Bad News Thread

Bruddah IZ said:
That's why Dad$'s COVID post are laughable. For me they always have been. He ignored the Scientific history, the bio history, and hyped cases based on the PCR test that was not only flawed but the wrong test for determining real time infections. No wonder our government subsidizes education. The education system teaches what to think. Not How. COVID just made it obvious.
Click to expand...
Says the man who throws around statistics terms, but can’t write a decent explanation of what he means by them.

Do you have a coherent explanation of whatever your point was with R^2 yet?

Should be easy for you. I’m just asking your to clearly explain your own point, in your own words.
 
Bruddah IZ said:
I don't think the experts are ignorant at all. They have a socialist agenda. The masses are dumbed down. You can see it in their actions.
Click to expand...
Maybe some do, but I think it has more to do with arrogance than anything else and living in an academic bubble. An utter failure of understanding how things work outside a lab (aka the real world).
 
Bruddah IZ said:
Of course you can....retroactively. That's why you had no credibility with me from the start.


Retroactive mea culpa.
Click to expand...
If you think I said masks eliminate transmission, find the link and post it. (You won’t find one. The goal is R<1, not R=0)

Better yet, pick up a stats book and try to figure out whatever it was you think you meant by R^2.
 
dad4 said:
You now say you supported an indoor mask mandate. WTF?

Your record is quite clear. You spent 14 months finding different ways to tell people masks are not effective. They don’t help much, look at the Dutch study, masks lose their effectiveness, kids can’t wear them, you can infect yourself by touching them, they don’t help if you don’t wash them enough, and so on. Ten posts saying masks are not effective for every one post voicing half hearted support in limited circumstances.

That is not support. That is a solid drumbeat undermining a basic public health measure.

You say it was a mistake to keep airline running? Just yesterday you mocked me for wanting to close air travel to non-essential travel.

You wanted to have surge closures of indoor dining? Last winter, during the surge, you were advocating for relaxing those rules to get people back to work.

Nothing wrong with changing your opinion, but you don’t get to do it retroactively.
Click to expand...
Saying an indoor mask mandate is different than buying in wholesale to the ridiculous mask mandates in place including outdoor mask mandates and masks for young children and the autistic. And my primary attacks have been to the oversell of masks. If telling folks a lie that masks are better than vaccines is required for support, then no. But yes, I've always thought, and have repeatedly said, an indoor mask mandate is a good idea: I just don't think it does what you think it does.

There's a difference between an airline grounding an non-essential travel. The problem with non-essential travel restrictions is the enforcement given the ubiquity of the car. Gonna put up police road barriers a la "Contagion"? You still haven't said how you'd do it.

My position has been clear all along. I've been right, you've been wrong.
 
dad4 said:
Says the man who throws around statistics terms, but can’t write a decent explanation of what he means by them.

Do you have a coherent explanation of whatever your point was with R^2 yet?

Should be easy for you. I’m just asking your to clearly explain your own point, in your own words.
Click to expand...
Hanapaa!! Unconfirmed COVID deaths were in no way correlated with your caseteria. Feel free to run through your numbers again....retroactively of course. Clarity and coherence is not what you seek. If that were the case, you would not have ignored the opacity of the PCR test. You would not have ignored the long history of respiratory diseases and the absence of tyrannical policies back then. I get that you like cherry picking your data. Funny thing is, it's cherry harvest in Cali. So I expect you to not miss a beat for the next 5 weeks.
 
dad4 said:
It’s on substack. There is a reason Team Virus has to seek support from non-scientific, non-peer reviewed articles.
Click to expand...
We addressed in a prior article why Team Panic and its expert class behaved the way it did, attacking the outsiders who in the end were more right than they were.
 
dad4 said:
If you think I said masks eliminate transmission, find the link and post it. (You won’t find one. The goal is R<1, not R=0)

Better yet, pick up a stats book and try to figure out whatever it was you think you meant by R^2.
Click to expand...
Says the man who throws around statistics terms, but can’t write a decent explanation as to why he excludes relevant historical data and stats.

Do you have a coherent explanation of why you exclude relevant historical data and stats?

I know your socialist agenda makes it hard for you to do so. I’m just asking you to clearly explain why you exclude relevant historical data and stats..
 
watfly said:
It's an articulate opinion piece based on data. Of course, we support it, we've been saying the same thing for months, just not as well said.
Click to expand...
Had we followed your advice last March, what would have happened?

Case growth followed an exponential curve up until about a week after the shutdowns began. (From Feb 01 to March 24 or March 29, 2020). This part is just fact. Look at a log scale graph of case counts.

Back then, you wanted us to believe it was not exponential. Had we followed your advice, case growth would have continued on an exponential path until something else slowed it down. What would that have been, and when would it have happened?

If you are relying on widespread natural immunity to act as the brakes, the slowdown doesn’t really start until you are over 50% seroprevalence. How many deaths would you have had up to that point?

You can estimate it. IFR back then was 0.7%. Our treatments were not very good yet. So, 330M * 0.5 * 0.07 = 1.15M deaths. That is a kind estimate, since it assumes absolutely no degradation in the heath care system. Once you account for that, you get the 2.2 million Imperial College estimate.

Which brings us back to the original point. Those initial restrictions saved us between 0.5 million and 1.5 million deaths, depending on your assumptions about what happens when you run out of health care facilities.
 
doubled said:
Some interesting mask discussion.

swprs.org

Are Face Masks Effective? The Evidence.

An overview of the current evidence regarding the effectiveness of face masks.
swprs.org swprs.org

Also some larger thinking around Covid as a whole.

swprs.org

Facts about Covid

Fully referenced facts about Covid-19.
swprs.org swprs.org
Click to expand...

Yup, if the virus had affected children as badly as old people and the IFR was closer to 3%, we would have seen a lighter version of "Contagion" play out.
 
dad4 said:
Had we followed your advice last March, what would have happened?
Click to expand...
Less unemployment, fewer business closures and better education.

As far as Covid goes, I would have hoped that honesty and common sense would have worked better than fear mongering. I personally believe that following my advice wouldn't have significantly impacted Covid one way or the other. The fact is neither of us have any clue how things could have turned out differently. We can play hypotheticals, speculate and attempt to rewrite history until we're blue in the face. There is no causation, let alone any correlation, between policies and Covid peaks and valley. There is no causation even with outside factors like weather and population density. Theories and speculation yes, compelling evidence no. (with the exception of vaccines)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top