Bad News Thread

Grace T. said:
What’s more interesting is that people in stay at home order states were just as likely to test positive after a birthday than those without. It points to one of the reasons the us lockdowns were ineffective: they didn’t/couldn’t control against these types of informal gatherings.
Click to expand...
I don’t see why you phrase it as a government centric angle rather than an individual responsibility angle. We are the ones who held the indoor gatherings, not NIH.

This is more of a time to look back and say “I personally should not have done that.”. It is sadly dependent to say, “That was a bad idea. Why didn’t the government stop me?”
 
Grace T. said:
What’s more interesting is that people in stay at home order states were just as likely to test positive after a birthday than those without. It points to one of the reasons the us lockdowns were ineffective: they didn’t/couldn’t control against these types of informal gatherings.
Click to expand...

That's pretty twisted logic.

Let's see -- we don't need stop signs because people will still run them. We don't need fireworks bans because people will find a way to get them anyway. The offside rules in soccer should be eliminated because people are still offside in every game.

Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera,

Please continue.
 
dad4 said:
I don’t see why you phrase it as a government centric angle rather than an individual responsibility angle. We are the ones who held the indoor gatherings, not NIH.

This is more of a time to look back and say “I personally should not have done that.”. It is sadly dependent to say, “That was a bad idea. Why didn’t the government stop me?”
Click to expand...
Daddy said don’t but we did anyways and got sick! It’s daddy’s fault!
 
espola said:
That's pretty twisted logic.

Let's see -- we don't need stop signs because people will still run them. We don't need fireworks bans because people will find a way to get them anyway. The offside rules in soccer should be eliminated because people are still offside in every game.

Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera,

Please continue.
Click to expand...
People still bring guns into gun free zones so why bother.
 
dad4 said:
I don’t see why you phrase it as a government centric angle rather than an individual responsibility angle. We are the ones who held the indoor gatherings, not NIH.

This is more of a time to look back and say “I personally should not have done that.”. It is sadly dependent to say, “That was a bad idea. Why didn’t the government stop me?”
Click to expand...

That's the difference in our philosophies. I approach policy knowing people sometimes are devils and will fail. You approach it hoping that people will be angels. When that fails, as it inevitably must, you get frustrated and fall back on authoritarianism. That's also why you are doing religion, instead of policy, preaching for folks to be better.
 
espola said:
That's pretty twisted logic.

Let's see -- we don't need stop signs because people will still run them. We don't need fireworks bans because people will find a way to get them anyway. The offside rules in soccer should be eliminated because people are still offside in every game.

Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera,

Please continue.
Click to expand...

The only thing you have demonstrated with your comment is a stunning misunderstanding of the intent and function of the offside rule.
 
Desert Hound said:
"Emerging data suggest people infected with the Delta variant - the variant behind most of Australia's current cases and highly prevalent around the world - are experiencing symptoms different to those we commonly associated with COVID earlier in the pandemic."

--

"While we still have more to learn about the Delta variant, this emerging data is important because it shows us that what we might think of as just a mild winter cold - a runny nose and a sore throat - could be a case of COVID-19."

--

www.sciencealert.com

Early Reports on Delta Variant Symptoms Indicate They Are Different From Normal

We've been living in a COVID world for more than 18 months now.
www.sciencealert.com www.sciencealert.com
Click to expand...
Maybe, just maybe, we're looking at the Delta strain the wrong way. If the symptoms are mild, maybe its the best way to self "vaccinate" the healthy that have yet to be vaccinated and to close the loop on herd immunity. It's still in the best interest of the vulnerable to get vaccinated.
 
watfly said:
Maybe, just maybe, we're looking at the Delta strain the wrong way. If the symptoms are mild, maybe its the best way to self "vaccinate" the healthy that have yet to be vaccinated and to close the loop on herd immunity. It's still in the best interest of the vulnerable to get vaccinated.
Click to expand...

Immunity from both natural and vaccines is imperfect, giving the virus hosts to mutate in. You'd have to blow it out and blow it out quickly by deliberately trying to infect people (worldwide including in places which don't have enough vaccine) so as to give the virus less time to mutate (though mutations are a function of both time and host count, so you are still giving it umpteen different times to mutate away from existing immunity...would be more feasible if we had achieved a threshold in global vaccinations).

More than likely, it's here to stay (at least for several years to come) as life will find away and it has enough time and hosts to further mutate before vaccination is deployed worldwide. We haven't even managed to eradicate polio (there's yet another push announced 4 weeks ago to eradicate it by 2026....difficult though when it hides in places like Afghanistan and Pakistan where governments have little functional control). It's going to be a bad cold....and yes it will kill people...many of the same people flu or adenovirus or rsv would have killed.
 
Grace T. said:
Immunity from both natural and vaccines is imperfect, giving the virus hosts to mutate in. You'd have to blow it out and blow it out quickly by deliberately trying to infect people (worldwide including in places which don't have enough vaccine) so as to give the virus less time to mutate (though mutations are a function of both time and host count, so you are still giving it umpteen different times to mutate away from existing immunity...would be more feasible if we had achieved a threshold in global vaccinations).

More than likely, it's here to stay (at least for several years to come) as life will find away and it has enough time and hosts to further mutate before vaccination is deployed worldwide. We haven't even managed to eradicate polio (there's yet another push announced 4 weeks ago to eradicate it by 2026....difficult though when it hides in places like Afghanistan and Pakistan where governments have little functional control). It's going to be a bad cold....and yes it will kill people...many of the same people flu or adenovirus or rsv would have killed.
Click to expand...
I have no doubts that Covid is going to linger in some form our another for a while, which only gives more fodder to the eradication proponents who continue to push for restrictions. Despite the fact it's likely on par or less harmful than the seasonal flu at this point and points in the future.
 
Grace T. said:
That's the difference in our philosophies. I approach policy knowing people sometimes are devils and will fail. You approach it hoping that people will be angels. When that fails, as it inevitably must, you get frustrated and fall back on authoritarianism. That's also why you are doing religion, instead of policy, preaching for folks to be better.
Click to expand...
Interesting pivot away from the core question of personal responsibility. You’re still looking to make it government centric. What should the government do to make me behave?

They gave you information. That ought to have been enough. It is our responsibility as rational adult human beings to use it.

The paper is simply evidence that the high case rates were, at least in part, the result of private gatherings that we chose to hold.
 
dad4 said:
Interesting pivot away from the core question of personal responsibility. You’re still looking to make it government centric. What should the government do to make me behave?

They gave you information. That ought to have been enough. It is our responsibility as rational adult human beings to use it.

The paper is simply evidence that the high case rates were, at least in part, the result of private gatherings that we chose to hold.
Click to expand...
What are governments doing to fight the global obesity pandemic?

I think Grace’s point is well within the scope of the core question as it appears when we shut down all options people will inherently find a way to be around other people, it’s in our nature.
 
Kicker4Life said:
What are governments doing to fight the global obesity pandemic?

I think Grace’s point is well within the scope of the core question as it appears when we shut down all options people will inherently find a way to be around other people, it’s in our nature.
Click to expand...
American's are typically social, independent, self reliant, risk tolerant and solution oriented creatures. Our MO has always been to address crises head on instead of hiding. Rightly or wrongly, lockdowns are antithetical to this mentality. We should have leveraged creativity and not fear.
 
watfly said:
American's are typically social, independent, self reliant, risk tolerant and solution oriented creatures. Our MO has always been to address crises head on instead of hiding. Rightly or wrongly, lockdowns are antithetical to this mentality. We should have leveraged creativity and not fear.
Click to expand...

Nonsense.
 
dad4 said:
Interesting pivot away from the core question of personal responsibility. You’re still looking to make it government centric. What should the government do to make me behave?

They gave you information. That ought to have been enough. It is our responsibility as rational adult human beings to use it.

The paper is simply evidence that the high case rates were, at least in part, the result of private gatherings that we chose to hold.
Click to expand...

Back in the 1920s it would have been great if the govt had told people about the abuse and dangers of alcohol instead of trying to prohibit it outright. You are the preacher preaching prohibition in this scenario. When your prescription fails, you then run to the govt to enforce your prescription based on the failings of your fellow humans. I don't care about preaching. I care about policy and the impact those decisions. The thing you've primary shown to me is that if the govt shuts down dining and other indoor business, people will gather indoors privately. Also they are more likely to let go of a meal with a coworker than telling jr. to skip their birthday this year (the same probably goes for Thanksgiving and Christmas). That leaves you with a choice: enforce roadblocks and bans on private gatherings, or recognizes NPIS such as shutting down dining (indoor or outdoor) or outdoor activities might be counterproductive.
 
Grace T. said:
Back in the 1920s it would have been great if the govt had told people about the abuse and dangers of alcohol instead of trying to prohibit it outright. You are the preacher preaching prohibition in this scenario. When your prescription fails, you then run to the govt to enforce your prescription based on the failings of your fellow humans. I don't care about preaching. I care about policy and the impact those decisions. The thing you've primary shown to me is that if the govt shuts down dining and other indoor business, people will gather indoors privately. Also they are more likely to let go of a meal with a coworker than telling jr. to skip their birthday this year (the same probably goes for Thanksgiving and Christmas). That leaves you with a choice: enforce roadblocks and bans on private gatherings, or recognizes NPIS such as shutting down dining (indoor or outdoor) or outdoor activities might be counterproductive.
Click to expand...
Yet another pivot. I understand you would rather talk about Prohibition than talk about personal responsibility for disease transmission.

But the study wasn’t about prohibition. It wasn’t even about government policies of any kind.

The study was a simple demonstration that our individual decisions to hold birthday parties were a significant factor in the spread of coronavirus around our communities.

Think of it as a counterexample to Watfly’s claim that Americans inherently step up to a challenge and address crises. This was a case where, when faced with evidence of a crisis, we did exactly the thing which causes it to get worse.
 
dad4 said:
we did exactly the thing which causes it to get worse
Click to expand...
People are social.

Unless you physically lock people up, they are going to socialize. That is the point @Grace T. and others are making. The prohibitions on biz, gatherings simply moved people from those areas to other areas (private gatherings).

Then when you factor in a significant portion of our population still has to go into work, there is no chance to stop the spread of the virus.

If you live on an island and shut off all outside travel, yes, temporarily you can stop the spread. As soon as you open your borders (Aus/NZ) you will seen the virus re-appear.
 
dad4 said:
Yet another pivot. I understand you would rather talk about Prohibition than talk about personal responsibility for disease transmission.

But the study wasn’t about prohibition. It wasn’t even about government policies of any kind.

The study was a simple demonstration that our individual decisions to hold birthday parties were a significant factor in the spread of coronavirus around our communities.

Think of it as a counterexample to Watfly’s claim that Americans inherently step up to a challenge and address crises. This was a case where, when faced with evidence of a crisis, we did exactly the thing which causes it to get worse.
Click to expand...

Wow are a total math guy when you cant even distinguish a pivot and an analogy.

My point is I'm interested in policy. You are preaching...demanding people be "just better". "when faced with evidence of a crisis, we did exactly the thing which causes it to get worse." So what do you want to do about it? Preach and hope people get better? o.k.....but I think your comment about watfly illustrates you don't think they will. So what then????

BTW....this is why I'm a member of a left-leaning church yet lean right when it comes to policy prescriptions and politics....there's no contradiction....it's the job of religion to help us become better people....but when government does it it generally duffs the policy because government involves using force.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top