Coronavirus General Discussion

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

User avatar
Mark Leavy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1950
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:20 pm
Location: US Citizen, Permanent Traveler

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by Mark Leavy » Thu Aug 26, 2021 3:40 pm

Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 3:06 pm
Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 2:28 pm
If they are not in a risk category, they are at much greater danger from you driving them to school. Why would you do that to your kid, you sociopath?
Citation?
Covid Deaths by Age

To date: 361 Covid Deaths under age 18

Death Rates* for Motor Vehicle Traffic Injury,† by Age Group — National Vital Statistics System, United States, 2015 and 2017

Quick math, using the above puts automobile deaths for under age 15 children in the 10,000 per year range.
D1984
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 730
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 7:23 pm

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by D1984 » Thu Aug 26, 2021 3:54 pm

Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 2:12 pm
Cortopassi wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 1:57 pm
I don't disagree with you 100%, but to do like you say likely results in one really major spike, and everyone (in govt) is trying to prevent/limit that, no? I'm not saying they are being successful, and I understand the forest analogy -- the dry brush initially were old and people with multiple conditions, but it does seem now that delta is spreading very fast, and while there's not as many compromised people around, there are increasing infections happening.

Agree or not?
No disagreement with your analysis of the situation, I'm only disagreeing with your solution.
Back off and let the people that want to take risks, take risks. It will eventually burn out - one way or the other.
As part of that risk taking, no one should assume that they will have access to a hospital. That's just the way to live life - Covid or no Covid.
Why should the vaccinated not have access to a hospital? Let the willfully un-vaccinated be the ones that don't get access. They are the ones who chose not to get vaccinated. They believed in "natural immunity" over the vaccine? They thought that the vaccine had microchips or turned them magnetic or put 5G nano-antennas into their bodies? They chose to "put their faith in God and not in shots" or believed that they didn't need a vaccine because COVID was "the Lord winnowing the sheep from the goats"? OK. Then let them damn well be the only ones to suffer the consequences. Make them recover at home and if they die, oh well. Good riddance to bad garbage. Don't let ICUs be clogged (and innocent people be rationed treatment) due to the selfishness, "muh rahts", and science denialism of arrogant refusenik minority of the population. They didn't want the vaccine? Fine. Go without it and see what happens when they get COVID. No ICU, no ventilator, no ECMO, no oxygen, no Regereron, no Remdesivir, no nothing....just go home and either get better on their own or pass away. I have zero sympathy for them and are out of fucks to give at this point.
User avatar
jalanlong
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 829
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2019 7:30 am

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by jalanlong » Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:00 pm

Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 2:19 pm
There is a great article by Glenn Greenwald discussing the lack of cost benefit analysis to this problem. Everyone talks about the dangers but there is little discussion of the cost. As rational people we continue to support the huge destruction of human life via automobiles. Yet we don't apply the same rationalizations to this disease. My basic premise is that it is because politicians are idiots. Nothing more conspiratorial than that.
The Bizarre Refusal to Apply Cost-Benefit Analysis to COVID Debates

Are those who oppose a ban on cars or a radical reduction in speed limits sociopaths, given the huge number of people they are knowingly consigning to death or maiming?
Any thoughts on what has caused this disconnect? For example, there is a local sports radio host in my town who is an avid outdoorsman. He rides his bike daily in Downtown Dallas (NOT a bike friendly city), goes mountain bike riding, goes hiking in desolate areas, skiing and travels to places like Africa to go on a safari. So certainly he is not a person who lives his life in fear and physically he would not be someone who you would target as being in grave danger of serious complications from a virus. But yet over the past year he has stayed holed up in his house, has been to no movies, no restaurants and has put off all doctor or dentist visits due to Covid. Why is his risk analysis so different from Covid vs the rest of the way he lives his life? I see this constantly. Parents who used to let their children swim unsupervised but now have a meltdown if the same child ever pulls down their mask.
User avatar
Mark Leavy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1950
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:20 pm
Location: US Citizen, Permanent Traveler

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by Mark Leavy » Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:06 pm

D1984 wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 3:54 pm
Let the willfully un-vaccinated be the ones that don't get access.
No argument from me.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by Xan » Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:06 pm

Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 3:40 pm
Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 3:06 pm
Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 2:28 pm
If they are not in a risk category, they are at much greater danger from you driving them to school. Why would you do that to your kid, you sociopath?
Citation?
Covid Deaths by Age

To date: 361 Covid Deaths under age 18

Death Rates* for Motor Vehicle Traffic Injury,† by Age Group — National Vital Statistics System, United States, 2015 and 2017

Quick math, using the above puts automobile deaths for under age 15 children in the 10,000 per year range.
A few points:
* That only considers death
* That includes all driving, not just driving to school
* The big one: only a small fraction of kids so far have gotten Covid, whereas all kids have been in cars. All kids WILL eventually get Covid, they'll just either do it with the vaccine or without.
User avatar
jalanlong
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 829
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2019 7:30 am

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by jalanlong » Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:06 pm

Cortopassi wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 2:56 pm
I don't disagree on the driving to school being dangerous.

And I'm not saying masks are 100% effective or that the vaccine is 100% effective. I am just trying to state that if someone works a job where they have exposure to kids who cannot be vaccinated, I would hope that their sense of altruism/community would make them reconsider their position.

As an aside, just heard a story from a friend at work. His buddy took his daughter to a birthday party. 9 years old. Got a call later that a kid had Covid. The 9 year old and Dad got it as well as at least one other co-worker, and the guy's ex-wife (who was un-vaccinated by choice). One person went to the hospital and passed away. The rest had no or mild symptoms. Care to guess which?

There seem to be some differences with this delta. I have absolutely already heard of more people who have gotten it than the entire period before.

When I say "heard" I mean personally.
What does vaccination have to do with exposure? Studies in MA have already proven that vaccinated people carry the same viral load as non-vaccinated people. So if you are going to spread it to a child, being vaccinated or not makes no difference.
glennds
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:24 am

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by glennds » Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:10 pm

In our society cost/benefit is kind of an alien concept in medicine. Public health is heavily influenced by politicians yes, but it is still a medical discipline, so the principles of medicine have a large influence IMO. In medicine, the thinking is to pursue any benefit, however incremental, at any cost.

Think about the last two weeks of life, for many people, spent in an ICU bed, being bombarded with every possible drug and mechanical intervention. The studies show 80% of healthcare cost occurs in the last two weeks of life. And for what benefit?
It is only relatively recently that palliative care and a cost/benefit approach has been adopted for many so they die in hospice care or at home with minimal palliative assistance.

There's also a resistance to the idea of "rationing" care that complicates the issue. Another complication is the tort legal system that attaches "standard of care" to negligence in a way that cost/benefit=legal exposure.

On the other hand, cost/benefit is a completely natural way of thinking for most of us in the area of casualty. That's why we look at auto accidents, risk of fire, recreational accidents, airplane travel the way we do.

One theory on the disconnect.
Last edited by glennds on Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Mark Leavy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1950
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:20 pm
Location: US Citizen, Permanent Traveler

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by Mark Leavy » Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:13 pm

Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:06 pm
* The big one: only a small fraction of kids so far have gotten Covid, whereas all kids have been in cars. All kids WILL eventually get Covid, they'll just either do it with the vaccine or without.
You don't think kids have been exposed at the same rate as 85 year olds?
Where does the difference in Covid death rates (or any other lasting injury) come from? What makes the statistics so vastly different between the youth and the elderly?

The youth are not at any measurable risk level.

It's as if the entire world has forgotten how immune systems work. It's not just antibodies and vaccines. It's an entire protective system. The youth have it in spades. Your grandma, not so much.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by Xan » Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:36 pm

Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:13 pm
Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:06 pm
* The big one: only a small fraction of kids so far have gotten Covid, whereas all kids have been in cars. All kids WILL eventually get Covid, they'll just either do it with the vaccine or without.
You don't think kids have been exposed at the same rate as 85 year olds?
Where does the difference in Covid death rates (or any other lasting injury) come from? What makes the statistics so vastly different between the youth and the elderly?

The youth are not at any measurable risk level.

It's as if the entire world has forgotten how immune systems work. It's not just antibodies and vaccines. It's an entire protective system. The youth have it in spades. Your grandma, not so much.
I didn't say the elderly aren't at much greater risk. Clearly they are. I'm mostly saying that you're not comparing apples to apples when you look at the total child Covid deaths and compare them to total driving deaths.

If you compare the rate of death for kids *of those who contracted the virus* compared to the rate of death for kids driving to school *of those who drive to school* then we could look at the numbers behind your original assertion.

IIRC kids have a something like a 3% chance of being hospitalized after testing positive. Yes, that isn't dying, and yes, it's low, but I'd rather not have my kid in the hospital, you know?
User avatar
jalanlong
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 829
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2019 7:30 am

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by jalanlong » Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:59 pm

Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:36 pm
Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:13 pm
Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:06 pm
* The big one: only a small fraction of kids so far have gotten Covid, whereas all kids have been in cars. All kids WILL eventually get Covid, they'll just either do it with the vaccine or without.
You don't think kids have been exposed at the same rate as 85 year olds?
Where does the difference in Covid death rates (or any other lasting injury) come from? What makes the statistics so vastly different between the youth and the elderly?

The youth are not at any measurable risk level.

It's as if the entire world has forgotten how immune systems work. It's not just antibodies and vaccines. It's an entire protective system. The youth have it in spades. Your grandma, not so much.
I didn't say the elderly aren't at much greater risk. Clearly they are. I'm mostly saying that you're not comparing apples to apples when you look at the total child Covid deaths and compare them to total driving deaths.

If you compare the rate of death for kids *of those who contracted the virus* compared to the rate of death for kids driving to school *of those who drive to school* then we could look at the numbers behind your original assertion.

IIRC kids have a something like a 3% chance of being hospitalized after testing positive. Yes, that isn't dying, and yes, it's low, but I'd rather not have my kid in the hospital, you know?
Not sure where you are getting that 3% figure. The CDC website shows that the Covid hospitalization rate of children is 8 out of every 100,000. And those are heavily weighted to kids under 2 years of age, further emphasizing that schools are not really risky environments.

Contrast that with CDC stats that every year an average of 3,957 unintentional drowning deaths occur and another 8,080 ER visits due to non-fatal drowning occur from children swimming.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by Xan » Thu Aug 26, 2021 5:06 pm

jalanlong wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:59 pm
Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:36 pm
Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:13 pm
Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:06 pm
* The big one: only a small fraction of kids so far have gotten Covid, whereas all kids have been in cars. All kids WILL eventually get Covid, they'll just either do it with the vaccine or without.
You don't think kids have been exposed at the same rate as 85 year olds?
Where does the difference in Covid death rates (or any other lasting injury) come from? What makes the statistics so vastly different between the youth and the elderly?

The youth are not at any measurable risk level.

It's as if the entire world has forgotten how immune systems work. It's not just antibodies and vaccines. It's an entire protective system. The youth have it in spades. Your grandma, not so much.
I didn't say the elderly aren't at much greater risk. Clearly they are. I'm mostly saying that you're not comparing apples to apples when you look at the total child Covid deaths and compare them to total driving deaths.

If you compare the rate of death for kids *of those who contracted the virus* compared to the rate of death for kids driving to school *of those who drive to school* then we could look at the numbers behind your original assertion.

IIRC kids have a something like a 3% chance of being hospitalized after testing positive. Yes, that isn't dying, and yes, it's low, but I'd rather not have my kid in the hospital, you know?
Not sure where you are getting that 3% figure. The CDC website shows that the Covid hospitalization rate of children is 8 out of every 100,000. And those are heavily weighted to kids under 2 years of age, further emphasizing that schools are not really risky environments.

Contrast that with CDC stats that every year an average of 3,957 unintentional drowning deaths occur and another 8,080 ER visits due to non-fatal drowning occur from children swimming.
Sorry, looks like it's just above 1%:
https://coronavirus.ohio.gov/wps/portal ... n/children
124,890 cases, 1,339 hospitalized. Only 7/8 deaths. And that's mostly before Delta.
User avatar
Cortopassi
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3338
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
Location: https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/content/webbL ... sWebb.html

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by Cortopassi » Thu Aug 26, 2021 9:40 pm

Another perfect example of asking myself why I bother writing a damn thing on any of the non investment topics here.
SomeDude
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2020 1:45 am

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by SomeDude » Thu Aug 26, 2021 9:52 pm

jalanlong wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:59 pm
Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:36 pm
Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:13 pm
Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:06 pm
* The big one: only a small fraction of kids so far have gotten Covid, whereas all kids have been in cars. All kids WILL eventually get Covid, they'll just either do it with the vaccine or without.
You don't think kids have been exposed at the same rate as 85 year olds?
Where does the difference in Covid death rates (or any other lasting injury) come from? What makes the statistics so vastly different between the youth and the elderly?

The youth are not at any measurable risk level.

It's as if the entire world has forgotten how immune systems work. It's not just antibodies and vaccines. It's an entire protective system. The youth have it in spades. Your grandma, not so much.
I didn't say the elderly aren't at much greater risk. Clearly they are. I'm mostly saying that you're not comparing apples to apples when you look at the total child Covid deaths and compare them to total driving deaths.

If you compare the rate of death for kids *of those who contracted the virus* compared to the rate of death for kids driving to school *of those who drive to school* then we could look at the numbers behind your original assertion.

IIRC kids have a something like a 3% chance of being hospitalized after testing positive. Yes, that isn't dying, and yes, it's low, but I'd rather not have my kid in the hospital, you know?
Not sure where you are getting that 3% figure. The CDC website shows that the Covid hospitalization rate of children is 8 out of every 100,000. And those are heavily weighted to kids under 2 years of age, further emphasizing that schools are not really risky environments.

Contrast that with CDC stats that every year an average of 3,957 unintentional drowning deaths occur and another 8,080 ER visits due to non-fatal drowning occur from children swimming.
If 20% of the population has tested positive than 99% have ummm....been exposed already. Remember don't 30% or some stupid number allegedly have a close friend or family member that died??? If someone on here thinks 20% of the population has gotten covid and that doesn't imply 99% have been exposed many many times....they struggle with maths.

If people are still catching the covid and getting sick from it for the first time.....its something new. Sorry, the vaccines didn't work and neither did destroying the economy and ruining millions of lives to try and extend the life of some unhealthy elderly people by a few months.

Line up for your next injection and keep your mask on.

Hard to believe this is America. It might as well be any other shithole considering the population of cowards we have that think bowing to some politicians will keep them safe from the flu. Sorry it didn't work and never will.
User avatar
Mark Leavy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1950
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:20 pm
Location: US Citizen, Permanent Traveler

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by Mark Leavy » Thu Aug 26, 2021 9:58 pm

Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:36 pm
IIRC kids have a something like a 3% chance of being hospitalized after testing positive. Yes, that isn't dying, and yes, it's low, but I'd rather not have my kid in the hospital, you know?
Xan, you are completely ignoring that exposed kids (i.e all of them) rarely even test positive for Covid. That's because they have working immune systems.


Work with me here...

1) I think we can all agree that vaccines are relatively safe. Some issues, but very few overall. It appears safe enough that an emergency use order was issued without full validation and it is currently universally recommended. That's pretty safe.

2) The vaccine is not allowed to be given to children under 12.

3) Ergo, whatever danger Covid presents to children under 12 is virtually non existent and even the very very very small risks presented by the vaccine are a greater danger to children than Covid.

4) QED: Kids are not in any danger from Covid at all. At the very least, any Covid danger to kids under 12 is arguably less than the risks of the vaccine.

Why would you vaccinate 12 yo's, you sociopath?
SomeDude
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2020 1:45 am

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by SomeDude » Thu Aug 26, 2021 10:05 pm

Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 9:58 pm
Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:36 pm
IIRC kids have a something like a 3% chance of being hospitalized after testing positive. Yes, that isn't dying, and yes, it's low, but I'd rather not have my kid in the hospital, you know?
Xan, you are completely ignoring that exposed kids (i.e all of them) rarely even test positive for Covid. That's because they have working immune systems.
Mark the children haven't been exposed because covid only lives 5ft above the Earth.

Haven't you walked into a restaurant with mandatory making until you sit down? See....once you're below five get you can't be exposed anymore.

If people believe covid is real but that all of The kiddos haven't been exposed many times.....there is no hope for them. They are a goner.

This time next year when they are on their 5th booster shot and wearing triple masks inside their homes and blaming Trump supporters......well I'll do the same thing as now.....laugh.
whatchamacallit
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 750
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 7:32 pm

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by whatchamacallit » Thu Aug 26, 2021 10:22 pm

Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 9:58 pm
Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:36 pm
IIRC kids have a something like a 3% chance of being hospitalized after testing positive. Yes, that isn't dying, and yes, it's low, but I'd rather not have my kid in the hospital, you know?
Xan, you are completely ignoring that exposed kids (i.e all of them) rarely even test positive for Covid. That's because they have working immune systems.


Work with me here...

1) I think we can all agree that vaccines are relatively safe. Some issues, but very few overall. It appears safe enough that an emergency use order was issued without full validation and it is currently universally recommended. That's pretty safe.

2) The vaccine is not allowed to be given to children under 12.

3) Ergo, whatever danger Covid presents to children under 12 is virtually non existent and even the very very very small risks presented by the vaccine are a greater danger to children than Covid.

4) QED: Kids are not in any danger from Covid at all. At the very least, any Covid danger to kids under 12 is arguably less than the risks of the vaccine.

Why would you vaccinate 12 yo's, you sociopath?
I can now confirm this first hand. My kids guaranteed covid exposure was nowhere close to needing a test. I expect maybe 1 out 20 would even test their kid under 12.

The full hospitalization data would be helpful. I expect they are hospitalized with covid and not from covid. Are not all hospitals still testing every patient admitted?
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by vnatale » Fri Aug 27, 2021 6:48 am

tomfoolery wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 1:49 pm

vnatale wrote:
Wed Aug 25, 2021 1:52 pm

Yesterday while I was in my backyard I saw one of my backyard neighbors with his cute, young dog.

I started moving toward them and he told me that he had to maintain distance as he'd tested positive for Covid last week. As has his two children but not his wife. No one is exhibiting symptoms. He stated he was in day six of his ten days of keeping away from people.

This is definitely the closest to home that the virus has hit me.

I forgot to add two important details....my neighbor had been vaccinated in February and his test took three days to get the result.


This is terrifying stuff. And they aren’t even showing symptoms which is the most dangerous kind of covid infection. And right next door! Stay safe, Vinny.


We maintained our distance during that time. Either 20 or 30 feet. I don't see him that often.
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
SomeDude
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2020 1:45 am

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by SomeDude » Fri Aug 27, 2021 6:49 am

whatchamacallit wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 10:22 pm
Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 9:58 pm
Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:36 pm
IIRC kids have a something like a 3% chance of being hospitalized after testing positive. Yes, that isn't dying, and yes, it's low, but I'd rather not have my kid in the hospital, you know?
Xan, you are completely ignoring that exposed kids (i.e all of them) rarely even test positive for Covid. That's because they have working immune systems.


Work with me here...

1) I think we can all agree that vaccines are relatively safe. Some issues, but very few overall. It appears safe enough that an emergency use order was issued without full validation and it is currently universally recommended. That's pretty safe.

2) The vaccine is not allowed to be given to children under 12.

3) Ergo, whatever danger Covid presents to children under 12 is virtually non existent and even the very very very small risks presented by the vaccine are a greater danger to children than Covid.

4) QED: Kids are not in any danger from Covid at all. At the very least, any Covid danger to kids under 12 is arguably less than the risks of the vaccine.

Why would you vaccinate 12 yo's, you sociopath?
I can now confirm this first hand. My kids guaranteed covid exposure was nowhere close to needing a test. I expect maybe 1 out 20 would even test their kid under 12.

The full hospitalization data would be helpful. I expect they are hospitalized with covid and not from covid. Are not all hospitals still testing every patient admitted?
As I've said before....imagine every year we test 100% of the population for the flu.....then everyone in the hospital that tests positive is listed as a flu hospitalization and everyone who dies that tested positive is listed as a "flu-related" death.

We'd probably have the exact same numbers across the exact same demographics. That's because this a flu strain and this year's is different from last year's. And next year's will be different also. Notice how the normal flu has 100% disappeared?????

Good luck with the booster shots guys. This won't end until the branch covidians stop empowering the government.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by vnatale » Fri Aug 27, 2021 6:54 am

Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 2:19 pm

There is a great article by Glenn Greenwald discussing the lack of cost benefit analysis to this problem. Everyone talks about the dangers but there is little discussion of the cost. As rational people we continue to support the huge destruction of human life via automobiles. Yet we don't apply the same rationalizations to this disease. My basic premise is that it is because politicians are idiots. Nothing more conspiratorial than that.


The Bizarre Refusal to Apply Cost-Benefit Analysis to COVID Debates

Are those who oppose a ban on cars or a radical reduction in speed limits sociopaths, given the huge number of people they are knowingly consigning to death or maiming?



Same no cost analysis is done regarding all the money making schools super save from potential active shooters.

Or, the implicit acceptance that children are going to get killed and maimed by putting them into vehicles. No would ever suggest you can only transport children in Range Rovers that go no faster than 20 miles per hour. Everyone realizes the potential benefits would not be worth that extreme cost.
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by vnatale » Fri Aug 27, 2021 7:01 am

Cortopassi wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 9:40 pm

Another perfect example of asking myself why I bother writing a damn thing on any of the non investment topics here.


Isn't it easy enough to see that something has been written by certain people and just skip over unread what those people have written?

I don't do that for certain people....just for certain topics---mainly anything related to crypto currencies in any form.
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
jalanlong
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 829
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2019 7:30 am

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by jalanlong » Fri Aug 27, 2021 8:06 am

SomeDude wrote:
Fri Aug 27, 2021 6:49 am
whatchamacallit wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 10:22 pm
Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 9:58 pm
Xan wrote:
Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:36 pm
IIRC kids have a something like a 3% chance of being hospitalized after testing positive. Yes, that isn't dying, and yes, it's low, but I'd rather not have my kid in the hospital, you know?
Xan, you are completely ignoring that exposed kids (i.e all of them) rarely even test positive for Covid. That's because they have working immune systems.


Work with me here...

1) I think we can all agree that vaccines are relatively safe. Some issues, but very few overall. It appears safe enough that an emergency use order was issued without full validation and it is currently universally recommended. That's pretty safe.

2) The vaccine is not allowed to be given to children under 12.

3) Ergo, whatever danger Covid presents to children under 12 is virtually non existent and even the very very very small risks presented by the vaccine are a greater danger to children than Covid.

4) QED: Kids are not in any danger from Covid at all. At the very least, any Covid danger to kids under 12 is arguably less than the risks of the vaccine.

Why would you vaccinate 12 yo's, you sociopath?
I can now confirm this first hand. My kids guaranteed covid exposure was nowhere close to needing a test. I expect maybe 1 out 20 would even test their kid under 12.

The full hospitalization data would be helpful. I expect they are hospitalized with covid and not from covid. Are not all hospitals still testing every patient admitted?
As I've said before....imagine every year we test 100% of the population for the flu.....then everyone in the hospital that tests positive is listed as a flu hospitalization and everyone who dies that tested positive is listed as a "flu-related" death.

We'd probably have the exact same numbers across the exact same demographics. That's because this a flu strain and this year's is different from last year's. And next year's will be different also. Notice how the normal flu has 100% disappeared?????

Good luck with the booster shots guys. This won't end until the branch covidians stop empowering the government.
Remember the days when you used to wake up in the morning and if you felt flu-ish you just stayed home, took some meds and slept it off? Or maybe even fought it and went ahead in to work anyway..maybe because your boss insisted? Now we just immediately go get a test and mark it as a "case". Every person in my office now who is sick in any way immediately goes and gets a test.

Its not even that we are testing 100% of the population, we are testing a huge percentage of people multiple, multiple times. Professional athletes are being tested almost every day!
glennds
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:24 am

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by glennds » Fri Aug 27, 2021 9:54 am

Is it a reasonable assumption that if a child is less susceptible to Covid because their immune system is optimal, then they would be less susceptible to side effects or reactions to the vaccine for the same reason?
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by vnatale » Fri Aug 27, 2021 10:23 am

glennds wrote:
Fri Aug 27, 2021 9:54 am

Is it a reasonable assumption that if a child is less susceptible to Covid because their immune system is optimal, then they would be less susceptible to side effects or reactions to the vaccine for the same reason?


How could that NOT be the case?
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
glennds
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:24 am

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by glennds » Fri Aug 27, 2021 10:40 am

vnatale wrote:
Fri Aug 27, 2021 10:23 am
glennds wrote:
Fri Aug 27, 2021 9:54 am
Is it a reasonable assumption that if a child is less susceptible to Covid because their immune system is optimal, then they would be less susceptible to side effects or reactions to the vaccine for the same reason?
How could that NOT be the case?
Well I didn't know if it is an apples/oranges comparison. The cost/benefit discussion and risk to children is an interesting discussion. There's a good argument both ways from what I can see.
SomeDude
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1080
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2020 1:45 am

Re: Coronavirus General Discussion

Post by SomeDude » Fri Aug 27, 2021 10:57 am

glennds wrote:
Fri Aug 27, 2021 9:54 am
Is it a reasonable assumption that if a child is less susceptible to Covid because their immune system is optimal, then they would be less susceptible to side effects or reactions to the vaccine for the same reason?
That seems reasonable to me or at least logical
Post Reply