Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
MDG, you must have seen the news though... routine operations and procedures are being lost right now. Because of the lockdown, or more (in my opinion) the fear culture thats been promoted. That's despite the health service not coming anywhere near being overwhelmed as predicted. There are many, many experts warning of the untold deaths just waiting for their turn for untreated or undiagnosed cancers, heart disease etc etc.
If I were a gambling man I wouldn't bank on a vaccine.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/19 06:12:02
Are they life saving operations? Or life improving?
Because let’s be absolutely honest. Life with a dodgy hip or other joint sucks - but isn’t going to kill you of itself, is it? Given they’re routine (non- emergency), I suspect they’re by definition not life saving.
And hospitals aren’t being overwhelmed precisely because of lockdown. It’s reducing infection rates. I remain uninterested in falling out with you, but still baffled at your odd dissonance here?
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
That's what vaccinations are for, not to render every single person immune to the disease, but to make enough immune as to limit the effective spread of a disease through a population.
It's well known and understood science at this point.
Anyone advocating that people should live or die as they may is, from a purely logical point of view, correct. That is the fastest way to achieve herd immunity in the absence of an effective vaccine.
What that argument fails to account for, of course, is the emotional impact on society those deaths will have, and all the consequential deaths from overwhelmed health services, which would be the outcome no matter the quality or preparedness of any given institution.
And what virus we have got herd immunity without vaccines? None really. MAYBE black death if that wasn't simply it dying because it was too killy...
All herd immunities humans have got are because of vaccines.
As it is there isn't even any proof yet there is natural immunity of note to corona virus. Previous corona viruses(you are aware this isn't first corona virus ever right?) don't leave people with long term immunity. Reinfection has been varying from 4 weeks to couple months. So your herd immunity is at best few months if you even get sufficiently infected in that time before merry go around starts again.
Top of that the rate people are getting the resistance indicators is painfully slow. In spain(one of the worst hit countries in EU) only few % could be considered immune. At this rate by the time sufficient is the early ones have most likely lost their immunity as usual with corona so back to square one...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/19 06:49:42
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: There will be a vaccine, in due course. Because this is a Flu variant. We’re even in the (accelerated) human testing stage.
Again, it's not a flu. The flu is a Orthomyxovirus. COVID 19 is a coronavirus. There are several coronaviruses with vaccines (albeit in animals, because no other coronavirus has actually become a real problem and thus funding dries up before a vaccine is fully developed), so we can still expect to see a vaccine at some point, but coronavirus and flu viruses are not the same thing.
Kilkrazy wrote: Herd immunity without a vaccine involves 60% or more of the population catching the disease.
If you assume a fatality rate of 1%, that means at least 400,000 dead in the UK population. That is more than we lost in WW2.
And it would be concentrated into a few months, rather than 5 years, if we are to avoid a long lockdown.
And likely in few months it would start again unless this new corona isn't different to previous ones and actually give permanent immunity. Rather dangerous assumption to assume it differs in that without evidence in contrary...
Well for cancer, heart disease, diabetes, even pre/post natal care definitely have life saving aspects.
I dont believe that lockdown is the reason for that. unfortunately, because its already been implemented, those who are sceptical are already standing on a weaker base to argue from, and those who advocate for lockdown have an easy wall to stand behind.
post hoc ergo propter hoc. (only just realised that I've been saying this wrong for years )
I'm dissonant because I dont believe this is as bad as the media makes out. I dont believe that a disease with a ~<1% IFR is worth effectively shutting down the entire country (and planet) for, especially considering the potential economic fallout. I think people will have a shock if those things come to pass. I feel that many of them just think they will get the government money, and then the virus will disappear and everything will return to normal(economy wise)
I know you think the economy will bounce back quickly, and I share that hope, but I think the longer this goes on, the less likely that looks.
I'm not saying precautions shouldn't have been in place, but I think they should have been targeted, based on the best evidence (read:not a blanket lockdown strategy based on shonky modelling, which has had so many holes poked through you could use it so sieve flour)
I also dont think that the fear promoted by the media and government is enough to implement the blanket restrictions of rights and freedoms with no parliamentary scrutiny, but I think my views on that are well documented so I wont say more on that.
I honestly think future generations will look back on this period with amazement.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: I'm dissonant because I dont believe this is as bad as the media makes out. I dont believe that a disease with a ~<1% IFR is worth effectively shutting down the entire country (and planet) for, especially considering the potential economic fallout.
The 1% is because the other 99% can get the care they need to recover.
If the beds weren't there, the 1% would be far higher. Or, if not fatal, the after-effects would be much more serious.
The lockdown is there to let the 99% get better, properly. It is not to stop the 1% happening.
How many of the 1% dying of this are doing so outside the health care system? How many died at home, or in a care-home? Would the 1% be lower if everyone who caught it were in a hospital bed.
Queen Anne's revenge - I hope to feth that you are right. But I fear that that won't be the case.
But - we are already at more deaths than caused during the WW2 Blitz. I think we will look back with amazement, but not in the sense you mean. Instead, we will look at why the lockdown started when it did, later than it should have and allowed events such as Cheltenham gold cup to go ahead when they knew that it should not have. That we have been unable to implement effective tracking, tracing and isolation regimes during the lockdown period. Our media has frontpaged stories of the gov scientific advisor going to illicitly meet his mistress on the day that we passed 1000 deaths and became the most deadly country in Europe. Lockdown fatigue has set in, and backed up by confusing gov messages and again elements of the media that should be screaming blue bloody murder, but are not, there is every chance now we will hit a second wave in a few weeks time and many more thousands of unnecessary deaths.
I already know of people in my 'circle' who have lost loved ones. In both the case of myself and my partner, someone at our place of work has died (admittedly big companies, but they are names that we recognised). And others that have lost members of family. All someone's Gran, someone's partner, someone's friend. It's a very hard pill to swallow, knowing that in all likelihood they might still have been alive had they lived in another country, one where the government and society had managed to effectively mitigate the outbreak.
The beds are there. Were there even at the peak (which multiple reputable scientists would say came before lockdown was implemented) this is my point.
Saying 'lockdown has worked' is just an assertion. There is no solid empirical evidence to back this up. It just is.
Unherd even got a lockdown advocate on to put forward her case, and it basically surmounted to the circular argument of : lockdowns work because they work, occams razor says so.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: The beds are there. Were there even at the peak (which multiple reputable scientists would say came before lockdown was implemented) this is my point.
Saying 'lockdown has worked' is just an assertion. There is no solid empirical evidence to back this up. It just is.
Unherd even got a lockdown advocate on to put forward her case, and it basically surmounted to the circular argument of : lockdowns work because they work, occams razor says so.
considering that people have multiple times told you that the beds alone are NOT the issue i am surprised that you still argue that way.
Also there is potential data in the case of sweden.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
quote=Pacific 784835 10800944 b2849392f11c9a766efe17f0601e55af.jpg]Queen Anne's revenge - I hope to feth that you are right. But I fear that that won't be the case.
But - we are already at more deaths than caused during the WW2 Blitz. I think we will look back with amazement, but not in the sense you mean. Instead, we will look at why the lockdown started when it did, later than it should have and allowed events such as Cheltenham gold cup to go ahead when they knew that it should not have. That we have been unable to implement effective tracking, tracing and isolation regimes during the lockdown period. Our media has frontpaged stories of the gov scientific advisor going to illicitly meet his mistress on the day that we passed 1000 deaths and became the most deadly country in Europe. Lockdown fatigue has set in, and backed up by confusing gov messages and again elements of the media that should be screaming blue bloody murder, but are not, there is every chance now we will hit a second wave in a few weeks time and many more thousands of unnecessary deaths.
I already know of people in my 'circle' who have lost loved ones. In both the case of myself and my partner, someone at our place of work has died (admittedly big companies, but they are names that we recognised). And others that have lost members of family. All someone's Gran, someone's partner, someone's friend. It's a very hard pill to swallow, knowing that in all likelihood they might still have been alive had they lived in another country, one where the government and society had managed to effectively mitigate the outbreak.
My sympathies.
The death figures themselves are also not particularly useful without nuances applied to them though. They are the first thing announced by the media every day, but no one ever explains all the factors. Excess deaths have been mentioned here. (can't remember who posted them) but they are a more useful stat to analyse.
I think the virus spread has too many other influencing factors, that whether you lockdown or not, the effect of which is miniscule. You can see this in the rates across various nations, each with various degrees of lockdown, all with wildly different death rates, but all with the rates following the same sort of curve.
I concur that lockdown came too late, but I think that this is always the case. I don't believe the government did this intentionally or out of stupidity. They were following the limited advice they had. I feel that unless you are very quick on the uptake, as some se Asian countries were, or lucky, you're pretty much always going to be too late implementing lockdowns.
Personally I align with those in the scientific community who believe that the virus will take its curve, pretty much to a similar degree in most places regardless. Some even believe that it will basically peter out, becoming like sars 1 or mers. In the background but not really worried about. Which I am hopeful for.
After contracting Covid-19 in hospital, my dad has managed to to reach a negative test having experienced nothing worse than an elevated temperature. He came home yesterday.
He knows he was lucky: 70+, massive existing health issues and a lifetime of smoking. I suspect a Mr Burns situation with every health issue fighting off all the others...
queen_annes_revenge wrote: The beds are there. Were there even at the peak (which multiple reputable scientists would say came before lockdown was implemented) this is my point.
Saying 'lockdown has worked' is just an assertion. There is no solid empirical evidence to back this up. It just is.
Unherd even got a lockdown advocate on to put forward her case, and it basically surmounted to the circular argument of : lockdowns work because they work, occams razor says so.
considering that people have multiple times told you that the beds alone are NOT the issue i am surprised that you still argue that way.
Also there is potential data in the case of sweden.
Sweden is following the exact same curve as every other country.
The very fact that Sweden is below many other countries in deaths and cases, without lockdown, shows that lockdown is not a particularly relevant factor. if it wasnt the case, then their rates should still be rising, higher than everyone else.
Patriarch wrote: After contracting Covid-19 in hospital, my dad has managed to to reach a negative test having experienced nothing worse than an elevated temperature. He came home yesterday.
He knows he was lucky: 70+, massive existing health issues and a lifetime of smoking. I suspect a Mr Burns situation with every health issue fighting off all the others...
Thats good news.
There have been things floating about lately about smokers being less susceptible somehow? something to do with the lung environment being less hospitable to the virus? doesnt seem to add up with the original theories about high number of smokers, and doesnt really make sense to me, but, who knows?
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2020/05/19 08:27:24
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/19 08:29:14
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
I've looked at the other countries. but death rate alone is not really an indictaor. the curve is following the same path.
to follow your logic though, add in Belgium. granted they are counting suspected (for some reason?) but still. I imagine if they weren't it would be following a similar curve.
The death figures themselves are also not particularly useful without nuances applied to them though. They are the first thing announced by the media every day, but no one ever explains all the factors. Excess deaths have been mentioned here. (can't remember who posted them) but they are a more useful stat to analyse.
Me. And they are. You've been ignoring them to push your 'not as dangerous as people think' line, though. Highest weekly deaths since recording began. Close to doubling the five-year average death rate at one point. Riding above 50% over it for a prolonged period. All whilst flu/other respiratory illness/heart disease etc deaths track the average.
Personally I align with those in the scientific community who believe that the virus will take its curve, pretty much to a similar degree in most places regardless. Some even believe that it will basically peter out, becoming like sars 1 or mers. In the background but not really worried about. Which I am hopeful for.
On the basis of your posts in this thread, you're aligning with that extreme minority of the scientific community because of your a priori assumptions/hopes.
You've been consistently scathing about the lack of robust evidence for lockdown success. This is fair and reasonable. The data is problematic and there is a lot of necessarily interpretation. However, you never acknowledge its being vastly more prevalent than evidence for lockdowns irrelevance, or even for its effectiveness being overstated, which essentially does not exist beyond 'not everyone in Sweden is dead'. The only data* you've ever managed to find are a couple videos you've pulled from a channel dedicated to minimalising coronavirus and a single study which has no stated methodology or criteria and specifically excludes all data concerning two diseases originating in Asia published in a language other than English, all of which you present without critique (or, usually, comment). You simply hold evidence supporting your position to one set of standards (basically, someone has said it) and evidence against your position to a different set (comprehensive proof).
Your position might be right, but you don't hold that position based on a reasoned assessment of the evidence.
* in the absolute loosest of terms.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2020/05/19 08:42:43
The death figures themselves are also not particularly useful without nuances applied to them though. They are the first thing announced by the media every day, but no one ever explains all the factors. Excess deaths have been mentioned here. (can't remember who posted them) but they are a more useful stat to analyse.
Me. And they are. You've been ignoring them to push your 'not as dangerous as people think' line, though. Highest weekly deaths since recording began. Close to doubling the five-year average death rate at one point. Riding above 50% over it for a prolonged period. All whilst flu/other respiratory illness/heart disease etc deaths track the average.
Personally I align with those in the scientific community who believe that the virus will take its curve, pretty much to a similar degree in most places regardless. Some even believe that it will basically peter out, becoming like sars 1 or mers. In the background but not really worried about. Which I am hopeful for.
On the basis of your posts in this thread, you're aligning with that extreme minority of the scientific community because of your a priori assumptions/hopes.
You've been consistently scathing about the lack of robust evidence for lockdown success, yet never acknowledge its being vastly more prevalent than evidence for its irrelevance, which essentially does not exist beyond 'not everyone in Sweden is dead'. The only data you've ever managed to find are a couple videos you've pulled from a channel dedicated to minimalising coronavirus and a single study which has no stated methodology or criteria and specifically excludes all data concerning two diseases originating in Asia published in a language other than English.
Your position might be right, but you don't hold that position based on a reasoned assessment of the evidence.
And you constantly attack me, assume my opinions and hopes, and then use that to 'deduce' why I reach the conclusions I do whilst trying to put up an appearance of intellectual superiority. You're only doing the exact same thing as I but on the other side of the coin.
being in a minority does not make a case wrong. Argumentum ad populum.
You question my use of unherd (I assume thats the one you're talking about) yet they have had both iain ferguson, and the aforementioned lockdown advocate on, and treated them to the same questions, put forward in the same civil manner. its the most balanced journalism you can find on the issue. certainly more so than the BBC or other mainstream media, who never mention anything of any dissenting scientific opinion on the matter.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2020/05/19 08:44:18
queen_annes_revenge wrote: I've looked at the other countries. but death rate alone is not really an indictaor. the curve is following the same path.
to follow your logic though, add in Belgium. granted they are counting suspected (for some reason?) but still. I imagine if they weren't it would be following a similar curve.
So you give me data, don't use your own data even correctly and contextualised.
And then complain about the data.
Just to write out what you logically just did:
QAR: Here is data s. s shows that country S does not suffer as much, therefore L doesn't work.
B: Looks at provided data s, expands the datapoints in regards to similar and suggested countries according to data Provided by QAR, s shows excactly that L seems to work.
QAR: Data s is not valid.
So in other words your first premise you yourself admit is not correct.
A can not be A and not A at the same time, so what is it?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/19 08:47:06
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: I've looked at the other countries. but death rate alone is not really an indictaor. the curve is following the same path.
to follow your logic though, add in Belgium. granted they are counting suspected (for some reason?) but still. I imagine if they weren't it would be following a similar curve.
So you give me data, don't use your own data even correctly and contextualised.
And then complain about the data.
Just to write out what you logically just did:
QAR: Here is data s. s shows that country S does not suffer as much, therefore L doesn't work.
B: Looks at provided data s, expands the datapoints in regards to similar and suggested countries according to data Provided by QAR, s shows excactly that L seems to work.
QAR: Data s is not valid.
So in other words your first premise you yourself admit is not correct.
A can not be A and not A at the same so what is it.
My point was that the curve was the same regardless, therefore lockdown is not the key factor. the fact that other countries with lockdown have smaller death rates is irrelevant here. the pattern is the same. I never said you data wasnt valid, but it doesnt prove your counterpoint either, as shown by the additional data from belgium.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/05/19 08:52:03
There have been things floating about lately about smokers being less susceptible somehow? something to do with the lung environment being less hospitable to the virus? doesnt seem to add up with the original theories about high number of smokers, and doesnt really make sense to me, but, who knows?
Thank you!
I thought the earlier high death rates in places like China and Italy had been partially ascribed to more smoking (and possibly a more "tactile" social culture in southern Europe) but that might have been early guesswork. Looks like the UK has overtaken Italy and everywhere else in Europe, so not the "touchy feely" thing.
There have been things floating about lately about smokers being less susceptible somehow? something to do with the lung environment being less hospitable to the virus? doesnt seem to add up with the original theories about high number of smokers, and doesnt really make sense to me, but, who knows?
Thank you!
I thought the earlier high death rates in places like China and Italy had been partially ascribed to more smoking (and possibly a more "tactile" social culture in southern Europe) but that might have been early guesswork. Looks like the UK has overtaken Italy and everywhere else in Europe, so not the "touchy feely" thing.
No your point was against my argument : Look here Sweden doesn't suffer as much. With provided data, COMPLETLY FAILING to propperly contextualise your arguement with the dataset you YOURSELF provided and now you complain about said dataset.
Like i said A can not be A and B at the same time.
What is it?
What? my point was that the curve was the same regardless, therefore lockdown is not the key factor. the fact that other countries with lockdown have smaller death rates is irrelevant here. the pattern is the same. I never said you data wasnt valid, but it doesnt prove your counterpoint either, as shown by the additional data from belgium.
Belgium can be discounted because Belgium is culturally diffrent, same with switzerland really, whilest the closes related countries for an easy comparison would be denmark and norway.
So your argument still holds no water whatsoever.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/19 08:53:00
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
The death figures themselves are also not particularly useful without nuances applied to them though. They are the first thing announced by the media every day, but no one ever explains all the factors. Excess deaths have been mentioned here. (can't remember who posted them) but they are a more useful stat to analyse.
Me. And they are. You've been ignoring them to push your 'not as dangerous as people think' line, though. Highest weekly deaths since recording began. Close to doubling the five-year average death rate at one point. Riding above 50% over it for a prolonged period. All whilst flu/other respiratory illness/heart disease etc deaths track the average.
Personally I align with those in the scientific community who believe that the virus will take its curve, pretty much to a similar degree in most places regardless. Some even believe that it will basically peter out, becoming like sars 1 or mers. In the background but not really worried about. Which I am hopeful for.
On the basis of your posts in this thread, you're aligning with that extreme minority of the scientific community because of your a priori assumptions/hopes.
You've been consistently scathing about the lack of robust evidence for lockdown success, yet never acknowledge its being vastly more prevalent than evidence for its irrelevance, which essentially does not exist beyond 'not everyone in Sweden is dead'. The only data you've ever managed to find are a couple videos you've pulled from a channel dedicated to minimalising coronavirus and a single study which has no stated methodology or criteria and specifically excludes all data concerning two diseases originating in Asia published in a language other than English.
Your position might be right, but you don't hold that position based on a reasoned assessment of the evidence.
And you constantly attack me, assume my opinions and hopes
I address poor analysis consistently, I hope. You are particularly consistent in restarting the same arguments without ever addressing their rebuttals so you catch note than most I guess.
I don't assume anything. You've been explicit in your positions: the danger is not significant enough to warrant a lockdown. The threat level is very low. Persons freedoms are more important than excessive efforts to protect some parts of the populace.
and then use that to 'deduce' why I reach the conclusions I do whilst trying to put up an appearance of intellectual superiority.
Yes, I use the things you say to deduce why you say them. It's not about intellectual superiority, but it is about more nuanced analysis of data as it presents itself.
You're only doing the exact same thing but on the other side of the coin.
Presenting evidence without critique to support my assumptions? This is nonsense. Heck, I'm one of like three people in this thread that's explicitly changed their mind as the crisis has unfolded!
being a minority, does not make a case wrong.
Read the whole post? You've quoted where I state this is the case!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/19 08:54:48
You're trying, and somewhat succeeding in tying me in knots by trying to make the death rate the main consideration here. that was not my point. the point was the curve, and its path. how high the curve is on the death rate is irrelevant, as I said. regardless of lockdown or no, the curve is now (in most places) plateauing, or starting to angle downwards
So, I guess you could go so far as to extrapolate the fact that lockdowns may prevent higher levels of deaths, but its only a may, as the myriad other factors, those that cant be shown on the graphs, could be a larger contributing factor (in my opinion)
queen_annes_revenge wrote: You're trying, and somewhat succeeding in tying me in knots by trying to make the death rate the main consideration here. that was not my point. the point was the curve, and its path. how high the curve is on the death rate is irrelevant, as I said. regardless of lockdown or no, the curve is now (in most places) plateauing, or starting to angle downwards
So, I guess you could go so far as to extrapolate the fact that lockdowns may prevent higher levels of deaths, but its only a may, as the myriad other factors, those that cant be shown on the graphs, could be a larger contributing factor (in my opinion)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/19 09:11:04
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
The death figures themselves are also not particularly useful without nuances applied to them though. They are the first thing announced by the media every day, but no one ever explains all the factors. Excess deaths have been mentioned here. (can't remember who posted them) but they are a more useful stat to analyse.
Me. And they are. You've been ignoring them to push your 'not as dangerous as people think' line, though. Highest weekly deaths since recording began. Close to doubling the five-year average death rate at one point. Riding above 50% over it for a prolonged period. All whilst flu/other respiratory illness/heart disease etc deaths track the average.
Personally I align with those in the scientific community who believe that the virus will take its curve, pretty much to a similar degree in most places regardless. Some even believe that it will basically peter out, becoming like sars 1 or mers. In the background but not really worried about. Which I am hopeful for.
On the basis of your posts in this thread, you're aligning with that extreme minority of the scientific community because of your a priori assumptions/hopes.
You've been consistently scathing about the lack of robust evidence for lockdown success, yet never acknowledge its being vastly more prevalent than evidence for its irrelevance, which essentially does not exist beyond 'not everyone in Sweden is dead'. The only data you've ever managed to find are a couple videos you've pulled from a channel dedicated to minimalising coronavirus and a single study which has no stated methodology or criteria and specifically excludes all data concerning two diseases originating in Asia published in a language other than English.
Your position might be right, but you don't hold that position based on a reasoned assessment of the evidence.
And you constantly attack me, assume my opinions and hopes
I address poor analysis consistently, I hope. You are particularly consistent in restarting the same arguments without ever addressing their rebuttals so you catch note than most I guess.
I don't assume anything. You've been explicit in your positions: the danger is not significant enough to warrant a lockdown. The threat level is very low. Persons freedoms are more important than excessive efforts to protect some parts of the populace.
and then use that to 'deduce' why I reach the conclusions I do whilst trying to put up an appearance of intellectual superiority.
Yes, I use the things you say to deduce why you say them. It's not about intellectual superiority, but it is about more nuanced analysis of data as it presents itself.
You're only doing the exact same thing but on the other side of the coin.
Presenting evidence without critique to support my assumptions? This is nonsense. Heck, I'm one of like three people in this thread that's explicitly changed their mind as the crisis has unfolded!
being a minority, does not make a case wrong.
Read the whole post? You've quoted where I state this is the case!
I'm fairly certain I do address rebuttals. not changing my mind because of them is a different matter.
I changed my mind throughout this crisis. I went from believing the media view about staying away from people, and supporting a short lockdown (just not as draconian as it was) to believing that we've over reacted even more than I initially thought. this is based on my daily analysis of events, and consuming as much media as I can on the issue.
Also, as a personal anecdote, I've been working throughout this whole thing, in an environment with no social distancing, no PPE, and with a workforce that is free to return to all areas of the country at weekends or on leave to families and partners. We've had 3 confirmed cases, right at the start, guys who came back from Austria with symptoms, and thats it.
The threat level is low. too low to blanket restrict freedoms the way they are, and the case for that is dropping daily. I stand by my earlier point that more and more people will begin to ignore the 'Rules' through fatigue, or just generally not being able to handle it anymore.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/05/19 09:18:26
queen_annes_revenge wrote: I'm dissonant because I dont believe this is as bad as the media makes out. I dont believe that a disease with a ~<1% IFR is worth effectively shutting down the entire country (and planet) for, especially considering the potential economic fallout.
The 1% is because the other 99% can get the care they need to recover.
If the beds weren't there, the 1% would be far higher. Or, if not fatal, the after-effects would be much more serious.
The lockdown is there to let the 99% get better, properly. It is not to stop the 1% happening.
How many of the 1% dying of this are doing so outside the health care system? How many died at home, or in a care-home? Would the 1% be lower if everyone who caught it were in a hospital bed.
It's always the same. If nothing is done people complain nothing is done when gak hits the fan. If it's done people are "it's overreaction". Same thing with standards. Few appreciate benefits of them because they are invisible except for inconveniences when they are there because they prevent the worse scenarios. Don't have those or they are ignored and people then complain why nothing is done.
Heresy World Eaters/Emperors Children 
)
6000 pts - Harlies: 1000 pts - 
4000 pts - 
1000 pts - 
1000 pts 
