-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Mask Efficacy |OT| Wuhan!! Got You All In Check
- Thread starter keraj37
- Start date
- Status
Euclid's Bendy Water
Banned
The bit in bold would be relevant should the police not be selective in there handling of all protests taking place during this plandemic. Maybe it's the police that are the super spreaders through all this seeing as they are no respecters of social distancing or proper mask wearing as seen in footage of anti lockdown protests. If they had just adhered to there stance at the BLM protests and just took a knee the virus would have just passed through unopposed and we would have far less 'cases' to deal with.
Mobile Suit Gooch
Grundle: The Awakening
Low info voters and that MSM indoctrination.
Blond
Banned
Took no time at all to certify you as a troll. Now make it entertaining.
Sis really needs to buy some shorts that fit that figure.
EDIT: lmaooooo that sashay at the end as he’s walking away reminded me of Ru Paul’s supermodel video.
Last edited:
Joe T.
Member
That's a strawman as far as I'm concerned and I'm one of the biggest critics against those numbers.
This has been explained ad nauseam, (most of) the numbers are real and are missing important context that changes the story entirely. That is fraud, using a fact to tell a lie like counting a cancer hospitalization/death as a covid case which then goes on to create justification for counterproductive measures that produce a lot more problems. This pandemic is built on such deceptions, it's really a house of cards.
Context is important, the mainstream narrative intentionally avoids giving it to you. Ask yourself why.
Focus on the PCR tests, they bring the entire house down. Dig into them yourself - their origin, how they work, how their results are interpreted - because the problem you're describing, an unwillingness to believe facts, definitely applies to those that trot out case counters and then act offended when context is added. They're doing so hoping you're too lazy to educate yourself, don't give them that satisfaction.
Magenta Mage
Banned
Can you elaborate on this? Like are you saying these tests are inflating numbers to paint an inaccurate picture of what is going on? Because from what I'm seeing a false negative is far more likely than a false positive. What is it about PCR tests in particular that "brings the house down?"
FunkMiller
Gold Member
What he said.
diffusionx
Gold Member
PCR tests just determine the presence of some viral matter in a binary way. It does it by amplifying the viruses in the sample by a certain number of times, called cycles. The tests they are doing are doing a level of cycles that is far too high if you're looking for clinical infections.
If you test positive it doesn't mean you are actually sick with COVID, or have an infection, or are contagious, or spreading the illness everywhere, or anything, just you have some virus particles in your nose. This article says that up to 90% of positive tests are not useful.
Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be. (Published 2020)
The usual diagnostic tests may simply be too sensitive and too slow to contain the spread of the virus.
Last edited:
Magenta Mage
Banned
Okay, thanks for sharing this. But I guess I don't really understand what it means in practice or how this "brings the house down" like Joe T said. From reading about the PCR tests it seems like a false positive is basically impossible. So a positive test means you have some degree of viral material in your system. And you don't know how much. So isn't it safer at that point to say if you test positive you should quarantine? Is the argument that we are asking far more people to quarantine or contact tracing far more people than is really necessary?PCR tests just determine the presence of some viral matter in a binary way. It does it by amplifying the viruses in the sample by a certain number of times, called cycles. The tests they are doing are doing a level of cycles that is far too high if you're looking for clinical infections.
If you test positive it doesn't mean you are actually sick with COVID, or have an infection, or are contagious, or spreading the illness everywhere, or anything, just you have some virus particles in your nose. This article says that up to 90% of positive tests are not useful.
Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be. (Published 2020)
The usual diagnostic tests may simply be too sensitive and too slow to contain the spread of the virus.www.nytimes.com
I guess I just question how this is a good indicator of how serious or not serious the spread of the virus and its effects are. Like for example, looking at local information here, my state has 5% of ICU beds available at the moment. In a typical year it would be something like 30-40% available at this time of year. How is that explained other than a lot more people are getting sick than usual? And if that's the case, isn't it worth taking it seriously? Those aren't nebulous positive test results that may be from people with almost no viral material in their system. That's people that are measurably sick and in a hospital bed.
Joe T.
Member
Conflating the technical definition of a false positive with true positive results that should in no way be reported as infectious cases is what adds to this convoluted mess and gets people tangled up in arguments. Forget the technical definition of false positives/negatives for a minute, what I'm referring to is the fact that these PCR tests are being amplified at 30, 35 even up to 45 cycles. They aren't looking for live virus or even viral load, they're simply amplifying your sample in search of a tiny fragment of the viral genome and report the result in binary positive/negative form, so completely asymptomatic/healthy people are being counted as infectious cases.
To use PCR tests to detect viral load and whether or not you're infectious many scientists have said it should be under 25 cycles, the data they've presented to make that case is sound and lines up with their opinion. Even then there still needs to be a confirmation process to ensure that test result is correct and you are indeed infectious. What governments/labs are doing is incredibly liberal reporting, simply shoveling money at the companies producing these tests without any interest in finding true positive cases. That's a crime 9+ months into this "pandemic" - I use quotes because I genuinely believe this virus no longer deserves that label, if it ever did. Everything is exaggerated to a ridiculous degree.
Magenta Mage
Banned
Okay, to reiterate what I said in my response above to diffusionx, it seems that regardless of how many cycles, a positive test unequivocally indicates that some level of viral material was present in your test. (Assuming I understand that NYT article correctly.) And without knowing the cycle count, you don't know exactly how much. You don't know if you're very infectious or if the test miraculously found the single viral particle you had in your body. So again, is it just that we're asking way more people to quarantine than we need to? Shouldn't we be better safe than sorry?
Last edited:
diffusionx
Gold Member
Well I disagree because a few virus particles is not a positive indication of anything except a few virus particles In your nose. It’s not an infection and it’s not symptomatic or asymptomatic. Our noses and skin and mouth is full of bacteria and viruses that are not going to infect us and make us sick, every moment of our lives. If anything this seems like a testing regime designed to generate false positives really, without getting conspiratorial.
If quarantines were cost free then sure maybe it’s better to be on the safe side. ItsThe key thing here is that you’re saying people who are not sick not contagious not infectious that they need to lock themselves up in their homes for 2 weeks - this strikes me as insane quite frankly. Not to mention that the government then tells everyone they came into contact with that they need to do the same thing.
then the government comes out and says well we have millions of people who are not sick not contagious not infectious so we need to close businesses and force people into poverty. You can’t go to the gym and the gym is going to go bankrupt because we have millions of healthy people walking around basically.
and yes it’s true hospitals are strained, but over and over, this happens in bad flu seasons all the time. It’s actually super common. Here’s an article from the ancient days of January 2018. My question is why didn’t hospitals spend all year building up additional capacity when they knew that this season was coming.
Hospitals overwhelmed by mass influx of flu patients - UPI.com
Hospitals and medical centers across the United States are scrambling to treat a mass influx of flu patients.
www.upi.com
Even if in terms of capacity this looks like a “super flu” type season (also of note that apparently flu has disappeared this year?) the question is why didn’t these hospitals go into the fall with more capacity.
Last edited:
Joe T.
Member
You're not being safe at all, you're destroying lives and the economy, literally throwing people with serious issues and in need of urgent care under the bus in order to keep this pandemic alive. Why? The "cure shouldn't be worse than the disease," except it is.
There are news stories of hospitals being at high capacity almost everywhere over the last decade, look hard enough and chances are you'll find some for your area. The US is a bit of an outlier because it's done unbelievable amounts of testing that put even India to shame, a country with a far higher population. If India was testing at the same rate and incentivizing covid hospital stays/ventilators the same way the US was there isn't a doubt in my mind their numbers would be far higher.
There are a lot of countries, Canada among them, that are enduring masks, distancing and business closures without having excess deaths beyond the annual expectations. The mainstream news is sensationalized, governments are trapped in a hole, few willing to admit they made mistakes because going against the narrative requires weathering the brutal beatdown from the media which unfortunately influences public opinion even when its lies are easily debunked.
Johns Hopkins recently released an opinion that got quickly deleted (censorship is widespread right now) stating some hard facts, among them that the US had around 1.7 million deaths between mid-March and mid-September. Those five missing months of the year need to add another 1.2 million deaths simply to reach the expect annual death count which it will undoubtedly do and likely exceed. The question is how much will it exceed the 2.9M figure? Chances are those excess deaths will make up a far smaller portion than the total number of deaths attributed to covid and will instead be pointing to the excess deaths caused because of the panic-driven response to this virus.
Magenta Mage
Banned
Okay but the problem seems to be that like I said, there is some degree of viral material present in your system. You don't know if it's a lot or a little. So is it just that you think we should adjust the cycle count threshold? In seems in reading more about this some people are in favor of lowering it to 35 instead of 40. But there are other things I'm reading that say cycle count isn't really something doctors feel like they can rely on as an accurate measure of how serious or infectious a case is. People with a cycle count above 30 still die, for instance.
I guess I just don't see the tyranny of asking people to play it safe and stay home if actual viral material was found in their system. Like it's annoying to have to wear a mask, but if there's a chance it could help me not get sick, or help someone else not get sick, I don't really see the harm in it.
BigBooper
Member
There's always been a chance wearing a mask would prevent you or someone else getting sick during flu season. Did you wear one before? You were able to make the judgement call yourself. That's why people are mad. They aren't mad at the mask; they are mad at the mandate.
Last edited:
diffusionx
Gold Member
Like I said we carry around potentially harmful bacteria and virus on our bodies. Every single moment. In our nose, skin, mouth, ear, eye duct, butt, genitals, everything. It’s extremely normal. Basically this point of view is pathologizing our bodies (similar to how we pathologized breathing) and I cannot support that. It also might have the problem that it is basically telling people who already got the ro that they got it again when in reality they might have exposure but their body fought it off as it is designed to do.
IMO run the PCR test if someone is showing symptoms to get a better idea if it is COVID or something else. If somebody goes to the doctor or hospital with a fever, cough, trouble breathing, and they ding on the PCR, good chance it is COVID. That is fine and it is useful because it can help with the course of treatment. I suspect that’s also what countries like Japan and South Korea are doing. On the other hand, telling totally healthy people they need to go take this overly sensitive PCR test to tell them yes or no on a question PCR isn’t really answering, with the consequence of total shutdown of their lives and society overall, is totally crazy.
Last edited:
Magenta Mage
Banned
No, I haven't worn a mask in previous flu seasons. But it's just honestly not something I ever considered before. Now that I know more information about how effective masks can be at preventing the spread of disease, it's probably a good idea that more people wear them during flu season every year. Fewer deaths from the flu seems like a good thing to me.
Magenta Mage
Banned
Sure but this isn't really the case is it? Like I don't see any recommendation that says "go get a test" unless there is a reason to. Unless you have symptoms or you've been possibly exposed. Earlier this year I was around someone who tested positive and I called our local hotline to ask about a test and they told me the safest thing to do is just to self-quarantine for 14 days and that I didn't even need to go get a test unless I developed symptoms. This seems to be in line with the current national recommendations. (Again, I'm only speaking about the US because that's where I'm from. Can't speak for the rest of the world because I don't keep up with it much.)
Last edited:
diffusionx
Gold Member
Here where I live, we get propaganda about getting tests constantly all the time, even if we don’t have symptoms. I see the commercials on Hulu and stuff constantly now. Maybe it is a local thing, it strikes me as insane. I bet there are lots of Karens here getting tests weekly and shit.
Magenta Mage
Banned
Yeah I agree that it seems weird to tell people to go get tested if they don't have any reason to. Here they are just saying "if you think you have it, call the hotline" the hotline asks you a few questions and tells you what you should do. And for me, even with possible exposure, they said don't get tested. And that's in a fairly big US city.
bigsnack
Member
They also had that “nasty cold” in December of 2019, but refuse to believe the chance that it may have been been C19. They are convinced if you get sick with this you will certainly be on the edge of death. There’s no convincing them otherwise.
DragoonKain
Neighbours from Hell
Covid Survivors With Long-Term Symptoms Need Urgent Attention, Experts Say (Published 2020)
In a two-day meeting sponsored by the N.I.H., officials acknowledged an insufficient understanding of the issues and warned of a growing public health problem.
this is the stuff that scares me. Especially the Hannah Davis example.
I worry about this stuff more than the acute symptoms.
this is why the vaccine is important.
Last edited:
Joe T.
Member
Covid Survivors With Long-Term Symptoms Need Urgent Attention, Experts Say (Published 2020)
In a two-day meeting sponsored by the N.I.H., officials acknowledged an insufficient understanding of the issues and warned of a growing public health problem.www.nytimes.com
this is the stuff that scares me. Especially the Hannah Davis example.
I worry about this stuff more than the acute symptoms.
this is why the vaccine is important.
"Experts say" in the headline always sets off alarm bells, it's become a common propaganda tactic to legitimize everything said in the story before you've actually read anything. The story itself and the experts within don't cite any scientific studies. Taking an untested vaccine rushed to market for a complete unknown is a terrible idea - you become a guinea pig.
DragoonKain
Neighbours from Hell
Did you read the article?
cryptoadam
Banned
China claims they tested Millions starting on Nov 23
www.ctvnews.ca
Since then their case count has been 80 one day 90 the next, back to 80, maybe 100. Baiscally averaging about 90 cases a day for the last 11 days.
Anyone really believe that China tests millions and gets 100 positives? Cmon man.
You can have these tests say whatever you want.
China tests millions after coronavirus flare-ups in 3 cities
Chinese authorities are testing millions of people, imposing lockdowns and shutting down schools after multiple locally transmitted coronavirus cases were discovered in three cities across the country last week.
www.ctvnews.ca
Since then their case count has been 80 one day 90 the next, back to 80, maybe 100. Baiscally averaging about 90 cases a day for the last 11 days.
Anyone really believe that China tests millions and gets 100 positives? Cmon man.
You can have these tests say whatever you want.
Joe T.
Member
It's how I know there isn't any scientific study cited to suggest covid is responsible for any of the anecdotal evidence they bring up.
DragoonKain
Neighbours from Hell
That doesn't mean it isn't true. I trust the patients who are suffering from these issues.
I've been in their shoes. Dealing with medical things that have trouble being diagnosed. I know what it's like to feel helpless.
For now everyone should trust the patients and take these reported side effects very seriously.
You do know that a vaccine for the seasnal flu exists right? I get it every year for free from my employer...
Joe T.
Member
That doesn't mean it's true either and that's the entire point. You're pushing a rushed vaccine - and yes, it does matter when it skips the all-important animal testing phase - for a complete unknown (re: long term effects). That article is hoping you make the inference yourself without them providing solid scientific evidence to make their case. The symptoms described in the anecdotes could be a result of any variety of factors completely unrelated to covid.
Deception is the default position for our mainstream news outlets where this pandemic is concerned.
DragoonKain
Neighbours from Hell
C'mon man. People know their own bodies better than anyone. I highly doubt it's a coincidence all these issues just happen to pop up right after they get COVID. You're playing conspiracy theory just for the sake of it because your mind is fixed on the presumption that this whole thing is overblown as a means of control. Some politicians may be using it for their own gain, but that doesn't mean everyone is lying about it, there's nothing to suggest that.
Read about the vaccine, it wasn't rushed. It was expedited, there's a difference. I read a lot about it and I felt very comfortable with it.
Too many people have reported cognitive issues and neurological issues for it to not be legit. Heart inflammation as well.
Unless it can be disproven with scientific evidence, I think it's important to assume it true going forward. These are serious issues here.
prag16
Banned
Yeah, shit is wack. In Connecticut the standing recommendation from the state is "consider getting tested if you live in an 'orange' or 'red' zone regardless of exposure/symptoms/etc". Right now those designations cover about 90% of the state. My town newsletter every single week urges everyone to go get tested regardless of exposure/symptoms/etc. I don't know any families that get themselves tested weekly, but I know some that have gotten themselves tested several times since March "just in case".
On the other hand one of my best friends got likely COVID from her kid who got it at school. Her kids got over it in less than a day, and she sent them to school the day after that once they had been totally symptom free for over 24 hours. None of them ever got tested. She is pretty sure it was COVID because she had the loss of taste/smell with the body aches and cough. She got over it in under a week. She was working remotely so continued working throughout. Her husband works in-person and he got it too, very mildly, but he powered through and continued working. What she did will be derided as horrible and dangerous by some chicken littles here. But how she handled this is EXACTLY how everyone should handle this shit. And if everyone did, there would be no pandemic.
"The science is clear" dude. Don't be a denier. Trust the science and take your zombie apocalypse vaccine.
Do you trust the parents that watched their babies/toddlers/children digress and deteriorate after routine childhood vaccines, and attribute the issues to the vaccines? No one knows the children better than their parents. However I would assume no, you would not trust them. So fuck off with this. And if you're gonna say "well 'the almighty science' has proven that stuff false" you'd be wrong. They actually know very little about this; they'll make broad statements until the cows come home but when pressed they don't have the goods. Once you go down the rabbit hole it's impossible to unsee what you will see. Just a starting point: https://www.icandecide.org/lawsuits/ and https://www.icandecide.org/white-papers/
Last edited:
diffusionx
Gold Member
I tested once in the summer after I got back from a trip. It was totally bogus, I get the nose swab, they say they'll get the results back to me in 2 weeks, so... after I would be totally recovered from it? So what's the point of the damn test? And sure enough it was like 17 days. Maybe they're better with results now, but it struck me as medical theater.
Last edited:
DragoonKain
Neighbours from Hell
You’re rerouting the conversation. Nothing you said has anything to do with trusting patients who talk about issues they’re dealing with after covid. And you basically just made random assumptions before I even responded, this is not a good way to discuss things.
trust them. And if it’s scientifically disproven, then it is. But until then we need to take these reported effects seriously. This is some nasty shit people are dealing with, this is no joke.
I think all reported effects of anything should be taken seriously.
Joe T.
Member
Throw that conspiracy theory nonsense out the window because there is none of that talk here. That NYT article is filled with out of context anecdotes, the experts within aren't speaking with any authority on this topic because they aren't pointing to any hard evidence that backs it up. It's the same damned scam they're running daily when they report X number of infectious covid "cases" when factually speaking they're simply positive test results, the majority of which aren't infectious at all.
I've read about several of the vaccines. Is there something specific you need me to read that suggests skipping the animal trials isn't a big deal? In Pfizer's case the phase III trial ends two years from now, that makes everyone that accepts it a human guinea pig. That's not hyperbole, just the simple facts of the matter - humans have replaced animals in the testing process.
The onus is on you/them to prove long term symptoms are directly linked to, and common among, those infected with covid before suggesting something as bold as these vaccines as a solution. Asking me to disprove something that may not exist at all is backwards thinking.
Remember all the stories about children and teenagers dying? Remember how many of them were later corrected/retracted? This pandemic is one giant mountain of deception. How anyone still has a high degree of confidence in the public health experts running the show or the mainstream news misleading them day in and day out is beyond me.
DragoonKain
Neighbours from Hell
I never stated this was scientific and 100% proven. All I said is that it's worth taking seriously and it's very concerning. Nor did I demand everyone take the vaccine. Though I think it is the wisest option of the ones available.
A friend of mine got COVID and since he got it he has not been himself. He has trouble focusing and thinking. It's affecting his day to day life.
I believe him that it's COVID related. He knows his own body. But regardless of whether or not it's factually proven to be COVID that caused it, it's still cause enough for me to want to take extreme precaution because I don't want to deal with what he's been dealing with.
I get the feeling that it doesn't matter what is posted. It could be a lengthy study, it could be doctor observations, it could be patient claims. There are a contingent of people who have already decided COVID isn't serious, it's a Democratic/left wing scam, and they're bunkered down on that and won't change no matter what it is. Now I'm not saying that's you or isn't you. But I do know there are people out there to where if there was some type of a lengthy meticulous study out there that proved COVID is responsible for X, Y, and Z, people would simply wave off the legitimacy of the study. That's just the way it is. People are going to be COVID deniers until the end of their days and won't change.
Take/don't take the vaccine, do whatever you want. What people do with their own bodies is none of my business. I'm just trying to provide some articles with some information and people can do what they want with it. But I do care about the people in this community and if these symptoms are legit, I'd really rather they not suffer from cognitive issues that would fuck with their livelihoods. I'm going to continue to post information I find concerning if/when I find it, and it's up to people to decide on what to do with that information and whether or not to believe it. Me? I'm taking the vaccine as soon as it's available to people in my bracket. I think the risks of that vaccine doing anything significantly negative to me are infinitesimal compared to COVID doing something like that to me. If people don't feel the same way, then that's their prerogative.
Last edited:
Joe T.
Member
And I think it needs to be scientifically proven before any action, especially one so bold as a rushed vaccine, is offered as a solution. We could simplify it and end it at that.
I have nothing against you, as difficult as it may be to believe in the midst of such an exchange. I'm attacking the message, not the messenger. I love this forum and the people in in it, even the ones I completely disagree with, but I will fight tooth and nail against the mountain of lies that have made 2020 one of the worst years ever for many of us - it didn't have to be this way.
"If these symptoms are legit..." Again, the problem. That's a big if with an even bigger if offered as a solution. Why on earth go down such a road? What are you going to say when other court cases from around the world back up the Portugal ruling and it becomes crystal clear this pandemic was one giant scam? It will happen, it's only a matter of time, and I suspect that's why these vaccines were rushed. This fraud collapsing before the masses can be vaccinated would entail billions in financial losses. Who would want an experimental vaccine, without proper testing, for a virus that was so greatly exaggerated?
I've made my opinion on the PCR tests loud and clear. Forget masks, distancing, lockdowns and vaccines, show me I'm wrong about those tests because this entire pandemic lives and dies by them. Without elevated numbers and deceptive spin to rely on this pandemic fades away in a hurry. Widespread censorship and the silencing of opposing views is all that's currently holding it in place.
DragoonKain
Neighbours from Hell
I don't have anything against you either. Even if the reported post-COVID symptoms and effects end up being proven to have nothing to do with COVID(which I think is incredibly unlikely given the timing and the amount of them) I still think the vaccine is a far safer option than COVID. I don't agree with calling it a scam. I think there is a chance it has been overblown. But a scam implies the whole thing is made up. People are dying from COVID. A lot of people. I think everyone knows someone or at least knows someone who knows someone who's been severely affected by COVID or even has died.
While you're right we don't know of any long-term issues the vaccine could present, I think it's far far faaaar more likely COVID presents long-term issues for a person than the vaccine does. The chances the vaccine kills anyone are probably about one in a million or even smaller than that, for the simple fact of anything in this world can kill anyone, vaccines by and large are very safe. The risk of COVID killing you is small, but it's not that small. No vaccine I know of has ever been riskier than the actual virus it's used to prevent.
I can promise you this, even if it's absolute best case scenario and it's only for peace of mind, I'd feel way safer worrying about potential future issues from a vaccine than catching COVID, recovering fine and worrying about something to pop up at some point in the future. Just for that alone I'd take the vaccine. But again, that's best case. If you're weighing pros and cons here, I think the pros stack very heavily in favor of the vaccine. There is no upside to contracting COVID. It may not hurt you, but there is no upside in getting it. There is a potential upside with the vaccine.
Cutty Flam
Banned
Are all the reporting about nurses and healthcare workers dropping like flies actually true or sensationalism / fear mongering ????
I haven't looked into this yet, but have heard people talking about this topic. I'm going to read some articles and research a bit tonight and try to find the answer
https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/pr...orkers-have-died-from-covid-19-contracted-job
Apparently 1,700+ nurses have died from Covid-19. How many usually die from the flu on any given year is another question to consider. I'm not denying that Covid-19 is one of the worst viruses we've encountered, but my thoughts are that nurses are right there in the war zone with infected patients and wonder if that number is accurate or inflated...
There are around 3,8 nurses working in the U.S. if Google is accurate btw, so even if that number is 100% true and not inflated, that would mean that the mortality rate among nurses in the U.S. = 0.00044%
3,800,000 / 1,700 = 0.00044736842
You never hear about nurses dying in abundance during flue seasons really. But during this pandemic we are hearing about their deaths. And I just checked, apparently the average age of a nurse working in the united States is 45-59 according to one survey taken, average age of those entering the workforce as a practicing nurse is 30 years old
What does everyone think?
I haven't looked into this yet, but have heard people talking about this topic. I'm going to read some articles and research a bit tonight and try to find the answer
https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/pr...orkers-have-died-from-covid-19-contracted-job
Apparently 1,700+ nurses have died from Covid-19. How many usually die from the flu on any given year is another question to consider. I'm not denying that Covid-19 is one of the worst viruses we've encountered, but my thoughts are that nurses are right there in the war zone with infected patients and wonder if that number is accurate or inflated...
There are around 3,8 nurses working in the U.S. if Google is accurate btw, so even if that number is 100% true and not inflated, that would mean that the mortality rate among nurses in the U.S. = 0.00044%
3,800,000 / 1,700 = 0.00044736842
You never hear about nurses dying in abundance during flue seasons really. But during this pandemic we are hearing about their deaths. And I just checked, apparently the average age of a nurse working in the united States is 45-59 according to one survey taken, average age of those entering the workforce as a practicing nurse is 30 years old
What does everyone think?
Taxexemption
Member
I would believe some died, the ones that died probably had high risk factors. People would genuinely be surprised by how many obese nurses, and doctors there are out there. I remember the first time I saw a doctor that was more than 100 lbs overweight complaining about people not eating their vegetables, it was one of those moments that really made me think.
Magenta Mage
Banned
I appreciate you bringing this up because the idea of how PCR tests work and the cycle count stuff is not something I was aware of despite following the news on COVID all year. But I'm also looking at information on the CDC site says that PCR Ct values can't determine a patient's viral load or how infectious they are, that Ct values of a test can be imperfect due to collection methods, and that Ct values across different tests can't be accurately compared. Is there an element of this I'm missing?
12Goblins
Lil’ Gobbie
I think its just a general sentiment. no need to worry about health care workers particularly; its everybody that will suffer if it gets to that point.
Joe T.
Member
Catching covid gives you the best possible upside: you conquer your fear. As the saying goes, fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the only reason any of this has occurred.
I posted about it earlier in the thread (too lazy to dig it up), but months ago doctors in Italy reported that up to 30% of their hospital patients had no reason to be receiving care, fear is the only reason they were there and since they had the room for it they accommodated them. That's no small number.
Last spring my dad was tested at least four times since developing symptoms and fighting off pneumonia yet I still can't tell you with any certainty if he had it. His tests bounced between negative and positive. Did he have two false positives? Two false negatives? Did he catch the virus weeks/months prior without any symptoms and simply test positive after developing pneumonia? Simple positive/negative results don't tell me much.
No, that's spot on. These tests have no business being used to detect infectious cases. At the very least there should have been a secondary form of testing to cross-reference and ensure a positive result is indeed infectious. That everyone ran with these tests with no attempt to improve the method of testing raised a major red flag to me.
Liverpool was using some lateral flow tests which Pfizer's former VP and chief scientist Michael Yeadon brought up last month, supposedly detecting far fewer positive cases than PCRs do, but I haven't dug into those myself yet and I noticed the propaganda machine was quick to shoot them down.
prag16
Banned
Based on what?
Based on what? Some anecdotes from acquaintances? The COVID "long haulers" don't seem to be a widespread trend. If they were you know we'd be hearing about this phenomenon CONSTANTLY since the media will latch on to anything that will scare the shit out of us. But government sources almost never talk about this. My theory is that the long haulers suffer from something more like PTSD or something else psychosomatic. But who knows. (Not you either.)
You don't know that.
Based on what?
Is there?
And stop with this "I support choice and people can do what they want" act. You're on record in favor of mandatory vaccination (for non COVID stuff at least). You give zero shits about personal choice, health freedom, and bodily autonomy. (There's a small chance I'm thinking of someone else, but I"m about 99.99% sure I'm not, and that you expressed strong support for mandatory vaccination in the past; I apologize if I am wrong on that.)
DragoonKain
Neighbours from Hell
Based on what?
That COVID has killed over a million people worldwide and the vaccine has killed no one. C'mon man, let's not play this game. One is a freaking virus and the other is a vaccine.
Look, if you want to argue COVID is being overblown by people, that's fine, because in some respects depending on the context I think it's true, but if you honestly want to try to tell me it's not logical to say that the vaccine is less dangerous than COVID, then you're not being objective whatsoever and are bunkered down stubbornly in an agenda-driven stance where you can see no more clearly than the people on the other wise whom you object to.
If you can't even budge on a vaccine being less risky than a freaking virus, then there's no hope for legitimate discourse here.
And stop telling me what I think about stuff. You do that a lot and it's annoying and disingenuous. We can't have honest discussion if you keep acting this way. I say what I feel, and I've said before I support mandatory vaccination for civilization ender pandemics. Like a modern day bubonic plague. And I stand by that. So, yes, I do care about personal health and freedoms, but as always the case with anything in life there are always exceptions in extreme circumstances.
Last edited:
prag16
Banned
Maybe not yet.
These vaccines are absolutely unprecedented on every level. Most notably the speed at which they were developed and approved for use, and the technology some of them are based on (mRNA, never approved for humans until now). This is not 'just another vaccine'. This is not the same thing as a measles shot. The truth is you have no idea how much harm the vaccines will do. You say maybe one in a million can be harmed, meanwhile the trials by the three top contenders included less than 100,000 people, half of which got a placebo.
Anyone who rushes out to get one early on (who isn't absolutely forced to for their job/livelihood) who is not in one of the more dire COVID risk groups (elderly and/or 3+ comorbidities), is an ignorant moron. I'm sorry if you think that's "mean" of me to say. But it's true.
I can't stand how the current medical conventional wisdom thinks a million years of evolution has resulted in a completely broken and inadequate product that now, with a mere one hundred years or less of "modern medicine" is somehow going to vastly improve on that product with no drawbacks. The worship of modern medicine really is like a religion. And vaccines are the sacred cow.
- Status