|
|
| |||||||
| From | Message | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
 DM |
||||||
|
stalhandske 03-Feb-22, 19:35 |
Softaire The report shows that a very, very small percentage of lives have been saved. You can justify that?> You cannot imagine how frustrated I am that I haven't been able to explain this to you to your understanding. I will try a last time. It is all a delicate balance between 'good' and 'bad'. The trouble is that one needs to make 'bad' decisions in order to reduce another 'bad' to an extent that it balances the first. When it comes to a pandemic, it obviously also matters how much one values life and health relative to the economy. This is even further complicated by the fact that a decline in economy has direct declining effects on health as well! So, this is not easy! What complicates it further is the changes that happen with time. The covid situation today is vastly different from what it was 2 years ago. Therefore, one must understand that the optimal measures are also different now - for that reason alone. I know that this is already too long to be read in full. The long and the short of it, and in answer to your comment: A huge number of lives plus health situations (long-term covid) have been saved by all the measures, including vaccination, masking, lockdowns and physical distancing. The report you quote is inaccurate in that it fails to show the beneficiary health effect. 'Percentage of lives saved' is quite a 'tricky' parameter. A percentage is always based on a ratio (times 100), as per cent means per one hundred. If you therefore divide by the US population (330 million), saving 1 MILLION people from death is just 0.3 PER CENT. Quite insignificant, right? |
||||||
|
Stalh The cost in lives due to the unexpected/unintended consequences more than makes up for any of those savings. The bad thing is that anybody who wanted to argue against the lockdowns was ridiculed as being anti-science, racist, or homophobic, plus many more. Nobody on your side would even discuss it with anybody on that side. YOU among them. YOUR science had to be followed or they were fools, stupid, and anti-science. |
||||||
|
stalhandske 03-Feb-22, 22:24 |
Softaire <Nobody on your side would even discuss it with anybody on that side. YOU among them.< That accusation is, of course, contrary to what we exchange right now, but it doesn't bother you to lie. I am getting accustomed to your dishonesty. |
||||||
|
pawntificator 03-Feb-22, 22:54 |
It has never been so easy to ignore someone as this. |
||||||
|
dmaestro 03-Feb-22, 23:17 |
Softaire |
||||||
|
DM However, are you saying that didn't happen? Whatever Fauci has said was taken as gospel and had to believed. Your side would not accept anything said contrary to that: Wear mask. Double mask. Stay six feet apart. Get vaccinated. Get two vaccinations. Get a booster vaccination. Stay home. Quarantine. Don't travel. Shut down your business, but OK to have large businesses stay open. Just for two weeks to level the curve. Anybody who had an argument against any of those, for any reason, has been reticuled, mocked, chastised, called anti-science and worse. Now it turns out there is ample proof that none of those things did much good. They did some good but the unintended consequences have been worse than doing nothing. I see that Sweden will now also end all mandates. However, there are many in the USA who are still forcing children to wear masks even after all the evidence that it is dangerous and harmful to them has come out. Who won't follow the science now? |
||||||
|
Softie |
||||||
|
dmaestro 04-Feb-22, 09:38 |
Softaire Your predisposition is such that you are interpreting biased information in a way that makes sense to you we find isn’t supported by the evidence. And the fact so many openly preach and act in opposition to any measure means they can’t work like they should, leaving self fulfilling pandemic fatigue and results for those who opposed from the beginning claiming they were ineffective overreach. The data is very complex and evolving with all sides trying to make their point and human psychology a huge complication. Which is why Bush 43 wisely said if you wait until the pandemic to plan it’s already to late—yet that is where we were due to political divisions. I know already we don’t have enough agreement on background, basic facts and risk analysis to get far. That you can’t see the bias in studies by economists vice medical experts or by those predisposed against mainstream medicine is good enough reason to let it go. Of course too much masks wearing is not ideal for children long term and if we had the high vaxx rates and social cohesion of some other countries we could more normalize. But being in Japan for a time where masks are normal I saw much of what concerns you is just cultural bias:: www.gavi.org. Today I understand my negative reaction to that Japanese mask custom was simply culturally biased and wrong. It’s been nice not being sick period from when the pandemic began and so I won’t throw away my mask. In summary nothing is perfect it’s all risk analysis. We are too far apart on the basics to get far but I don’t want it to get personal. |
||||||
|
dmaestro 04-Feb-22, 10:01 |
Thumper It’s true the pandemic has been a god send for authoritarians. But the chaos and conflict in democratic societies over the pandemic has actually become a recruitment tool for their form of “democracy”. But this does show why its a waste of time to discuss such science. It will always be a “control” issue for you which we can assume is why you chose your lifestyle. |
||||||
|
DM You and Stalh have given sainthood to the European and Scandinavian countries as usually being smarter and better at fighting the Covid than the USA. Now when they are all ending the Covid mandates and I point it out, where are you? Shouldn't the USA also do that? Shouldn't you be calling for us to do that also? Why so quiet? |
||||||
|
dmaestro 04-Feb-22, 11:02 |
Softaire The historic use of masks in Japan even among children to reduce allergies and illness just doesn’t produce the claimed harm—we know that is fact. In our culture it’s new and thus less effective but still of value when cases are high. And despite what some claim vaccines do help reduce mortality and serious illness. Flu in the USA disappeared, there were far less colds, simply because viral spread was impeded. But you don’t see that on right wing news because it undercuts their agenda. L It’s not perfect. Like in security you have layers of protection not just one thing and some crime still exists. You can’t just stay at higher threatcons forever but never leaving threatcon normal is worse. In a few years when things calm down when you look at objective after action analysis you will see where you got off track. Too much division now. Stay well… |
||||||
|
dmaestro 04-Feb-22, 15:38 |
It’s fair to say Dem leaders have not handled this as well as they could and the divisions among Dems is a problem. And they will pay at the polls. But between extremes and with close attention to facts is where we need to go. |
||||||
|
Some allowance will be given for the early Covid mandates because we "didn't know" and "we were learning", but at this late date they won't be accepted. |
||||||
|
pawntificator 05-Feb-22, 23:27 |
|
||||||
| |||||||
