Topic: Sturgis redux

[carnivorous chicken]

Maybe try this.. in the last 2 years, compare how many people you know that died of the flu , then how many from covid.
 This will vary widely among us.
 I don't know people in either group..
 But I have heard of a few people that knew  several in the  cogid group, and they were nit all over 65 years of age.

I was thinking yesterday about one of my best friends from college who died from COVID-19 in March. It won't be long before everyone of us knows someone personally who has died.

10.6 million cases, 150,000 new cases a day, and 243,000 dead. Sadly you're probably right. I've had sick relatives and sick friends, and friends' relatives die, but thankfully nobody in my immediate family.

Stay safe everyone. Take precautions.

[calj737]

...and 243,000 dead. Sadly you're probably right.

Based upon a reasonable estimate of the US population at 320,000,000 243K dead equals 0.0007%. Hardly a stirring number to react to given all the infringements and hysteria.

If you want to deal in factual numbers.

Number of cases matters little, number of hospitalizations matters little, mortality rate is all that should be factored. And the rate in the US is a rounding error to the population.

[carnivorous chicken]

...and 243,000 dead. Sadly you're probably right.

Based upon a reasonable estimate of the US population at 320,000,000 243K dead equals 0.0007%. Hardly a stirring number to react to given all the infringements and hysteria.

If you want to deal in factual numbers.

Number of cases matters little, number of hospitalizations matters little, mortality rate is all that should be factored. And the rate in the US is a rounding error to the population.

Math is hard, I guess.

I'm not sure if downplaying Covid and failure at math go hand in hand (it seems to here), but 243,000 dead out of a population of 320,000,000 is certainly not 0.0007%. It's actually .07%, or seven people out of 10,000. For a comparison, .0007% of 328,000,000 would be 2,300 dead. Another 80,000 dead, and it will be 1 person out of 1000. With 1500 people dying a day lately, that will be around the New Year, although the number could go up or down.

Hospitalizations should matter. Covid leaves life-long and life-shortening effects in many patients. Saying that only the people who die should matter in calculating a toll ignores these people who suffer as well.

Viewing other countries that have taken this more seriously, one can see that comparatively speaking the United States is at the bottom of the list for developed countries in its Covid approach, mostly due to people who have opposed taking it seriously -- I mean who reject the "infringements and hysteria." Yikes.

Stay safe, take precautions.

***Edit:
For a comparative perspective, here are mortality figures as a percentage of population:
Japan: .0014%
Germany: .014%
Singapore: .0005%
UK: .007%
Canada: .028%
And everybody’s favorite, New Zealand: .00006%

[goodtryer]

https://tomwoods.com/the-covid-cult/?omhide=true

[madmtnmotors]

number of hospitalizations matters little

I have to politely disagree. When the number of hospitalizations exceed the available facilities for treating these patients then we have a serious problem. When healthcare staff have to decide between treating a trauma patient (victim of a motorcycle accident?) or treating the latest covid patient arrival due to a lack of resources, then our healthcare system is overwhelmed. When the dead bodies are being stacked up in refrigerated trucks like cordwood, then our healthcare system is overwhelmed. IMHO the primary goal of "preventing the spread" is to prevent this very scenario. The simplest way of doing this is to "mask up" and avoid large groups. When I get in the car I put on my seat belt. When I get out of my car to enter a retail establishment, to enter the workplace, or to enter any other location that puts me in close proximity to others, I put on a mask. To sacrifice a little discomfort by donning a mask, primarily to protect others from me in the event that I should be an asymptomatic carrier, pales in comparison to the ultimate sacrifice others have paid to protect the freedoms we hold so dear.

Doesn't everyone have the right to breathe air that is free from the covid infected droplets being spewed by asymptomatic carriers? The flu is one thing, I can handle the flu, but this covid is such a voracious spreader with health complications that extend far beyond the side effects from the flu, that it should merit a little extra effort to minimize the spread. Who knows? What we learn from this may very well translate to a lower infection rate of the flu in the future... hey, I can dream!

I don't have to be forced to wear a mask and avoid large groups, I am happy to wear a mask when appropriate and avoid large groups because it's the right thing to do. 😷

IBTL!

[goodtryer]

https://gbdeclaration.org/

"The Declaration was written from a global public health and humanitarian perspective, with special concerns about how the current COVID-19 strategies are forcing our children, the working class and the poor to carry the heaviest burden.  The response to the pandemic in many countries around the world, focused on lockdowns, contact tracing and isolation, imposes enormous unnecessary health costs on people. In the long run, it will lead to higher COVID and non-COVID mortality than the focused protection plan we call for in the Declaration. "


"Dr. Kulldorff works on research grants from the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration and the non-profit Fund for Public Health in New York City, some of which is related to COVID-19. He has never accepted or received any funding from pharmaceutical companies, nor from any other large corporation.

Dr. Bhattacharya research funding over the past 22 years of his career has come almost entirely from grants from the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, the US Department of Agriculture, and participation on contracts with the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) via a government contracting research group, Acumen, LLC. He has never accepted or received any funding from pharmaceutical companies, nor from any other large corporation.

Dr. Gupta’s research funding over the last 30 years has principally been through fellowships and investigator awards from the Wellcome Trust and the European Research Council.  She has also received funding from the UKRI, the Royal Society, the Leverhulme Trust, the Emily and Georg von Opel Foundation and the Oxford Martin School. She and Dr. Craig Thompson have developed a novel method for producing a universal influenza vaccine (derived from a mathematical model) and this has now been licensed and is going through early testing. She does not hold any consultancy contracts or stock shares in any commercial company."

[carnivorous chicken]

goodtryer, we get it. Posting links to libertarian economic think tanks is one way to engage. But the Barrington document has been condemned by leading health experts such as the head of the WHO and Anthony Facui as immoral and misleading. The director of the National institute of Health called it "fringe epidemiology," "not mainstream science" and "dangerous."  It's assumptions about herd immunity are incorrect and would have potentially disasterous implications for the number of people killed -- between 2-6 million in the United States. The document has been thoroughly debunked by scientists who matter.

People tend to look for things that confirm their biases or assumptions, but relying on politically oriented information about a pandemic isn't relying on solid information. It is also one of the things that make these discussions turn into utter sh1tshows here.

[calj737]

goodtryer, we get it. Posting links to libertarian economic think tanks is one way to engage. But the Barrington document has been condemned by leading health experts such as the head of the WHO and Anthony Facui as immoral and misleading. The director of the National institute of Health called it "fringe epidemiology," "not mainstream science" and "dangerous."  It's assumptions about herd immunity are incorrect and would have potentially disasterous implications for the number of people killed -- between 2-6 million in the United States. The document has been thoroughly debunked by scientists who matter.

People tend to look for things that confirm their biases or assumptions, but relying on politically oriented information about a pandemic isn't relying on solid information. It is also one of the things that make these discussions turn into utter sh1tshows here.

Isn't that exactly what you're doing? Presuming that your source of facts and truths are empirically unquestionable? Two people can never agree on anything if they don't agree on what the standard of truth is. And with Covid, there is SO MUCH speculation, forecasting, dissenting insights that it is extremely fair to say that nobody has the exact facts. Relying on the WHO as a standard is by many accounts, ridiculous. They are so embroiled in corruption it is not even funny. That's not to say that all their data is inaccurate, but their models have been way off-base.

There is ample science and expert testimony from plenty of epidemiologists that contradict the sources you cite. The fact that some prefer their credibility is a matter of discernment. Choose your facts as you wish. But your argument is met with conflicting evidence by other "experts" with careers of achievement and field certifications. Things I doubt you hold in epidemiology.

[calj737]

number of hospitalizations matters little

I have to politely disagree. When the number of hospitalizations exceed the available facilities for treating these patients then we have a serious problem. When healthcare staff have to decide between treating a trauma patient (victim of a motorcycle accident?) or treating the latest covid patient arrival due to a lack of resources, then our healthcare system is overwhelmed. When the dead bodies are being stacked up in refrigerated trucks like cordwood, then our healthcare system is overwhelmed. IMHO the primary goal of "preventing the spread" is to prevent this very scenario. The simplest way of doing this is to "mask up" and avoid large groups. When I get in the car I put on my seat belt. When I get out of my car to enter a retail establishment, to enter the workplace, or to enter any other location that puts me in close proximity to others, I put on a mask. To sacrifice a little discomfort by donning a mask, primarily to protect others from me in the event that I should be an asymptomatic carrier, pales in comparison to the ultimate sacrifice others have paid to protect the freedoms we hold so dear.

Doesn't everyone have the right to breathe air that is free from the covid infected droplets being spewed by asymptomatic carriers? The flu is one thing, I can handle the flu, but this covid is such a voracious spreader with health complications that extend far beyond the side effects from the flu, that it should merit a little extra effort to minimize the spread. Who knows? What we learn from this may very well translate to a lower infection rate of the flu in the future... hey, I can dream!

I don't have to be forced to wear a mask and avoid large groups, I am happy to wear a mask when appropriate and avoid large groups because it's the right thing to do. 😷

IBTL!

There's much to agree with you on, Wilbur.

But at present, latest stats show that in the State of New York, there are 1,600 hospitalized persons across 220 hospitals as an example. That's an average of 7 persons per facility. Hardly overwhelmed. Isn't it rational to allow the detection rate to initiate a treatment (now that we have some verifiable therapies) and allow our citizens to recover their lives? Sure, infection rates and hospitalizations will differ geographically around the US because the US is many, many different urban, suburban and rural cultures. Is what is necessary in the Bronx required in Opalaka? Or Des Moines? Or Casper? I think not.

There is no constitutional power given to the Federal government to require a mask. It is a clear violation of our civil liberties. Even most states have only a very limited authority under public health circumstances to enforce a person, neighborhood or citizenry to quarantine for only the duration of the gestation period. That would include masks. And many states have badly over-stepped these boundaries.

That does allow private businesses to demand they be worn to enter or enjoy their services. I am perfectly okay with that. Dress codes are often a requirement and if a mask is one, so be it. Airlines too. But at the end of the day, it is your right to make your decision for you, but not for me. As for "Doesn't everyone have the right to breathe air that is free from the covid infected droplets being spewed by asymptomatic carriers?" sure. Stay home in your private residence. There is no obligation on the State or Federal government to insure the air outside is free from bacteria, germs or viruses. Never has, can't be done.

Because where will it end? Covid? I doubt it. Some mother will then demand that peanut butter be banned because their child is hyper allergic and they may come into contact with someone who enjoyed a Reeses and boarded the same bus. See the point as to why these powers are limited? I for one would rather a system that allowed you to make your choices for you and your family, and take whatever precautions you deem needed. But I ask that you allow the same for others. And the hyperbole of how catastrophic this virus is comparatively is deafening. Vaccines are emerging in short order and hopefully people will settle down and carry on soon.

All I know, I've spent this year not traveling internationally and put enough miles on my bikes to require 6 sets of tires. I'm going broke buying rubber while I socially distance at 80 Smiles Per Hour 

[goodtryer]

None are so blind as those who will not see.

You want to wear a mask, you have the freedom to wear a mask. Wear 2 masks, wear 10 if it makes you happy.

Just respect the rights of other people to make decisions for themselves.

The virus is going to do what it's going to do. The lockdowns have no basis in science, the masks are a ridiculous, virtue-signaling waste of time and effort. You didn't watch the videos or read the alternative points of view because they don't confirm your biases and you make baseless assertions to dismiss the facts you don't want to address.

Land of the free... unless that guy over there wants to impose his will on you.

[carnivorous chicken]

Land of the free... unless that guy over there wants to impose his will on you.

One could simply argue that some one -- knowingly or unknowingly (which is kind of the point) -- not wearing a mask and infecting others is impinging on others' right to breathe uncontaminated air. You're arguing that your "right" (?) not to wear a mask is more important that others' rights to a life free from disease. One is in the Constitution, literally. The other is not. Seriously, 245,000 dead and people are still saying "I'm not going to wear a mask because of freedom." There is no wonder the US is doing such a horrible job at containing this disease.

The lockdowns have no basis in science, the masks are a ridiculous.

This is simply factually incorrect, and is empirically provable.

BTW, I read the source you cited, as well as read about it. It's nonsense, according to the experts.

Isn't that exactly what you're doing? Presuming that your source of facts and truths are empirically unquestionable? Two people can never agree on anything if they don't agree on what the standard of truth is. And with Covid, there is SO MUCH speculation, forecasting, dissenting insights that it is extremely fair to say that nobody has the exact facts. Relying on the WHO as a standard is by many accounts, ridiculous. They are so embroiled in corruption it is not even funny. That's not to say that all their data is inaccurate, but their models have been way off-base.

There is ample science and expert testimony from plenty of epidemiologists that contradict the sources you cite. The fact that some prefer their credibility is a matter of discernment. Choose your facts as you wish. But your argument is met with conflicting evidence by other "experts" with careers of achievement and field certifications. Things I doubt you hold in epidemiology.

Hi Cal, not interested in responding to my or others' earlier posts? It's interesting trying to have a discussion with someone about something scientific who doesn't understand how percentages are calculated. Math is, after all, the basis of science.

You can argue that science is somehow "biased" or "political" in defence of someone posting libertarian ideology that comports with how you feel. A few wackjob epidemiologists -- by consensus, they are wackjobs -- making claims about "herd immunity" and the damages to children that conveniently dovetails with a libertarian think tank's economic prescriptions for dealing with this pandemic versus the vast majority of epedimiologists and the heads of their agencies? I will take the consensus over a projected 2-6 million dead.

I'll admit to a bias. I prefer science dealing with issues relating to things such as epidemiology, not political organizations. But hey, you do you, guy.

Stay safe.

[goodtryer]

False dichotomy: not wearing a mask and infecting others is impinging on others' right to breathe uncontaminated air.

False assertion: right to breathe uncontaminated air

False assertion: right to a life free from disease

Neither of those assertions is in the constitution.

Your precious mask wouldn't be acceptable in a high school woodshop as protection. How can you possibly believe it is useful against a virus?
But, again, wear 10 of them, and stay 50 feet away from everybody... it's up to you. That's the nice thing about being a free man.

Fauci has flipped and flopped as many times on this issue as the CDC has. He has been debunked. But you're free to believe him if you want. Nobody stopping you...

My face & my space are up to me.

[carnivorous chicken]

False dichotomy: not wearing a mask and infecting others is impinging on others' right to breathe uncontaminated air.

False assertion: right to breathe uncontaminated air

False assertion: right to a life free from disease

Neither of those assertions is in the constitution.

Your precious mask wouldn't be acceptable in a high school woodshop as protection. How can you possibly believe it is useful against a virus?
But, again, wear 10 of them, and stay 50 feet away from everybody... it's up to you. That's the nice thing about being a free man.

Fauci has flipped and flopped as many times on this issue as the CDC has. He has been debunked. But you're free to believe him if you want. Nobody stopping you...

My face & my space are up to me.

The right to life is indeed enshrined in the Constitution.

Nobody is going to convince you that science is real and masks are an effective deterent to the spread of Covid, which has been empirically proven.

Many in the United States and throughout the world marvel at the American reaction to wearing masks. The inability to link that to the spread of a deadly disease, the desire to demand one's perceived right to "freedom" from the tyranny of mask wearing, the inability to acknowledge that wearing a mask is a small price to pay to save hundreds of thousands of lives, the forcefull assertion of one's "rights" over one's responsibilities to his or her fellow citizens has the world scratching their collective heads and wondering, "How could Americans be so selfish and ignorant of science? How is one of the world's most developed countries among the worst in controlling the pandemic?" Is wearing a mask so inconvenient that it's worth risking killing others? It makes these people look like, to borrow a term, "whining snowflakes." The slipperly slope arguments ("Next they'll be coming for my ____________") are equally ridiculous.

Despite the protests, some 92 percent of Americans wear a mask when they go ouside of their house, and a vast majority of Americans are in favor of using them.

But hey, "freedom." 

[calj737]

Hi Cal, not interested in responding to my or others' earlier posts? It's interesting trying to have a discussion with someone about something scientific who doesn't understand how percentages are calculated. Math is, after all, the basis of science.

I did respond to your comments. And yes, I made a typographic error by omitting the (0.07) to lead the % symbol.

There's little point in discussing anything with you as you are now, and always have rejected dissenting views due to your version of the facts you believe.

And I did also respond at length to Wilbur because he is someone I know personally and respect immensely.

[goodtryer]

Funny how it's a "perceived right to freedom" now. A couple or replies ago you were (incorrectly) quoting to Constitution.

Quit moving the goalposts...

[scottly]

My face & my space are up to me.

When you are out in a public place, it is not YOUR space, so please keep your unmasked face out of OUR space.
The virus is spreading at a rapid pace throughout the US, as well as the rest of the world, and simply wearing masks could reduce the spread by 50% or more. (That means one half for the mathematically challenged. )

[Don R]

 The Hospital taking the covid patients here is now full. Full. No one has the right to potentially expose another.  The folks that won't protect themselves or others have caused this and we are all affected regardless of politics. The virus does not care or discriminate, it will infect any host it can.

[carnivorous chicken]

I gotta be honest, and I apologize for ruffling your feathers guys, but you mask and science deniers clamoring about your "rights" simply sound, after 9 months of a devastating pandemic that has killed over one-quarter million people, like petulant little kids. It's funny and kind of sad at the same time.

[calj737]

When you are out in a public place, it is not YOUR space, so please keep your unmasked face out of OUR space.

Nor is it yours to dictate how others conduct themselves. So please keep your masked face inside your dwelling where you can dictate your rules to all whom enter. (You might research the meaning of public if you are grammatically challenged).

The virus is spreading at a rapid pace throughout the US, as well as the rest of the world, and simply wearing masks could reduce the spread by 50% or more. (That means one half for the mathematically challenged. )

Detection is occurring at a greater rate due to more testing. That is not proof the spread is occurring at a higher rate now then it was 6 months ago. It may well be the same now as it was then.

[goodtryer]

I didn’t claim the right to “potentially expose another.” 

But since we’re claiming rights not to...

I claim the right to not potentially be exposed to false claims of authority over me.

Made up statistics don’t prove anything no matter what you call it, 50%, half, or anything else.

Impose all the restrictions you want on yourself. More power to you.

Just leave others out of it. If your mask works, wear it.

[madmtnmotors]

Land of the free... unless that guy over there wants to impose his will highly infectious disease on you.

FTFY

[scottly]

Wearing masks has nothing to do with rights or freedom. You shouldn't have to be told or forced to do it, you should do it out of respect for your fellow man.

[goodtryer]

I hope the guy waits until I’m seated safely at a restaurant. I understand the virus can’t get you when you’re eating. Also it can get you at church but not a riot mostly peaceful demonstration.

I respect my fellow man. I’ve gone so far as to not infect any of them. Nor have I imposed any false authority on them.

[jgger]

So 92% of people are wearing masks and covid is approaching the highest levels so far? That tells me one of two things 1. Either the masks don't do much or
2. Somebody isn't being very accurate in reporting the numbers.

I highly doubt that 8% of the people are causing all these cases. But I'm a carpenter, not a "scientist ".

[madmtnmotors]

So 92% of people are wearing masks and covid is approaching the highest levels so far? That tells me one of two things 1. Either the masks don't do much or
2. Somebody isn't being very accurate in reporting the numbers.

I highly doubt that 8% of the people are causing all these cases. But I'm a carpenter, not a "scientist ".

Where are you getting these statistics? My experience in retail establishments around here put the numbers opposite of what you are spouting. About 8% are masked up while 92% are wandering around like there's nothing going on. Makes me want to wretch. THAT should help keep people back! 

Sad state of affairs...