Covid 19 discussion zone

[Huck]

Originally Posted by MyronL

People who use the "F..." word (Freedom) to justify not getting the vaccine are so full of the "S..." word (stupid).

And so are the ones who would use it to try to shame others into getting the vaccine.

[Huck]

Which country has the most cases of Covid-19 and the most deaths? Is that the country we should look to for guidance on how to handle Covid-19?

Or should we look to a country with a high vaccination rate like the UK or Israel? It seems that most modern western countries with their experimental vaccines aren't doing any better than 3rd world countries and in many cases, not as well.

[gordon2]

Originally Posted by Huck

...There is so much conflicting information available, and backed up by scientific studies and scientists, I can argue for or against any position someone decides to take..

The way I see it is that there is very little conflicting information. Experts are by and large in agreement. Actual facts backed up by scientific studies and scientists are very consistent at any particular point in time.

Now its true that the advice is sometimes conflicting. But that just makes sense. 1. Because our understanding of the virus is not static.. its always changing and improving. 2. The virus changes, and so the level of the threat changes. 3. To what extent people go to avoid the virus is always a balancing act.. do we shut down schools where cases are sharply rising and some deaths are have occured, or do we keep them open because students learn and develop better? The most effective way to prevent COVID is for everyone to stay home, not get with 20 feet of anyone else, and wait. But of course that is not possible or desirable in the least. The best way to support the widespread spread of COVID is to ignore it and take no precautions at all. How you view the risk matrix determines what level of actions you will give or accept. Most everyone is somewhere in the middle but that middle spread is pretty darn wide.

So when they said you no longer needed a face covering if you were vaccinated that advice was based on what was known at the time with a consideration to how difficult or uncomfortable the face coverings are. When the Delta variant started taking a heavy toll it was found that the transmissibility was greater, and there was developing evidence of vaccination protection waning sooner than we had hoped. And so the advice changed. That is not a conflict at all. its simply adapting to changing circumstances and adaptation is exactly what is needed.

So thats the way the medical and scientific community works. But when you introduce politics all that gets twisted and distorted. They say that (insert name or organization here) does not know what they are talking about because six months ago they said one thing and now they say something different. And too many people eat that up and use such statements to reinforce their politics or beliefs. And they do that when it makes perfect sense that people and organizations do adapt and change.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by gordon2

The way I see it is that there is very little conflicting information. Experts are by and large in agreement. Actual facts backed up by scientific studies and scientists are very consistent at any particular point in time.

Now its true that the advice is sometimes conflicting. But that just makes sense. 1. Because our understanding of the virus is not static.. its always changing and improving. 2. The virus changes, and so the level of the threat changes. 3. To what extent people go to avoid the virus is always a balancing act.. do we shut down schools where cases are sharply rising and some deaths are have occured, or do we keep them open because students learn and develop better? The most effective way to prevent COVID is for everyone to stay home, not get with 20 feet of anyone else, and wait. But of course that is not possible or desirable in the least. The best way to support the widespread spread of COVID is to ignore it and take no precautions at all. How you view the risk matrix determines what level of actions you will give or accept. Most everyone is somewhere in the middle but that middle spread is pretty darn wide.

So when they said you no longer needed a face covering if you were vaccinated that advice was based on what was known at the time with a consideration to how difficult or uncomfortable the face coverings are. When the Delta variant started taking a heavy toll it was found that the transmissibility was greater, and there was developing evidence of vaccination protection waning sooner than we had hoped. And so the advice changed. That is not a conflict at all. its simply adapting to changing circumstances and adaptation is exactly what is needed.

So thats the way the medical and scientific community works. But when you introduce politics all that gets twisted and distorted. They say that (insert name or organization here) does not know what they are talking about because six months ago they said one thing and now they say something different. And too many people eat that up and use such statements to reinforce their politics or beliefs. And they do that when it makes perfect sense that people and organizations do adapt and change.

So...
Hurry up and follow the current advice before some conflicting new advice comes along, then be prepared to change with the new protocol knowing it too will be bad advice shortly.. right??? UH UH... SPLUNGE!!!


All of this when we have had reliable infectious disease protocols in place for more than a century on which to build a reasonable response.

In the so called "information age" should we just be mushrooms or should we look at all the information and its sources , then make our best decision?


Of course if you can't trust your own judgement seek trusted advice,(like your doctor) but in the mean time why presume to impose your conclusions on others?
Herd immunity should not be dependent on herd instinct.


Did you really think that government officials were following the best science available when they implemented "Duck & Cover"?
Would a credible nuclear scientist have supported that as official protocol?

Not likely, the government was basically just saying...
" Hey we don't have any real solutions so we came up with this!"

[gordon2]

Originally Posted by Huck

It seems that most modern western countries with their experimental vaccines aren't doing any better than 3rd world countries and in many cases, not as well.

I don't know where you get your data. If you want that statement to be believed you should quote some authoritative sources. But thats the rub.. there are very few good sources of data in third world countries. Try comparing COVID numbers between the USA and China To the extent your statement is true, also compare the restrictions on the population. Not too many people in China are refusing to do what the government tells them to do (at least not for long)... even wear masks!

In the US, with 178,000,000 people fully vaccinated and only 1636 serious reactions related to the vaccine, and with about 98% of those hospitalized with COVID being unvaccinated, I think we can say the "experiment" was a success.

Originally Posted by Huck

And so are the ones who would use it to try to shame others into getting the vaccine.

I would not shame anyone into getting the vaccine. I would just point out my statement above.

Originally Posted by floyd

So... Hurry up and follow the current advice before some conflicting new advice comes along, then be prepared change with the new protocol knowing it too will be bad advice shortly???

No, don't follow the more recent advice.. keep smoking your cigarettes and using lead in you paint and gasoline. And get some blood letting from leaches while you're at it. And the past advice was not bad advice at the time it was given but it does get tweaked.

[gordon2]

Originally Posted by floyd

Did you really think that government officials were following the best science available when they implemented "Duck & Cover"?
Would a credible nuclear scientist have supported that as official protocol?

Not likely, the government was basically just saying...
" Hey we don't have any real solutions so we came up with this!"

You make it sound like the government was not doing anything else about the nuclear war threat. Nothing in the military. Nothing with diplomacy. Only telling children to take cover. Perhaps Kennedy was hiding under his desk in the Oval Office.

But in fact "duck and cover" is still the government's advice in an earthquake.. and it seems like good advice when buildings might be crumbling from an earthquake or from a bomb.

COVER your head and neck with your arms to protect yourself from falling debris. If you are in danger from falling objects, and you can move safely,
crawl to a safer place or seek cover (e.g., under a desk or table).

[Glenn Baglo]

Originally Posted by Huck

There is so much conflicting information available, and backed up by scientific studies and scientists, I can argue for or against any position someone decides to take.

You can argue, but the preponderance of data, peer reviewed studies and science says that vaccines are the most effective tool in the battle against Covid 19.

[Huck]

Originally Posted by Glenn Baglo

You can argue, but the preponderance of data, peer reviewed studies and science says that vaccines are the most effective tool in the battle against Covid 19.

Then why is it that modern western countries seem to have the highest rate of cases and death?

[gordon2]

Originally Posted by Huck

Then why is it that modern western countries seem to have the highest rate of cases and death?

F R E E D OM

.
.
.

Actually I question your statement, but if it is right then people doing what they want to do instead of what they should do for the common good has to be high on the list of reasons.

[Glenn Baglo]

Originally Posted by Huck

Then why is it that modern western countries seem to have the highest rate of cases and death?

What is your source for that statement?

[floyd]

Originally Posted by gordon2

F R E E D OM

.
.
.

Actually I question your statement, but if it is right then people doing what they want to do instead of what they should do for the common good has to be high on the list of reasons.

Many folks are doing what they should do and what they want to do, just not (to your apparent aggravation) what they are TOLD to do.

To your point though...
It does seem that competence and self sufficiency is on the wane in America today. However...
Abject fealty does not serve the common good, in fact it diminishes it and is anathema to the true American spirit.


During the '60s there was a great emphasis and many books written on how to raise children. That effort was apparently a great success as we now have multiple millions of "children" approaching middle age.
I always thought the idea was to raise responsible adults?

[floyd]

Originally Posted by gordon2

No, don't follow the more recent advice.. keep smoking your cigarettes and using lead in you paint and gasoline. And get some blood letting from leaches while you're at it. And the past advice was not bad advice at the time it was given but it does get tweaked.

"Tweaking"? From "Smoking is good for you" to "Smoking will kill you"? "Tweaking"?

Smoking was always a vice until the tobacco companies bought some prominent doctors.

The trick is to resist obvious Quackery while it is being practiced and preached, not to wait for a corporate epiphany.
Ever heard of the "Science" of Phrenology?

[Glenn Baglo]

Originally Posted by floyd

It does seem that competence and self sufficiency is on the wane in America today.

I gather you've developed your own vaccine.
Along with your own facts.

[gordon2]

Originally Posted by floyd

Many folks are doing what they should do and what they want to do, just not (to your apparent aggravation) what they are TOLD to do.

You could not be anymore incorrect. I too share concern about government overreach and our diminishing freedoms. In fact after I decoded

"Abject fealty does not serve the common good, in fact it diminishes it and is anathema to the true American psyche"

.. I can say that I agree with that statement.

Originally Posted by floyd

To your point though...
It does seem that competence ... is on the wane in America today. ...

And that is exactly the point I have been trying to make. Too many people are making life and death decisions based not on competent information but instead on politics, different priorities or just plain lack of knowledge. If someone has a logical, researched and educated basis for doing (or not doing) something then I would support that. But when they choose a course of action largely or exclusively because they are more concerned about some (hopefully) temporary restrictions or requirements than about doing the competent thing, that is when I get concerned.

[MyronL]

When Doc Donald suggested why not try a bleach injection for the virus Myron began to get just a little suspicious...

[floyd]

Originally Posted by Glenn Baglo

I gather you've developed your own vaccine.
Along with your own facts.

Thank you so much! Your naive confidence in me, though not well founded, is very flattering, although it could be a bit burdensome.
I caution you to be a bit more skeptical in the future, whether it is your faith in me or some bureaucrat.

I simply advocate as always...
Educate yourself, seek competent advice, then take personal responsibility for your choices.

[floyd]

Originally Posted by gordon2

.
And that is exactly the point I have been trying to make. Too many people are making life and death decisions based not on competent information but instead on politics, .

Absolutely my point as well!
I knew this discussion , if left open, would eventually reach consensus

[tua]

I have been bothered about the people with covid dying after they reach the ICU and put on a ventilator.

Then I saw this video and wonder if this can be a possible reason?


https://rumble.com/vloe0w-dr.-bryan-...rica-tour.html

[floyd]

Originally Posted by tua

I have been bothered about the people with covid dying after they reach the ICU and put on a ventilator.

Then I saw this video and wonder if this can be a possible reason?


https://rumble.com/vloe0w-dr.-bryan-...rica-tour.html

Great example, but...
Do you consider that to be a credible source or more on the line of obvious fearmongering hyperbole?

Listen to it if you choose....but please don't give it any credence without massive and credible corroboration.

This sort of thing obfuscates an already muddy picture and only serves to discredit any legitimate skepticism on a very serious and frightening subject.


I'm reminded of an old SNL skit... "its a floor wax, its a dessert topping, you're both right!!"...Well, not likely.

[Huck]

Originally Posted by Glenn Baglo

What is your source for that statement?

Go to any Covid-19 tracker and see what countries have most cases and most deaths. Poor countries treat Covid-19 with repurposed drugs while western countries wait for new drugs to be approved and provide little early treatment.