaguely) inaccurate doesn't help. Honestly, I wouldn't even make the argument here more than once. Unless you're enjoying it.  |
|
|
|
Post by mustrumridcully on Oct 8, 2020 21:24:16 GMT
As I understand it, there are no cross-immunities at the same level as there were for the swine flu, however. There is a cross-reactivity, but it's too weak and unspecific for thethe effect to actually protect the patient. At least that's what apparently the authors of one of those studies that found these cross-reactivity concluded.
It depends upon the level of commonality of the makeup of each strain of virus. If I recall, covid-19 is like 80% common with Sars and is common enough with other coronaviruses to result in the aforementioned t-cell immunity. But, they don't have to be that closely related for cross reactivity - such as a type of flu-specific t-cell having cross reactivity with a hep c antigen. It would really have been better had Fauci stayed in the lab and have actual epidemiologists with real world experience provide advice on public policy over this wu-flu. Well, it seems epidemiologists all across the world recommend mask wearing, recommend limiting the size of public gathering, trying to do stuff under open air rather than indoors and doing basically anything possible to limit infections to allow contact tracing to contain outbreaks before they can get serious.
But regarding the cross-reactivity - the important point is that just because there is reactivity it doesn't mean it's actually protecting you. At least that seems to be what I gather from the information available to me as layperson. The swine flu/spanish flu thing was a strong and specific enough cross-reaction it helped, but the Corona-Virus one isn't looking to be like that. And I think that kinda bears out in practice already - the Swine Flu didn't get as widely spread (at least in the US or Europe) as this new Corona variant did.
|
|
|
|
Post by kirinke on Oct 9, 2020 18:30:51 GMT
|
|
