....and by the way, if an alligator is chasing you and all you have is an umbrella I would bet money that opening it and swing at the gator would help rather than hurt; even your insults are not thought out sir, just poor on all fronts..........
....and by the way, if an alligator is chasing you and all you have is an umbrella I would bet money that opening it and swing at the gator would help rather than hurt; even your insults are not thought out sir, just poor on all fronts..........
I agree.
Telling people to just "be careful" hasn't worked. The one thing we know that has worked is doing those other things combined with stay at home orders.[/quote]
Again, this is something we do not know and have no proof works. You are just lying...again. No matter how much you repeat it, it does not make it true. It is just an assumption which is too generalized and unsubstantiated by science to be declared "the only thing we know works".
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
It's your reasoning that is weak. You say some places that did not shut down had small death totals. That's like saying that umbrellas prevent alligator bites. I have an umbrella and I've never been bitten, so that proves it's true.
Quarantines work. This is basic epidemiology with plenty of data to back it up.
Again there is no evidence that quarantine of healthy people works.
Of course there is. About five minutes of Googling uncovers many studies that show quarantine of healthy people works and has specifically worked in the case of COVID-19.
I'll let you Google it yourself since that will be more convincing than me spoon-feeding it to you. If you tell me you have tried and failed to find the evidence I will know you are lying because it's really, really easy to find.
Fat hurts wrote:
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Again there is no evidence that quarantine of healthy people works.
Of course there is. About five minutes of Googling uncovers many studies that show quarantine of healthy people works and has specifically worked in the case of COVID-19.
I'll let you Google it yourself since that will be more convincing than me spoon-feeding it to you. If you tell me you have tried and failed to find the evidence I will know you are lying because it's really, really easy to find.
Opinions pieces in the news and non-reviewed blog analyses is not scientific data. Again, you just keep lying because you can't actually find much to support what you are saying.
Of course there is. About five minutes of Googling uncovers many studies that show quarantine of healthy people works and has specifically worked in the case of COVID-19.
I'll let you Google it yourself since that will be more convincing than me spoon-feeding it to you. If you tell me you have tried and failed to find the evidence I will know you are lying because it's really, really easy to find.[/quote]
Well, this is not a peer reviewed anything, but your google search did turn up this; just basic observation of the basic data; but you can keep deluding yourself into believing a Dogma that does not exist; no matter how much you throw your bible at people it does not change what has happened around the world;
I don't really get the argument here. Sweden and its neighbors like Norway are the perfect examples. Homogenous populations, and you see that Sweden had substantially higher deaths ( have seen 10x per capita) after forgoing a lockdown. Both are in similar boats now, but one suffered much more as far as deaths, strain on the medical system etc. Economically, the benefits were marginal if at all as consumers change behavior when there is a pandemic around them.
Shutting down the country is not where it at; good testing and targeted containment measures work. Proper analogy, don't build a dollhouse with a sledge hammer. It does not work.
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
It's your reasoning that is weak. You say some places that did not shut down had small death totals. That's like saying that umbrellas prevent alligator bites. I have an umbrella and I've never been bitten, so that proves it's true.
Quarantines work. This is basic epidemiology with plenty of data to back it up.
Again there is no evidence that quarantine of healthy people works. Of course quarantine of sick people works, that is well proven. There is no substantial evidence that quarantine of healthy people is effective; you are just making things up and calling names rather than provide evidence; if it was so obvious there would be evidence. Show it. Quite the contrary, many nations that did not lock down did not have major problems, some like North Korea and Singpore faired very well, among others. In the USA almost all of the states with limited lock downs or no full state closure faired far better than states that implemented rigid lock downs and restrictions; the relationship may not be associated with not locking, but for certain there is no evidence that lock downs improved things. Just because you say it is obvious does not make it true; that is just you lying because you have no evidence to support your argument. Most likely, the primary issues is crowding and confinement; regions with high pop densities in the US did far worse. What is the impact of confining everyone is such place to their crowded apartment buildings, losing most healthy behavior; is it possible that this actually exacerbated the issue; who knows, we need data, and same goes for your claim that lock downs work; ther is no data suggesting they do, just assumptions and catchy zingers mean to insult anyone questioning your claim.
there's more than one way to skin a cat, right?
My understanding is that in Japan and SK everyone wears a mask. Everyone. And that was enough to stop the virus. NYCers are all wearing masks right now and they have no virus either.
In the UK and USA the freedumb caucus refuses to wear masks. So that strategy won't work here. Here we'll have to shut down or suffer until the vaccine comes - we're not capable of any other solutions.
Fat hurts wrote:
Terraplane wrote:
like mask mandates, social distancing, etc., stay at home orders only work if they are enforced Or a large # adhere to them. the problem is like with the other advice people didn’t adhere to stay at home orders. Protests and people just ignoring them. We cant put all our eggs in one basket with stay aT home orders. I think it’s good to advise on all fronts that can help not just one
I agree.
Telling people to just "be careful" hasn't worked. The one thing we know that has worked is doing those other things combined with stay at home orders.
? but haven’t those things helped? Wouldn’t it be best to say do those things and stay at home if they all help? It loOks like you just say stay at home only will work???
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
Of course there is. About five minutes of Googling uncovers many studies that show quarantine of healthy people works and has specifically worked in the case of COVID-19.
I'll let you Google it yourself since that will be more convincing than me spoon-feeding it to you. If you tell me you have tried and failed to find the evidence I will know you are lying because it's really, really easy to find.
Opinions pieces in the news and non-reviewed blog analyses is not scientific data. Again, you just keep lying because you can't actually find much to support what you are saying.
I didn't say opinion pieces. I said studies. That's scientific studies. Keep Googling.
agip wrote:
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Again there is no evidence that quarantine of healthy people works. Of course quarantine of sick people works, that is well proven. There is no substantial evidence that quarantine of healthy people is effective; you are just making things up and calling names rather than provide evidence; if it was so obvious there would be evidence. Show it. Quite the contrary, many nations that did not lock down did not have major problems, some like North Korea and Singpore faired very well, among others. In the USA almost all of the states with limited lock downs or no full state closure faired far better than states that implemented rigid lock downs and restrictions; the relationship may not be associated with not locking, but for certain there is no evidence that lock downs improved things. Just because you say it is obvious does not make it true; that is just you lying because you have no evidence to support your argument. Most likely, the primary issues is crowding and confinement; regions with high pop densities in the US did far worse. What is the impact of confining everyone is such place to their crowded apartment buildings, losing most healthy behavior; is it possible that this actually exacerbated the issue; who knows, we need data, and same goes for your claim that lock downs work; ther is no data suggesting they do, just assumptions and catchy zingers mean to insult anyone questioning your claim.
there's more than one way to skin a cat, right?
My understanding is that in Japan and SK everyone wears a mask. Everyone. And that was enough to stop the virus. NYCers are all wearing masks right now and they have no virus either.
In the UK and USA the freedumb caucus refuses to wear masks. So that strategy won't work here. Here we'll have to shut down or suffer until the vaccine comes - we're not capable of any other solutions.
people here didn’t adhere to shutdowns either. Protests, marches against shutdowns, no enforcing. Same peoPle won’t wear masks, social distance, etc. suffer or enforce All recommendations.
Terraplane wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
I agree.
Telling people to just "be careful" hasn't worked. The one thing we know that has worked is doing those other things combined with stay at home orders.
? but haven’t those things helped? Wouldn’t it be best to say do those things and stay at home if they all help? It loOks like you just say stay at home only will work???
I'm saying that stay at home orders are the only thing we know of that works. Yes you should do those other things, but if you don't start by getting the case numbers down with stay at home orders then you are doomed to fail.
agip wrote:
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Again there is no evidence that quarantine of healthy people works. Of course quarantine of sick people works, that is well proven. There is no substantial evidence that quarantine of healthy people is effective; you are just making things up and calling names rather than provide evidence; if it was so obvious there would be evidence. Show it. Quite the contrary, many nations that did not lock down did not have major problems, some like North Korea and Singpore faired very well, among others. In the USA almost all of the states with limited lock downs or no full state closure faired far better than states that implemented rigid lock downs and restrictions; the relationship may not be associated with not locking, but for certain there is no evidence that lock downs improved things. Just because you say it is obvious does not make it true; that is just you lying because you have no evidence to support your argument. Most likely, the primary issues is crowding and confinement; regions with high pop densities in the US did far worse. What is the impact of confining everyone is such place to their crowded apartment buildings, losing most healthy behavior; is it possible that this actually exacerbated the issue; who knows, we need data, and same goes for your claim that lock downs work; ther is no data suggesting they do, just assumptions and catchy zingers mean to insult anyone questioning your claim.
there's more than one way to skin a cat, right?
My understanding is that in Japan and SK everyone wears a mask. Everyone. And that was enough to stop the virus. NYCers are all wearing masks right now and they have no virus either.
In the UK and USA the freedumb caucus refuses to wear masks. So that strategy won't work here. Here we'll have to shut down or suffer until the vaccine comes - we're not capable of any other solutions.
I agree for the most part. But Japan, SK, and NYC have also used lockdowns as part of their strategy. If cases are already under control, you don't need to lock down so much.
(And do your point, Japan was able to make their lockdowns voluntary. Yea, that could never work in our culture.)
THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:
I don't really get the argument here. Sweden and its neighbors like Norway are the perfect examples. Homogenous populations, and you see that Sweden had substantially higher deaths ( have seen 10x per capita) after forgoing a lockdown. Both are in similar boats now, but one suffered much more as far as deaths, strain on the medical system etc. Economically, the benefits were marginal if at all as consumers change behavior when there is a pandemic around them.
Sweden and Norway or nowhere near homologous populations; Sweden is much more diverse and has a much more open immigration policy. Compare Sweden to Europe and you see doing little did not fare much worse. Compare South Korea or Taiwan or other nations that did not lock down. In reality Denmark and Norway did not fully lockdown the nation; non essential public sector workers were sent home and businesses were encourage to have workers work at home; schools closed for a bit, but Denmark sent their kids back to school right after Easter and have seen no problems; they were actually one of the first nations to start easing restrictions they had put into place while a full lockdown of everything was never really a thing, just a lot of smart and brief targeted measures. Another example is Hungary, who only locked down for 12 days and has a DPC of ~60 over Denmark's 100 and NYC's 2700 and full lockdown Belgium's ~800. So, your comparison is terrible at best, disingenuous at worst. I can keeping giving you examples be you have your new bible and nobody cna change your mind.
Fat hurts wrote:
Terraplane wrote:
? but haven’t those things helped? Wouldn’t it be best to say do those things and stay at home if they all help? It loOks like you just say stay at home only will work???
I'm saying that stay at home orders are the only thing we know of that works. Yes you should do those other things, but if you don't start by getting the case numbers down with stay at home orders then you are doomed to fail.
Evidence or still just your opinion?
Fat hurts wrote:
agip wrote:
there's more than one way to skin a cat, right?
My understanding is that in Japan and SK everyone wears a mask. Everyone. And that was enough to stop the virus. NYCers are all wearing masks right now and they have no virus either.
In the UK and USA the freedumb caucus refuses to wear masks. So that strategy won't work here. Here we'll have to shut down or suffer until the vaccine comes - we're not capable of any other solutions.
I agree for the most part. But Japan, SK, and NYC have also used lockdowns as part of their strategy. If cases are already under control, you don't need to lock down so much.
(And do your point, Japan was able to make their lockdowns voluntary. Yea, that could never work in our culture.)
one of my favorite questions from all is just this: If NYC had not shut down but had 100% mask compliance from day one...what would the result have been? (sure, shut down bars and restaurants because they are the worst)
My gut tells that the result would have been pretty good but that's a guess without any science attached.
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
There is no substantial evidence that quarantine of healthy people is effective; you are just making things up and calling names rather than provide evidence; if it was so obvious there would be evidence. Show it.
You're looking for proof that a person needs to be exposed to a pathogen to become infected?
I'm just trying to understand how much of late 1800s medicine needs to be reviewed on this thread to satisfy your obviously good faith attempt to understand the matter.
Monkeys typing wrote:
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
There is no substantial evidence that quarantine of healthy people is effective; you are just making things up and calling names rather than provide evidence; if it was so obvious there would be evidence. Show it.
You're looking for proof that a person needs to be exposed to a pathogen to become infected?
I'm just trying to understand how much of late 1800s medicine needs to be reviewed on this thread to satisfy your obviously good faith attempt to understand the matter.
I think it's a valid question on the tradeoffs of locking down healthy people in dense urban cores.
In an apartment building with 50 small units...is it better to be indoors all day rebreathing air exhaled by virus carriers or better to get out into the fresh air where the virus is diluted?
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
I'm saying that stay at home orders are the only thing we know of that works. Yes you should do those other things, but if you don't start by getting the case numbers down with stay at home orders then you are doomed to fail.
Evidence or still just your opinion?
Both.
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
I agree.
Telling people to just "be careful" hasn't worked. The one thing we know that has worked is doing those other things combined with stay at home orders.
Again, this is something we do not know and have no proof works. You are just lying...again. No matter how much you repeat it, it does not make it true. It is just an assumption which is too generalized and unsubstantiated by science to be declared "the only thing we know works".[/quote]
The only thing we can say with near certainty that when the establishment engages in a massive, ever present, 24/7 campaign of fear aimed at the public they are lying. No doubt.