Covid-19 information - some statistics, models, and firsthand sources.

YouTube's become efficient at removing suspicious content regarding COVID, as they removed both the Kern County doctors video and now the Plandemic one. If they keep up the pace, is it worth the effort to critically analyze them here and clutter the thread?

IMO, if you share information here, you should also be responsible for vetting it. Putting in the effort to share it means you also put in the effort to critically analyze it yourself. It's unfair to wash your hands of it and shift the burden of (dis)proof onto others. I don't take pleasure in analyzing the videos, but I do it because I can't stand seeing people deceived into believing dubious claims that aren't backed up with evidence. The more dubious the claim = the more evidence required to back it up. Both the Kern County doctors and Plandemic videos severely lack in evidence, filling up most of their air time with statements of opinion. When you see this, it begs the question: why aren't they providing more evidence? Are there ulterior motives in play? Are they providing you verifiable information, or telling you what you want to hear?

If you dirty up some dishes, you should wash them. Don't leave them in the sink for your roommates to clean up.

I hear what you are saying and yes a lot of the plandemic video is filled with opinions the begs for verifiable proof. 

The parts where Dr Mikovits is describing the raid on her house and her arrest are all true and verified.  Also how her collaborative work on AIDS and XMRV were silenced are true as well.  What she says is true, but I understand that how she says it rubs people the wrong way.  (Kind of like how Smoke points out frequently that I rub people the wrong way with my responses on this forum).  Fauci funding the Wuhan lab through the NIAID is also true and verified.

I have personally witnessed real fear in Doctors that work outside of the standard protocols in treating patients.  Dr Mikovits is one of the exceptions in that she does not show fear in standing up for what she believes is right.  I can fill a page on this forum with information and facts but I also realize that I am not an expert nor the original source.  I will leave at that and if we ever have a chance to meet up and talk, I am more than happy to discuss further.

I see these opposing videos as concerns that the layman has towards those who are now running our lives for us, not with us.  When government steps in and denies citizens of their freedoms, they really need to address with seriousness all concerns.  These videos voice many of them and they should take them one at a time to fully explain why they may or may not have validity.  I'm not a scientist so when my leadership tells me to abandon the very core if what makes life good, they really need to do more that try to baffle me with "science".  I can't see my grand kids.  I can't visit my father in a senior home, who has dementia, can't understand why no one wants to visit him.  His will to live decreases daily and will shorten his life absolutely, as opposed to the risk that it might be shortened if he go this virus.  Sure, to live is important, but quality of life must be part of the equation and right now, letting science call all the shots, with no exit plan that the average citizen can understand is not conducive to a life worth living.  If today's arrangement for isolation were to continue as the futures new normal, I would  struggle with considering if indeed life this way is with it or not.  When every joy and pleasure is denied and the remaining years are few, it is very depressing for seniors and the young children.  Science is totally ignoring that it seems to me.  Rather a quality of life than a quantity.  Risk is something we all deal with and accept in order to live a life worth living. Right now, it's not for many of our elderly. 

The strain is starting to show. 

We need to do the hard math.  There has to be some calculus, some formula, that determines what is better for us - to expose ourselves and others to the virus at some level, or to suffer mental health issues such as depression, increased suicide rates, domestic violence, alcoholism, loss of at risk youth, child abuse, bankruptcy, financial ruin, homelessness, etc.

Plenty of folks are arguing that "saving lives" is the most important thing while assuming that means being singularly focused on saving lives from covid.  Thing is, the world is dynamic, not static, and choosing to lock down and tank the economy to save lives, costs other lives, and yes, costs quality of life.

Is saving a 80 year old nursing home patient worth losing a 25 year old construction worker who commits suicide?  Is saving 5?  10?  It's past time to do the math.

As for the purpose of this thread, the discussion has migrated a little, I guess we could put this in a different thread.  Here's some anecdotal evidence from my circle:

I have filed more domestic violence cases since the pandemic started than I did in the preceding 10 months, and the cases are more extreme.  I had one child abduction, successfully reunited.  It's only my 3rd legit abduction in 17 years of doing this.  I know of another covid death in my circle, the young father of a young athlete, in great shape only 52 years old, beat covid, tested negative after weeks of recovery, went to sleep saturday night and didn't wake up Sunday morning.  Yeah that counts as a covid death, as it rightly should.

I don't have the answers, but we need to ask the questions instead of allowing ourselves to be black dot focused on whatever we are predisposed to focus on.

I see these opposing videos as concerns that the layman has towards those who are now running our lives for us, not with us.  When government steps in and denies citizens of their freedoms, they really need to address with seriousness all concerns.  These videos voice many of them and they should take them one at a time to fully explain why they may or may not have validity.  I'm not a scientist so when my leadership tells me to abandon the very core if what makes life good, they really need to do more that try to baffle me with "science".  I can't see my grand kids.  I can't visit my father in a senior home, who has dementia, can't understand why no one wants to visit him.  His will to live decreases daily and will shorten his life absolutely, as opposed to the risk that it might be shortened if he go this virus.  Sure, to live is important, but quality of life must be part of the equation and right now, letting science call all the shots, with no exit plan that the average citizen can understand is not conducive to a life worth living.  If today's arrangement for isolation were to continue as the futures new normal, I would  struggle with considering if indeed life this way is with it or not.  When every joy and pleasure is denied and the remaining years are few, it is very depressing for seniors and the young children.  Science is totally ignoring that it seems to me.  Rather a quality of life than a quantity.  Risk is something we all deal with and accept in order to live a life worth living. Right now, it's not for many of our elderly.

Really well written, and you make a lot of good points worth considering.  It is a very hard balancing act to handle.  I have been a scientist for 20 years, Ph.D in chemistry, and what I can gather is that if left unchecked, this virus would eventually kill hundreds of millions of people globally - it is that bad.  But it wouldnt be due to the way people are currently dying.  If hospitals got overrun due to too many cases at once, there would be desperation from critically ill non-Covid patients as well as for Covid patients.  Home deaths with suffering would become more commonplace leading to a lot of bad deaths that would have normally been prevented.  Eventually, civilized society would collapse, and we would all resort to eating and killing eachother - in that order!  OK, Im using a bit of hyperbole, but you get my drift.  The current situation and way of life is temporary - cant stress that enough.  The controls we put in place are to ensure we stay ahead of this virus and not lead to situations where the full extent of our healthcare system, technology, and innovation (needed to fight it) are impacted enough to the point where we lose control.  Maybe it is inevitable at this point... it is people we are talking about, not robots. 

We should keep in mind that science and policy are not the same thing. Science is objective information that can be used to inform policy. It’s cold, hard, nuts n bolts information.

As for policies, they bring up a lot of philosophical and moral questions that, unlike science, don’t have a clear “right” or “wrong” answer. For example, would it be ethical to kill one elderly person if it means a million people don’t have to live in poverty? How about ten elderly people? A thousand? Do I place more value in the financial and mental well-being of a healthy 25 year old, or in keeping alive a 50 year old diabetic with respiratory issues? Does it matter to keep that 50 year old diabetic alive if they have to live in poverty?

These are some of the incredibly heavy questions our policy makers are grappling with right now, every day this goes on. They’ll be shouldering all the responsibility for the path they set for us and society. All the money in the world wouldn’t be enough to put me in their shoes right now.

We should keep in mind that science and policy are not the same thing. Science is objective information that can be used to inform policy. It’s cold, hard, nuts n bolts information.

As for policies, they bring up a lot of philosophical and moral questions that, unlike science, don’t have a clear “right” or “wrong” answer. For example, would it be ethical to kill one elderly person if it means a million people don’t have to live in poverty? How about ten elderly people? A thousand? Do I place more value in the financial and mental well-being of a healthy 25 year old, or in keeping alive a 50 year old diabetic with respiratory issues? Does it matter to keep that 50 year old diabetic alive if they have to live in poverty?

These are some of the incredibly heavy questions our policy makers are grappling with right now, every day this goes on. They’ll be shouldering all the responsibility for the path they set for us and society. All the money in the world wouldn’t be enough to put me in their shoes right now.

Exactly.

Hyper focusing on the science may lead to decision paralysis.  Not acting is pretty much the same as acting though, in that time and viruses are going to do what they are going to do. Failing to make a decision is, in practical effect, still making a decision.

Either way people will die and lives will be shattered.

We should keep in mind that science and policy are not the same thing. Science is objective information that can be used to inform policy. It’s cold, hard, nuts n bolts information.

As for policies, they bring up a lot of philosophical and moral questions that, unlike science, don’t have a clear “right” or “wrong” answer. For example, would it be ethical to kill one elderly person if it means a million people don’t have to live in poverty? How about ten elderly people? A thousand? Do I place more value in the financial and mental well-being of a healthy 25 year old, or in keeping alive a 50 year old diabetic with respiratory issues? Does it matter to keep that 50 year old diabetic alive if they have to live in poverty?

These are some of the incredibly heavy questions our policy makers are grappling with right now, every day this goes on. They’ll be shouldering all the responsibility for the path they set for us and society. All the money in the world wouldn’t be enough to put me in their shoes right now.

You should keep in mind that the cold, hard, nuts n bolts of science has very little to do with covid-19 policy. It plays a big part in designing rockets, but not in statistical analysis of a novel corona virus. Remember,  we have liars, damed liars and statistics.

We should keep in mind that science and policy are not the same thing. Science is objective information that can be used to inform policy. It’s cold, hard, nuts n bolts information.

As for policies, they bring up a lot of philosophical and moral questions that, unlike science, don’t have a clear “right” or “wrong” answer. For example, would it be ethical to kill one elderly person if it means a million people don’t have to live in poverty? How about ten elderly people? A thousand? Do I place more value in the financial and mental well-being of a healthy 25 year old, or in keeping alive a 50 year old diabetic with respiratory issues? Does it matter to keep that 50 year old diabetic alive if they have to live in poverty?

These are some of the incredibly heavy questions our policy makers are grappling with right now, every day this goes on. They’ll be shouldering all the responsibility for the path they set for us and society. All the money in the world wouldn’t be enough to put me in their shoes right now.

You should keep in mind that the cold, hard, nuts n bolts of science has very little to do with covid-19 policy. It plays a big part in designing rockets, but not in statistical analysis of a novel corona virus. Remember,  we have liars, damed liars and statistics.

The problem comes not from the science or the math, it comes from misrepresenting or misusing the math then relying on the misrepresentation.  Like those Bakersfield docs.  Intentional or not, they conducted shoddy, broken statistical analysis and then relied on their bad results for their argument.

If someone came along and said hey, if we allow X level of movement in the community we would see Y increase in transmission and expect Z number of hospitalizations and deaths, half the country would use that information to berate folks for wanting to end SIP and the other half would rant about 5G, chemtrails, Bill Gates and you can't trust scientists anyway.

It's exhausting.

I think the original intent of this thread is sort of getting lost, these are all the same armchair musings/arguments being hashed out in the general thread.

I think the original intent of this thread is sort of getting lost, these are all the same armchair musings/arguments being hashed out in the general thread.

Definitely off the rails of the original intent.  I will accept blame (at least partial).

You should keep in mind that the cold, hard, nuts n bolts of science has very little to do with covid-19 policy. It plays a big part in designing rockets, but not in statistical analysis of a novel corona virus. Remember,  we have liars, damed liars and statistics.

Thank you for your valuable contribution to the thread. It's about time that we recognize science has no place in the world, except for building rockets.



Dude, just stop.

I see these opposing videos as concerns that the layman has towards those who are now running our lives for us, not with us.  When government steps in and denies citizens of their freedoms, they really need to address with seriousness all concerns.  These videos voice many of them and they should take them one at a time to fully explain why they may or may not have validity.  I'm not a scientist so when my leadership tells me to abandon the very core if what makes life good, they really need to do more that try to baffle me with "science".  I can't see my grand kids.  I can't visit my father in a senior home, who has dementia, can't understand why no one wants to visit him.  His will to live decreases daily and will shorten his life absolutely, as opposed to the risk that it might be shortened if he go this virus.  Sure, to live is important, but quality of life must be part of the equation and right now, letting science call all the shots, with no exit plan that the average citizen can understand is not conducive to a life worth living.  If today's arrangement for isolation were to continue as the futures new normal, I would  struggle with considering if indeed life this way is with it or not.  When every joy and pleasure is denied and the remaining years are few, it is very depressing for seniors and the young children.  Science is totally ignoring that it seems to me.  Rather a quality of life than a quantity.  Risk is something we all deal with and accept in order to live a life worth living. Right now, it's not for many of our elderly.

 I have been a scientist for 20 years, Ph.D in chemistry, and what I can gather is that if left unchecked, this virus would eventually kill hundreds of millions of people globally - it is that bad. 

Again, snipped for clarity and readability.

Would you care to cite a source or state your reasoning? Because that appears to be an order of magnitude (or more) larger than any recent data would suggest. Looking back at what was being reported from China mid-January-February-March, yeah, it looked that bad. In fact, I argued that point elsewhere at the time.  But new data has changed my mind.

For instance, the eventual .1% mortality rate for Sweden:

https://covid19.healthdata.org/sweden

I see these opposing videos as concerns that the layman has towards those who are now running our lives for us, not with us.  When government steps in and denies citizens of their freedoms, they really need to address with seriousness all concerns.  These videos voice many of them and they should take them one at a time to fully explain why they may or may not have validity.  I'm not a scientist so when my leadership tells me to abandon the very core if what makes life good, they really need to do more that try to baffle me with "science".  I can't see my grand kids.  I can't visit my father in a senior home, who has dementia, can't understand why no one wants to visit him.  His will to live decreases daily and will shorten his life absolutely, as opposed to the risk that it might be shortened if he go this virus.  Sure, to live is important, but quality of life must be part of the equation and right now, letting science call all the shots, with no exit plan that the average citizen can understand is not conducive to a life worth living.  If today's arrangement for isolation were to continue as the futures new normal, I would  struggle with considering if indeed life this way is with it or not.  When every joy and pleasure is denied and the remaining years are few, it is very depressing for seniors and the young children.  Science is totally ignoring that it seems to me.  Rather a quality of life than a quantity.  Risk is something we all deal with and accept in order to live a life worth living. Right now, it's not for many of our elderly. 

The strain is starting to show. 

We need to do the hard math.  There has to be some calculus, some formula, that determines what is better for us - to expose ourselves and others to the virus at some level, or to suffer mental health issues such as depression, increased suicide rates, domestic violence, alcoholism, loss of at risk youth, child abuse, bankruptcy, financial ruin, homelessness, etc.

Plenty of folks are arguing that "saving lives" is the most important thing while assuming that means being singularly focused on saving lives from covid.  Thing is, the world is dynamic, not static, and choosing to lock down and tank the economy to save lives, costs other lives, and yes, costs quality of life.

Is saving a 80 year old nursing home patient worth losing a 25 year old construction worker who commits suicide?  Is saving 5?  10?  It's past time to do the math.

As for the purpose of this thread, the discussion has migrated a little, I guess we could put this in a different thread.  Here's some anecdotal evidence from my circle:

I have filed more domestic violence cases since the pandemic started than I did in the preceding 10 months, and the cases are more extreme.  I had one child abduction, successfully reunited.  It's only my 3rd legit abduction in 17 years of doing this.  I know of another covid death in my circle, the young father of a young athlete, in great shape only 52 years old, beat covid, tested negative after weeks of recovery, went to sleep saturday night and didn't wake up Sunday morning.  Yeah that counts as a covid death, as it rightly should.

I don't have the answers, but we need to ask the questions instead of allowing ourselves to be black dot focused on whatever we are predisposed to focus on.

Doug - Do you think this shutdown is actually creating new violent domestic abusers, or exposing those who already exist? I'm no expert on domestic abuse, but it seems like at least some of the cases that finally reached an extreme could have already been going on for months/years/decades before the pandemic hit.

I don't know... Just searching for a silver lining in this overall bad situation. Maybe there will actually be fewer violent domestic abusers out there when this is all said and done?   

You should keep in mind that the cold, hard, nuts n bolts of science has very little to do with covid-19 policy. It plays a big part in designing rockets, but not in statistical analysis of a novel corona virus. Remember,  we have liars, damed liars and statistics.

Thank you for your valuable contribution to the thread. It's about time that we recognize science has no place in the world, except for building rockets.



Dude, just stop.

It appears to me that you're putting words in E Kayaker's mouth.

Note that he did not say that cold hard nuts and bolts science shouldn't play a part in policy. Just that it currently doesn't. It'd be pretty hard to argue that policy right now isn't being ruled by models.

All models are wrong, but some are useful

Early models were arguably quite s--t. Imperial College - GMAFB.  Later models are getting better, but even then they just give (sometimes huge) ranges. Not very cold hard nuts n bolts. As opposed to putting people on satellites.

Doug - Do you think this shutdown is actually creating new violent domestic abusers, or exposing those who already exist? I'm no expert on domestic abuse, but it seems like at least some of the cases that finally reached an extreme could have already been going on for months/years/decades before the pandemic hit.

I don't know... Just searching for a silver lining in this overall bad situation. Maybe there will actually be fewer violent domestic abusers out there when this is all said and done?   

Not necessarily new, just folks that might have been predisposed that are now not working, moneys an issue, drinking more, arguing more, and it turns physical.  There’s also likely an increase in sex abuse but that is hard to catch, particularly when children don’t have regular contact with mandated reporters anymore.

We just had a murder suicide of a family of 4 last week of a family that used to live here but moved to southern Oregon a few months ago.  It’s horrifying, guy used blunt instruments to murder his family, doused the house in gasoline, lit it ablaze, then shot himself in the head.

It’s just going to get worse as we go.

You should keep in mind that the cold, hard, nuts n bolts of science has very little to do with covid-19 policy. It plays a big part in designing rockets, but not in statistical analysis of a novel corona virus. Remember,  we have liars, damed liars and statistics.

Thank you for your valuable contribution to the thread. It's about time that we recognize science has no place in the world, except for building rockets.



Dude, just stop.

It appears to me that you're putting words in E Kayaker's mouth.

Note that he did not say that cold hard nuts and bolts science shouldn't play a part in policy. Just that it currently doesn't. It'd be pretty hard to argue that policy right now isn't being ruled by models.

All models are wrong, but some are useful

Early models were arguably quite s--t. Imperial College - GMAFB.  Later models are getting better, but even then they just give (sometimes huge) ranges. Not very cold hard nuts n bolts. As opposed to putting people on satellites.

I think that the physics and math that lead to "rocket " science more easily lead to proven result than biological sciences do in search of the ways virus travels through a population and how to combat it. It seems to me that the strands of biology are myriad and intertwined in a way that makes it difficult at the moment to produce a "hard" answer yet I think an answer will be found. Till then what to do. Moral questions aside if covid 19 had been allowed to just run rampant we could measure deaths accurately then rerun the script using SIP and see what reduction in death would be. The same for the economy. But we can't so we do make an attempt to model statistically and hope accurate science is behind it. Again it seems to me that most epidemiologists, expert in their field, agree on the necessity of SIP and other measures as the best way forward. How long society can keep it up though without serious fractures is a hard question