[MacNNFamous]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Oh wait — you weren't just floating this thought for discussion, but actually BELIEVE that SARS-CoV-2 was engineered and purposely distributed to eliminate a portion of the population?

And that the SIXTY-TWO strains we've had so far were all just to let the uneducated survivors believe they're invincible, so that the NEXT one (#63? #65?) that they release will kill of the uneducated, easily replaced unskilled workers?

As well as a billion others worldwide who may be educated but just not have access to proper healthcare?

yeah…that checks out.

Nah, I'm not 100% sold on it, but if it happens, imma post "i told you so" before the internet goes down

[Spheric Harlot]

Until then, just be aware that the material you're spreading is of Nazi origin.

[MacNNFamous]

Nah, it's my own creation based off from what I stated earlier.

[Laminar]

https://dalecarnegiewaynj.com/2011/0...as-their-idea/

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by MacNNFamous 

Nah, it's my own creation based off from what I stated earlier.

Yeah. You "DiD yOuR oWn ResUrcH!", came to your own conclusions, and invented your very own story to match them.

Which, amazingly, also 100% matches Nazi lore and Q-Anon content.

And it really doesn't matter whether you know that "hyper billionaire George Soros type, with cheat mode bank accounts" is Nazi code for "Jewish banker".

[Spheric Harlot]

Sorry, just bursting back in here after Laminar's blatant and plump troll.

I obviously know exactly know why YOU are bothering to engage, again and again, Lam.

[Laminar]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcis...ality_disorder

Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a personality disorder characterized by a life-long pattern of exaggerated feelings of self-importance, an excessive need for admiration, a diminished ability or unwillingness to empathize with others' feelings, and interpersonally exploitative behavior.

[subego]

“[A]ssociated with significant distress”.

This is the important part.

[Laminar]

For someone who complains about strawmanning...

[MacNNFamous]

Can't you weave nazis in there somehow?

[Spheric Harlot]

You already did by spreading literal Nazi propaganda as your own.

Beyond that, everything else I wrote is literally what you said.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by MacNNFamous 

Man like everyone is sooooo smart and contrarian around here.

Have you ever noticed you're unable to find a reasonable middle ground? When people disagree with you or point out actual history behind some of the ideas you're putting forward, the only response you have is to get super defensive, go on the attack, and start trying to mock people? Why not have a conversation? Why not take a step back and consider viewpoints of people that have had different life experiences than you? Why instantly play victim?

[subego]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Why not have a conversation? Why not take a step back and consider viewpoints of people that have had different life experiences than you? Why instantly play victim?

The answer…

Originally Posted by subego 

“[A]ssociated with significant distress”.

[MacNNFamous]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

You already did by spreading literal Nazi propaganda as your own.

Beyond that, everything else I wrote is literally what you said.

What if you're the nazi, spreading propaganda and weaving nazis into things when they aren't mentioned to promote your nazi viewpoints?

[MacNNFamous]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Have you ever noticed you're unable to find a reasonable middle ground? When people disagree with you or point out actual history behind some of the ideas you're putting forward, the only response you have is to get super defensive, go on the attack, and start trying to mock people? Why not have a conversation? Why not take a step back and consider viewpoints of people that have had different life experiences than you? Why instantly play victim?

I think associating things that might be true with nazism would be a good way for people to dismiss them without thinking critically about them.

[Laminar]

Eugenics is back on the menu, boys!

[MacNNFamous]

Sounds like something a nazi would know about.

[Spheric Harlot]

I’m sure some might.

Most of them just regurgitate stuff that they’ve read/been told, that seems plausible to them.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

If facts are subject to opinion, they aren't facts.

"Covid is over" is an opinion.

4000 deaths a week is a fact.

Where is this figure from? What population is it referring to?

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by subego 

Where is this figure from? What population is it referring to?

According to the NYT Covid tracker, 442 people died of Covid on 12 February. Multiplying by 7 to get a rough estimate for deaths in a week gives me about 3,100 deaths a week in the US. However, going back one week, the numbers were higher. The NYT tracker doesn't show the number of deaths per day as you mouse over the graph, but John Hopkins' Covid tracker does. A week earlier the numbers were a bit higher in the 500–600 deaths per day region, and if you multiply those numbers by 7 you arrive at roughly 4,000 deaths.

So the number seems to be correct, taking into account the time when Rob first mentioned the number and assuming he doesn't check weekly death tolls daily.

[Spheric Harlot]

There are various portals where that figure can be confirmed or debunked.

The point is that it is verifiable.

The fact that somebody may define things differently, may have access to incomplete data, or simply be lying does not mean that a particular number isn’t either true or false.

Whether that number is reducible any further by reasonable countermeasures or whether it’s the best it’s gonna get, and thus the fight against Covid can be deemed „over“ or not, and which countermeasures may be reasonable, are matters of opinion.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

There are various portals where that figure can be confirmed or debunked.

The point is that it is verifiable.

I get your point, which is why I tried to bolster your argument by pointing to sources. Rob's claim that 4,000 people died from Covid within a week in the US is accurate.

And I completely agree with the rest of your post. My intention was to shift the discussion from what is factually accurate to unfounded conspiracy theories.

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Whether that number is reducible any further by reasonable countermeasures or whether it’s the best it’s gonna get, and thus the fight against Covid can be deemed „over“ or not, and which countermeasures may be reasonable, are matters of opinion.

Not only that, it depends very much on things like vaccination status. In the initial phase, vaccines were not widely available. I had to wait for several months, my wife even longer (because her OBGYN recommneded Pfizer/Biontech, which wasn't as available in Japan as Moderna). You also have the transition from a pandemic to an endemic, etc. Like you wrote, this is a legitimate discussion to have.

Conspiracy theories, though, are a different matter.

The evolution of SarS-CoV2 variants seems to follow what experts have predicted now that they have had time to study it and follow its pattern.

[Spheric Harlot]

Yes, I was replying to subego, but after you ninja'ed, I decided not to bother editing, since we were reinforcing each other's standpoints.

[subego]

@Spheric and Oreo

We can agree to disagree, but I do not consider “rough estimate” to be freely interchangeable with “fact”.

The former is defined as inherently only approaching fact, and what constitutes close enough is a matter of opinion.

[subego]

To rephrase my original point, what people claim are facts, such as the number of US COVID deaths per week, often do in fact (heh) have one or more inferences involved in their construction.

[MacNNFamous]

It's been 3000ish for almost a year. Was higher a week or two ago, around 4000.

But "it's over".

Meanwhile we went to war for years because 3000 people died in a terrorist attack. Now the blue team and red team say "well we've tried nothing and we're out of ideas, get fucked, back to work peasants" and ask us to ignore Sept 11th happening 52 times a year.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by subego 

@Spheric and Oreo

We can agree to disagree, but I do not consider “rough estimate” to be freely interchangeable with “fact”.

Except that it wasn’t a rough estimate. I think at the time of the post, it was very close to the actual number as reported by two very reputable Covid trackers. The only slight caveat is that because a few days before the post, Covid deaths decreased from 500–600 per day to 430~450ish per day, the numbers from a few days before the post would be slightly higher (about 4,000) than the latest numbers before the post. I wouldn’t count that as a mistake or even an inaccuracy. It’s not as if Rob quoted the numbers from the November peak or so.

Originally Posted by subego 

To rephrase my original point, what people claim are facts, such as the number of US COVID deaths per week, often do in fact (heh) have one or more inferences involved in their construction.

So what? That’s true of pretty much all information we use nowadays, most quantities are at least in part inferred. That doesn’t make them less useful or wrong.

Originally Posted by subego 

The former is defined as inherently only approaching fact, and what constitutes close enough is a matter of opinion.

I think you are focussing on something really esoteric and ultimately the least important point of the discussion. I’m not saying that to dismiss your point, but I think it can easily become a weakness when you argue with others.

Originally Posted by MacNNFamous 

But "it's over".

At this stage, this requires a more nuanced discussion. If we stick to 450 deaths per day for the sake of argument, that is about 3x the rate of flu deaths in the 2017/2018 season (52,000 deaths in total corresponds to about 143 deaths per day). Covid is entering/has entered the endemic stage (which is a gradient, not black-and-white), and needs to be treated differently. The evolution of Covid will likely follow that of the flu. And the question is what we should do about it at this stage where vaccines are commonly available to anyone who wants them.

Ideally, society should be more open to people wearing masks to protect others, especially when they feel sick or something is going around. (That’s something I’ll continue doing.) I also don’t mind wearings masks on public transportation, planes and trains. However, I don’t think the same measures are justifiable as during the height of the pandemic. Where to place the balance is something society at large needs to agree on. That consensus looks very different in Japan (where I live) than in the Netherlands or the US.

Originally Posted by MacNNFamous 

Meanwhile we went to war for years because 3000 people died in a terrorist attack. Now the blue team and red team say "well we've tried nothing and we're out of ideas, get fucked, back to work peasants" and ask us to ignore Sept 11th happening 52 times a year.

I think you are making things too easy: it wasn’t politicians pushing people, it was people pushing politicians. Governor DeSantis did something very popular when he “resisted” stricter Covid measures and I think it did put a lot of pressure on Democratic governors to loosen restrictions at the time. People want the pandemic to be over, something they need no longer worry about.

FWIW I find the difference in reaction to 9/11 very paradoxical, too. I guess it is easy if you loudly claim to want to do stuff to feel strong without feeling any sacrifice.

[subego]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

So what?

The so what is a claim requiring inference isn’t fact.

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

I think you are focussing on something really esoteric

Apologies for allowing my contemplation of the nature of truth to get in the way of the shitposting. Carry on.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by subego 

The so what is a claim requiring inference isn’t fact.

You're mixing up things. Drawing upon several sources to glean a better overview of the situation doesn't change the facts: The numbers are the numbers. Their uncertainties are known and quantifiable.

Reported COVID deaths aren't a "rough estimate". There *are* rough estimates of the ACTUAL number of deaths from COVID, which of course are higher than the reported number, and THOSE are to some extent matters of opinion.

"Accidents while DUI" are a concrete number. The fact that not all accidents may have been CAUSED by the driver — or even have been avoidable if sober — may not be accounted for. Nor the fact that a number of accidents happen under the influence where no alcohol or drug blood testing sample was taken. That number is still a fact.

What CONCLUSIONS you draw from it are largely matter of opinion and depend upon how well you understand what the number represents and which preconceptions you're trying to support with them. And that includes misrepresenting what the number actually describes, or in which context it is placed.

[MacNNFamous]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Except that it wasn’t a rough estimate. I think at the time of the post, it was very close to the actual number as reported by two very reputable Covid trackers. The only slight caveat is that because a few days before the post, Covid deaths decreased from 500–600 per day to 430~450ish per day, the numbers from a few days before the post would be slightly higher (about 4,000) than the latest numbers before the post. I wouldn’t count that as a mistake or even an inaccuracy. It’s not as if Rob quoted the numbers from the November peak or so.

Apparently you didn't get the memo, you're supposed to nitpick and argue in an attempt to prove literally everything I say is wrong somehow, because they have tiny fucking dicks and want to feel good about themselves.

[Laminar]

So weird to see you whine and play the victim. Usually you're so confident and self-assured.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

"Accidents while DUI" are a concrete number. The fact that not all accidents may have been CAUSED by the driver — or even have been avoidable if sober — may not be accounted for. Nor the fact that a number of accidents happen under the influence where no alcohol or drug blood testing sample was taken. That number is still a fact.

The number of “[recorded] accidents while DUI” is a fact. The qualifiers in the claim are instrumental to its factuality.

Should the claim “4000 deaths a week” be given additional qualifiers, such as “the NYT reported approximately 4000 US COVID deaths during the week in question”… okay, that’s a fact.

Likewise, just like whether DUI caused an accident or was merely present, COVID causing a death and someone with COVID dying does not have a bright line drawn between them. We can determine as fact the number of people in a given population over a given time who died while testing positive for COVID. Every qualifier I put in there is necessary for this to be a fact. To say that population died of COVID at the least requires a consistent metric to determine whether COVID was the cause of death. We don’t have that in the US because metrics are not determined federally, but by individual state health departments. Even if we had a federal metric, the number can only be considered fact if we add the qualification of what metric is being used.

Facts are slippery.

[andi*pandi]

Like superbowl grass.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

Like superbowl grass.

[MacNNFamous]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

So weird to see you whine and play the victim. Usually you're so confident and self-assured.

AcTuaLLy ThaT is OnLy RouGhLy TruE But WithOut ReaL Metric I NeeD to PoiNt Out ThAts Not AlwaYs 100% TruE thEreFORREEeee I am SmaRt And CorReCt

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by MacNNFamous 

Apparently you didn't get the memo, you're supposed to nitpick and argue in an attempt to prove literally everything I say is wrong somehow, because they have tiny fucking dicks and want to feel good about themselves.

Somebody agrees with you, and you still can't help yourself and have to play the asshole with tiny-dick energy?

I'm not surprised.

Small Penises and Fast Cars: Evidence for a Psychological Link

[MacNNFamous]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Somebody agrees with you, and you still can't help yourself and have to play the asshole with tiny-dick energy?

I'm not surprised.

Small Penises and Fast Cars: Evidence for a Psychological Link

WoWwW You ArE So SmaRT HoLy MoLy So SMaRT Big BRaIN

And yeah I guess I'm an outlier as my dick is like 95th percentile. I didn't know this growing up but I'm at 8" or so.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by subego 

The number of “[recorded] accidents while DUI” is a fact. The qualifiers in the claim are instrumental to its factuality.

That’s no more or less a fact than Covid deaths. You have edge cases, inconsistent and incomplete reporting, etc. Whether qualifiers matter depends on the context. I don’t think they matter at all here.

Originally Posted by subego 

Should the claim “4000 deaths a week” be given additional qualifiers, such as “the NYT reported approximately 4000 US COVID deaths during the week in question”… okay, that’s a fact.

I don’t think it is wise or feasible to insist on scientific standards in a regular discussion. The less scientific we are — and none of us are experts — the more leeway we should have in our discussion, provided we stay on solid factual grounds. This was clearly the case here.

Originally Posted by subego 

Likewise, just like whether DUI caused an accident or was merely present, COVID causing a death and someone with COVID dying does not have a bright line drawn between them. We can determine as fact the number of people in a given population over a given time who died while testing positive for COVID.

We cannot even determine those “as a fact”. Especially early in the pandemic there was quite a bit of discussion how e. g. reporting, false positives and negatives, time lag between infection and testing positive, and other factors (“fewer” cases on weekends and false spikes on Mondays) influence the numbers and their scientific analysis. The dichotomy you explore in your post is a chimera when it comes to any broadly collected statistical data.

Originally Posted by subego 

Every qualifier I put in there is necessary for this to be a fact. To say that population died of COVID at the least requires a consistent metric to determine whether COVID was the cause of death. We don’t have that in the US because metrics are not determined federally, but by individual state health departments. Even if we had a federal metric, the number can only be considered fact if we add the qualification of what metric is being used.

These things matter a great deal if we were experts in a room discussing how to improve Covid statistics and the like. I don’t think it matters one iota for the present discussion.

Originally Posted by subego 

Facts are slippery.

Facts are not slippery at all. Facts come with context, and whether that context is relevant for a discussion clearly depends.

[subego]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

That’s no more or less a fact than Covid deaths. You have edge cases, inconsistent and incomplete reporting, etc. Whether qualifiers matter depends on the context. I don’t think they matter at all here.

The requirements to be included in the count are the authorities filed an accident report wherein one or more drivers meet the legal definition of DUI.

Give me an example of an edge case, or inconsistent and/or incomplete reporting altering the count.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by subego 

The requirements to be included in the count are the authorities filed an accident report wherein one or more drivers meet the legal definition of DUI.

Give me an example of an edge case, or inconsistent and/or incomplete reporting altering the count.

What if the cops notice one of their friends is drunk and simply don’t administer a breathalyzer or a blood test after an accident? Or a county forgets to report a DUI (without malice)?

Look, let’s not get side tracked. All statistics come with systematic errors and require detailed look by experts.

[ghporter]

I've (finally) moved the labor/training related posts to THIS THREAD.

Please keep ANYTHING not directly related to COVID-19 out of THIS thread. And keep the contentiousness adult and courteous discussion about how certain crafts/trades/occupations are or are not easily replaceable in the new thread.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by MacNNFamous 

WoWwW You ArE So SmaRT HoLy MoLy So SMaRT Big BRaIN

And yeah I guess I'm an outlier as my dick is like 95th percentile. I didn't know this growing up but I'm at 8" or so.

🍆

[reader50]

Originally Posted by MacNNFamous 

AcTuaLLy ThaT is OnLy RouGhLy TruE But WithOut ReaL Metric I NeeD to PoiNt Out ThAts Not AlwaYs 100% TruE thEreFORREEeee I am SmaRt And CorReCt

-> "AT LLTT OLRGL TEB WORL MIND P NOT ANAY 100% TEE FOR REEIS RAC RC"

You're not doing it right. Cryptograms are supposed to spell something afterwards.

[subego]

Had to go to the ER (as a visitor). Masks were not required. They were in the ICU tho.

[MacNNFamous]

GFs oncology departemnt is fighting to make masks required because their entire wing is immunocompromised and vulnerable. But politics gonna politic and we have to pretend everything is fine.

WHO says we are still losing 1500-2000 people to covid a WEEK, but once the emergency care acts ends all of this information will no longer be available to the general public, so things could spike out of control and get bad and until the hospitals start failing we won't be made aware of it.

https://covid19.who.int/region/amro/country/us

Scroll down and go to the horizontal graph that shows deaths per week.

[subego]

Oncology here is on the list.

[subego]

The full list was ICU, oncology, and anything with babies involved.

[ghporter]

For what it’s worth, whenever we had an immune compromised patient, EVERYBODY had to wear masks in the patient room. This was the rule from when I started in 2013…

The term “reverse isolation” is used to describe the situation. Everybody other than the patient was responsible for masking (and often gowning and gloving) to (isn’t this kinda the point?) PROTECT THE PATIENT.

For these folks, it isn’t about COVID, it’s about EVERYTHING. And even with COVID being “less of a threat” than it was (insert your own milestone here), everything else is still a major problem to someone whose bone marrow has either died or been turned against them by cancer.

[subego]

Originally Posted by subego 

Had to go to the ER (as a visitor). Masks were not required. They were in the ICU tho.

Guess who just tested positive.


Edit: I’m currently asymptomatic, so here’s hoping it’s NBD.

[Laminar]

Why'd you test? Preemptive before seeing someone? Known exposure? Hope everything stays asymptomatic.