https://twitter.com/MaggieEThornton/status/1380652509405003776
@Coyote you’re doing good work🤣 I’d join you but I’m permanently suspended from Twitter. Every time I open the app there is this big banner that says “Welcome Back” but I can’t tweet and they zero’d out my followers and followed accounts.
It's just confronting fools with their own stupidity. When both had "PhD" next to their names, and can't support a single scientific claim, it mostly says our educational system is garbage. But we all knew that... 😂
🇳🇱
@madmike @freemo @Coyote Yes you are right #hcqworks don't listen to scummo he is corrupt academic morally defunct, with god complex, works for government pathological liar as caught many times, just a human garbage that will pay at the end of scamdemic. Covid19 doesn't exist. Virus doesn't exist.
And if scummo says otherwise he can collect free money here https://samueleckert.net/isolat-truth-fund/ he won't because he is simply a liar.
I know it exists, I've had it, still not breathing right. Got it last March, wish I would have got it now, when they know a bit more.
What's real though is, it's a rather small blip, flu sized so far, and I suspect more life-long damage than a typical flu. But still, it's no where near the scale they say it is, and until I see this data from our own country, I'm going to believe this scale is probably a reasonable representation:
https://twitter.com/VoidSurf1/status/1320269542174720000
I would almost agree with you but not to that extent.
First off we agree its real, and yea, you have to be clueless not to know the evidence shows its real.
As for how severe it is.. well its not the flu, it **is** worse than the flu. But its also not as bad as people and media will make you feel it is. Many worse diseases by many orders of magnitude have come and gone in the lifetime of the living generations.
If we had to put a number on it based on objective numbers and not "the sky is falling" nonsense I'd say its about 10x worse than the flu in terms of being more deadly by a reasonable but not huge margin, as well as being more capable of causing long term injury... 10x is a lot and enough to take it seriously.. but its not the end of the world either.
The link you gave and associated image is just showing you **overall** deaths, and is limited specifically to sweden and no where.
You have to keep in mind first off it were as bad as the flu you wouldnt have that bump that is **twice** the natural background rate of **deaths** which is very significant when you talk about overall deaths. Next you also have to keep in mind you cant simply compare death tolls of diseases from 30 - 100+ years ago to now. Technology and medicine has advanced and we can handle diseases better now than before. But finally, sweden didnt have a lockdown but they did have strict social distancing and the general population was very mindful and did their part in that regard, something you didnt really see in past diseases.
So a direct comparison is very misleading, and even if you take that chart at face value it still suggests COVID ius many times worse than the common flu.
Yes, the point was, ALL deaths, by week, plotted. Makes excess morbidity stick out like a sore thumb. And, Covid didn't blip as hard as some recent flus have.
The point isn't that it proves or disproves Covid caused it, or anything remotely of the sort. The point is, that's the exact data set we all should be looking at for the USA. And with that perspective, I'd like to re-frame the discussions. But no one want's to re-frame anything when they can power grab in a panic, why look at it with "realistic perspective."
Right but what im saying is how hard of a blip you see is not a measure of the seriousness of the disease.
In 1993 we didnt undergo lockdown, significant social distancing, or mask wearing. During covid we did. Ergo even if they were exactly the same severity covid would show up as a smaller blip. So its not an objective measure of the lethality of the virus, only a measure of the consequences sweden faced for their particular way of handing the virus.
Also keep in mind while you can say "COVID is as bad as certain unusually lethal varients of the flu" and that would not be incorrect, you cant make the statement "COVID is as bad as the flu" which implies your talking about the common strain of the flu, and not new novel strains.
"what im saying is how hard of a blip you see is not a measure of the seriousness of the disease."
Yes, long term effects are more likely with Covid, I am aware, anecdotally through my own experience. (could be bias, I'm older now than with previous flu's, for example).
I totally agree, you are going into the details of where the discussion SHOULD go. However, I'm also a bit experienced with teaching science, and sometimes gross oversimplifications are necessary to get someone looking at a scientific issue/structure from the right direction, before you go off into the weeds about the details (this, is the discussion BEFORE masks and vaccines, that should have happened on the global political landscape).
But a comparison to the flu, is not accurate, but useful tool to teach the "what's happening" impact in one viewpoint, and then drill down to the other details of fear. Not lead with the fear, ya know? I don't know, I'm a troll...
@10grans makeitrain 0.001
Thats all fine. The only problem with comparing it to a flu is that it gives the impression that COVID is not particularly novel and serious.. it is serious, just not to the levels of exageration the media makes you think but it is serious. So I think comparing it to the flu maybe be exagerating it too far in the other direction and making it sound far more benign than it really is, which has just as many dangers as trying to play it off as worse than it is.
I favor the "don't trample on my rights" approach, which requires telling Karen, "hey, look at it this way for 1 second, see there's something going on that doesn't match your level of hysteria that is real, and let's talk rationally for a second."
You're not Karen. She's out there. I want to start talking to her. Rationally.
you probably cant have a rational conversation with karen either way.. but you stand a much more reasonable chance of getting a karen to consider your POV if you sell a reasonable middle ground that takes the truthful elements of both sides rather than exaggerating too far in the opposite direction which will just result in you being dismissed for absurdity not just by the karens, but by the few objective people who are walking the middle road.
"much more reasonable chance of getting a karen to consider your POV if you sell a reasonable middle ground that takes the truthful elements of both sides"
Disagree. Simplest model with real data that shows something. That's where you have to start with Karen.
If there is a more simple model, that shows clearly the hystara is rampant, I'm all for it. But for now, that's a very simple model to both grasp, and critique, so I like it as a starting point for discussions.