cognitive dissonance much wrote:
Also I think the lurking variable of grocery delivery is people who have suppressed immune systems are more likely to get grocery delivery and stay inside in general. They probably don’t go in the sun much, low vitamin D. This further suppressed their immune system and makes them more likely to catch Covid from a delivery guy
Bad Wigins wrote:
Miasma wrote:
Reading this thread raises one’s risk by 17%. Prove me wrong.
How many cycles do I get?
Dogs have been known to carry covid-19, similar to cats and minks. People also walk dogs and take them to dog parks. And a person who has a dog may have multiple dogs. And those dogs may be a fence board away from someone else's dog. Dogs don't social distance. They sniff each other's butts and then lick people's faces.
It would not surprise me at all if there is a significantly unreported surge in canine covid-19 cases or there is an increased risk of covid by owning one.
rojo wrote:
Is it simply a result of a small sample size? Or perhaps it's just an example of correlation doesn't equal causation?
{Shakes head} and closes tab.
Miasma wrote:
Reading this thread raises one’s risk by 17%. Prove me wrong.
Could be. Or, lonely guy walking his dog talks to lonely female dog walker , she goes home with him , and they have sex without masks ?
And more people drown in pools when Nicolas Cage appears in more movies...
LOTM677 wrote:
Could be. Or, lonely guy walking his dog talks to lonely female dog walker , she goes home with him , and they have sex without masks ?
I will be sure not to walk my dog in Spain.
But but but, science. Science denier spotted. Omg.
Rojo has found his level wrote:
The Daily Mail, well done, you raise the tone of your message board consistently.
Great contribution.
It's definitely a case of correlation being touted as causation. I work in a field basically focused on identifying causation and it's amazing how many studies actually don't make any sense once you dive into the results.
For example on the grocery finding - I bet it's harder to get groceries delivered in more rural areas, so those getting groceries delivered are in more urban areas that are more likely to have hotspots and many people nearby. So the correlation makes sense, but it's not causation.
The dog correlation is less obvious to me. I still highly doubt that having the dog is what actually causes someone to catch COVID.
Funny, I own a dog and haven’t caught it. Everyone I know personally who has caught it does not own a dog. Must be a Spanish dog thing.
After this evening's run a small dog was running away from its owner down the alley behind where I live. The dog ran past me and I did not try to stop the mangy mongrel. The owner, a weight -challenged woman, said to me as she was screaming to her dog as ran into the street, "I've have an A%$hole, for a dog." I did not reply to her observation.
I was reminded of the Steve Martin movie The Jerk, but quickly decided that the owner of the dog was likely the one in need of training. Probably making a low estimate, but 50% of people are not qualified to take care of a pet.
Alexi Santana wrote:
It's definitely a case of correlation being touted as causation. I work in a field basically focused on identifying causation and it's amazing how many studies actually don't make any sense once you dive into the results.
For example on the grocery finding - I bet it's harder to get groceries delivered in more rural areas, so those getting groceries delivered are in more urban areas that are more likely to have hotspots and many people nearby. So the correlation makes sense, but it's not causation.
The dog correlation is less obvious to me. I still highly doubt that having the dog is what actually causes someone to catch COVID.
As a certified dog-hater I would love for this to be true, but sample size is tiny.
But regardless, dogs are obnoxious yapping crapping biters. Don’t get a dog.
Bad Wigins wrote:
Miasma wrote:
Reading this thread raises one’s risk by 17%. Prove me wrong.
How many cycles do I get?
What about cats? I'd rate them at half the dogs' s risk, 37%. Cat people don't talk to other cat people.
Now horses are a different story.
peacock poop wrote:
Rojo has found his level wrote:
The Daily Mail, well done, you raise the tone of your message board consistently.
Great contribution.
Awesome thoughts. Now tell us what CNN, Snopes, or Polifact has to say about the truth
