GL1800Riders Forums banner

101 - 120 of 153 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,029 Posts
How do you expect any of us to keep up when you're throwing around five-syllable words like "re-a-son-a-ble".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,969 Posts
How do you expect any of us to keep up when you're throwing around five-syllable words like "re-a-son-a-ble".
Four syllables: rea-son-a-ble


🏆
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,029 Posts
Future viral archaeologists will mark 2020 as the year a novel virus removed humanity's ability to recognize humor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
893 Posts
Yes. ;)



My point was mainly aimed at those that are getting their 'tainted' information from less than an adequate number of 'news' sources. From that, being able to use those critical thinking skills to obtain knowledge and understanding that goes beyond simply what you're told (and how it's presented) to come to a reasonable conclusion on a subject.
Thanks. I thought I understood you correctly. Here's the problem I see with getting accurate information. How do we get "inside" the sources that are GIVING OUT the info? It's hard to find "Pure" Reporters anymore. Honest, non-biased, non-agenda, non-political reporting seems to be non-existent. Sometimes you can read far enough into a newspaper story to get nice tid-bits of info, which can't be heard in 2 minute sound bites on TV interviews. But rarely even then.

It seems to me like all the public has gotten for years is editorializing agenda disguised as facts. ...on the Internet, TV, and the newspapers. It's as if "Freedom of the Press" has become the 11th article in the Bill of Rights..the FREEDOM TO LIE. Where are our litigious society attorneys when it comes to suing for slander when a TV show, disguised as a news outlet, deliberately lies and distorts facts, and reports them as gospel?

Forgive me for the negative nature of this post, but the lack of getting accurate info about anything in this Country has finally worn me down.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,969 Posts
<...>but the lack of getting accurate info about anything in this Country has finally worn me down.
Look, even the beloved Walter Cronkite fifty years ago was slinging the crap provided by the Tiffany Network back in the day. Same with the other TV media on the other two channels. By then, they'd already figured out how to poison the minds of the masses for 30 minutes every evening.

This thread has morphed from "herd immunity" to "heard immunity," as in we want to be immune to the biases we've just heard in the media.
...yet, here we are with stories like:




...just within the last 48 hours or so.

The answer is...?

No answers that I can see just yet.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,073 Posts
Look, even the beloved Walter Cronkite fifty years ago was slinging the crap provided by the Tiffany Network back in the day. Same with the other TV media on the other two channels. By then, they'd already figured out how to poison the minds of the masses for 30 minutes every evening.



...yet, here we are with stories like:




...just within the last 48 hours or so.

The answer is...?

No answers that I can see just yet.
The biggest question mark re "herd immunity" is, "Immunity to what?" As the virus mutates, we are no longer immune.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,622 Posts
The biggest question mark re "herd immunity" is, "Immunity to what?" As the virus mutates, we are no longer immune.
I read some time back that as a virus mutates it becomes less severe or fatal. It has increased chances to continue to spread. I don’t remember where I read that and I’m not going to even try to search for it. Just found it interesting and it made sense to me,. A mutating virus is not really bad news if it’s deadly.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,073 Posts
I read some time back that as a virus mutates it becomes less severe or fatal. It has increased chances to continue to spread. I don’t remember where I read that and I’m not going to even try to search for it. Just found it interesting and it made sense to me,. A mutating virus is not really bad news if it’s deadly.
From my Googling, you are right that this is often true, and often the mutation is so little-different that a vaccine for the original continues to work on the mutation, but not always, and like in other areas, this particular virus is confounding expectations:


Of course, they're not sure about this.

Also, some viruses mutate but don't get weaker, like the "regular" flu, in which the annual vaccine is a "best guess" on which strain will be active in a particular year. And there are mutating common-cold viruses that get us sick sometimes more than once a year.

We need luck with this one, first that a vaccine works, and second that it works also on the inevitable mutations.

Really what we need--the planet, not just us--is a broad-spectrum virucide, the equivalent of a broad-spectrum antibiotic. There are people working on this approach.

I don't credit the following bleakness and off-the-wall pessimism at all, but if you've got your sedative of choice nearby, take one, then listen (in the interview, she leaves out one additional negative--the antivaxers who will refuse to be vaccinated.): She warned of virus decades ago. Hear her best-case scenario for how this ends. - CNN Video
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,073 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,679 Posts
It's a macabre approach, but horrifyingly practical: If everyone who isn't immune eventually dies, then everyone left will be immune, and the country will no longer be threatened by CODIV-19. Or course, that will still leave COVID-20. But we'll burn that bridge when we come to it.
You're absolutely right, that's the way I've viewed it from day one. My only problem with it is who gets to decide what portion of the population they're willing to sacrifice so that they will be able to go out and get an ice cream cone. :oops: My fear is that there is a false sense of immunity amongst a lot of people because most deaths have been mostly the elderly. I saw a story earlier about one of the anti shutdown protesters, calling the lockdown a political hoax contracting the disease and dying from covid 19. it's a lot of people around where I live that feel the same way.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,073 Posts
You're absolutely right, that's the way I've viewed it from day one. My only problem with it is who gets to decide what portion of the population they're willing to sacrifice so that they will be able to go out and get an ice cream cone. :oops: My fear is that there is a false sense of immunity amongst a lot of people because most deaths have been mostly the elderly. I saw a story earlier about one of the anti shutdown protesters, calling the lockdown a political hoax contracting the disease and dying from covid 19. it's a lot of people around where I live that feel the same way.
It seems wrong to "Like" posts like this, but the "Like" button is a coarse tool. With you, I fear that many good people are going to die unnecessarily, and, though most of them will be elderly, not all of them will be elderly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,622 Posts
I’m not an expert in general corona virus knowledge.

It appears to me after a few months of lockdown that countries can no longer tolerate the economic impact and social stagnation. Most seem to be kind of migrating to the Swedish model from what I see as they begin to “open up” as they call it. They will never admit that but that’s what it looks like. Sweden just decided to start out that way.

From what I can see everyone is looking desperately for validation of their decisions and no one has it. Time will tell in a few years.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,073 Posts
Sweden has no controls at all and among the highest death rates. California has relatively tight controls--and lower death rates--and is looking to gradually ease its controls. Most countries with tight controls--and that is most countries--are seeking to loosen those controls over time, where and when it can be done safely.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,099 Posts
Sweden has no controls at all and among the highest death rates. California has relatively tight controls--and lower death rates--and is looking to gradually ease its controls. Most countries with tight controls--and that is most countries--are seeking to loosen those controls over time, where and when it can be done safely.
You statement that Sweden has one of the highest death rates in the world is somewhat true. It is #7 according to my just completed research with a rate of 290 per million. The United States is #9 with a rate of 230 per million. Belgium, UK, Spain, Italy, France, and Netherlands all have higher rates than Sweden and all have been thru a lockdown. This are the numbers I am looking at:

Confirmed deaths (absolute) Population (in millions) Deaths per million
Belgium 8,415 11.42 736.73
Spain 26,070 46.72 557.96
Italy 29,958 60.43 495.74
United Kingdom 30,615 66.49 460.45
France 25,962 66.99 387.57
Netherlands 5,289 17.23 306.95
Sweden 3,040 10.18 298.53
Ireland 1,403 4.85 289.07
United States 75,557 327.17 230.94
Switzerland 1,810 8.52 212.53
Canada 4,541 37.06 122.53


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,073 Posts
You statement that Sweden has one of the highest death rates in the world is somewhat true. It is #7 according to my just completed research with a rate of 290 per million. The United States is #9 with a rate of 230 per million. Belgium, UK, Spain, Italy, France, and Netherlands all have higher rates than Sweden and all have been thru a lockdown. This are the numbers I am looking at:

Confirmed deaths (absolute) Population (in millions) Deaths per million
Belgium 8,415 11.42 736.73
Spain 26,070 46.72 557.96
Italy 29,958 60.43 495.74
United Kingdom 30,615 66.49 460.45
France 25,962 66.99 387.57
Netherlands 5,289 17.23 306.95
Sweden 3,040 10.18 298.53
Ireland 1,403 4.85 289.07
United States 75,557 327.17 230.94
Switzerland 1,810 8.52 212.53
Canada 4,541 37.06 122.53


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"Somewhat" true? Of 195 countries in the world, Sweden is #7. How much higher would Sweden have to be for my statement that Sweden has among the highest death rates to be, say, very true? I compared Sweden with California. The US total includes New York, which was late to institute controls and where the death rate was/is much higher than California's.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,679 Posts
You statement that Sweden has one of the highest death rates in the world is somewhat true. It is #7 according to my just completed research with a rate of 290 per million. The United States is #9 with a rate of 230 per million. Belgium, UK, Spain, Italy, France, and Netherlands all have higher rates than Sweden and all have been thru a lockdown. This are the numbers I am looking at:

Confirmed deaths (absolute) Population (in millions) Deaths per million
Belgium 8,415 11.42 736.73
Spain 26,070 46.72 557.96
Italy 29,958 60.43 495.74
United Kingdom 30,615 66.49 460.45
France 25,962 66.99 387.57
Netherlands 5,289 17.23 306.95
Sweden 3,040 10.18 298.53
Ireland 1,403 4.85 289.07
United States 75,557 327.17 230.94
Switzerland 1,810 8.52 212.53
Canada 4,541 37.06 122.53


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
True, but a little misleading. Sweden has only a fraction of the population density of most of the counties on that list. Another factor is that most of those countries on that list only closed the door when the horses were already out of the barn, They closed because of the infection rate, not to preemptively stop it. The US has never issued a national lockdown, and it's been piecemeal in the states that have, so it's not a good example.

The more accurate comparison would be with Swedens neighbors who share similar population density, age of population, and cultural behavior.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,099 Posts
"Somewhat" true? Of 195 countries in the world, Sweden is #7. How much higher would Sweden have to be for my statement that Sweden has among the highest death rates to be, say, very true? I compared Sweden with California. The US total includes New York, which was late to institute controls and where the death rate was/is much higher than California's.
Well my my. The expert has spoken. Look where the U S is on the list. It is true that the US never had a complete lockdown, thank god. However the big population centers have. How has NY, NJ, MA, and MD done. They sure have instituted severe lockdowns. The economy has suffered immensely and IMHO way more than the threat required. Over time I think my trepidation against a lockdown based upon totally overblown projections has been proven correct. It is possible to be concerned about the virus, while being concerned about the economic calamity the draconian executive orders have wrought. Yes we have over a million confirmed cases of COVID-19 but we have 34 million people unemployed. When is enough enough?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
101 - 120 of 153 Posts
Top