Coronavirus

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
DDM, you've reached the point where no one cares or reads your posts. Apologies...

he's the boy who cried "reeeeee"

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
You might disagree with him on some things, but that doesn't mean he doesn't make other perfectly reasonable points. Seems kind of silly to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Imo, 90% of political arguments would not be as heated if that was reduced.

Regarding DDM's points, 3 to 5 are particularly important for the U.S. imo.

They stopped reading DDM's posts because they realized that they didn't have the ability to refute DDM's points.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
I stopped reading his points long ago when he didn't understand herd immunity had never been achieved without a vaccine and we have no way of knowing how long immunity will last. This was before long Covid reared its head.

So then why continue to respond to him if you aren't reading his posts?

Let me bottom line this: it's not endearing, it's not funny, it's not edgy nor is it clever. You just come off as sad. I know your pals would never acknowledge this, but I bet even they feel that way.

Originally posted by Surtur
So then why continue to respond to him if you aren't reading his posts?

Let me bottom line this: it's not endearing, it's not funny, it's not edgy nor is it clever. You just come off as sad. I know your pals would never acknowledge this, but I bet even they feel that way.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
he's the boy who cried "reeeeee"

I'd say that to anyone here: there is no point in responding to posts you aren't even reading.

And you do it on a daily basis, multiple times a day.

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Whirly your a fat old man with no life. Get a grip on reality. I’ve never said people shouldn’t wear masks, take the vaccine etc.

Your problem is your a dried up stinky dick licker

ffs, elementary children even know which one to use when.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
YouTube experts make people more pliable in my opinion.

That's why my predictions are so good. 🙂

Originally posted by Surtur
So then why continue to respond to him if you aren't reading his posts?

Let me bottom line this: it's not endearing, it's not funny, it's not edgy nor is it clever. You just come off as sad. I know your pals would never acknowledge this, but I bet even they feel that way.

Originally posted by Artol
I disagree with 1, I do think lockdowns are a useful tool, I have read your posts on it, but have not been thoroughly convinced. With the other ones I do agree mostly though. 2 is somewhat of a trade off, you don't want coronavirus to ravage care homes like it has done in many European nations, and you also don't want old or infirm people to be separated from their social support networks.

I can agree with 1 being iffy because we do have evidence it does delay cases (but not deaths...unsure why). But the only robust modeling we have shows it increases the deaths, directly from COVID-19 (not ancillary deaths) because of the delayed effect. To better explain what they figured out, it creates multiple significant waves of infections and deaths instead of just one major one and minor increases later on. Second and third waves every bit as terrible as the first waves is the issue. So you reduce your primary wave to 80% max. Second wave is at 80% max. Whereas, not using lockdowns, you'd see 100% then 10%. It's not that exaggerated according to the modeling they did but you get the idea.

If we want to see how true that is, we just need to look at Sweden's results. And that does appear to be the case (no pun intended). While the world is going through terrible second and third waves, they are almost completely done with their second wave which was moderate. Look at France to compare and their second wave was almost as severe as their first wave.

If you look at the US: the states with the most deaths all have lock down restrictions. And have had them for weeks. The correlation to deaths and lockdowns is, as research has found, statistically insignificant. In some instances, it actually causes a spike in deaths shortly after they go into place (the rehousing puts household members in much closer proximity so it allows it to transfer in much heavier viral loads - initial viral load is what kills the vulnerable: they just do not have the immune system to fight it off quick enough).

Here's an interactive map with all the lockdown restrictions by state:

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/here-are-stay-home-orders-across-country-n1168736

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Lockdowns are like applying a bandaid to treat cancer. And they also disproportionately impact the poor and small business owners. So many small businesses are closing down in my area, it's going to take years to recover from this. We'll be feeling the effects of the lockdowns longer than the virus.

I also don't understand why lockdowns are cool among so many young people on social media. When did listening to the man become cool? I'm not anarchist, but I think a healthy dose of skepticism, and risky behaviour is good in younger generations and keeps older people on their toes.

No, lockdowns are like applying a Band-Aid to a bullet wound. It is not intended to fix the injury, it is intended to slow the bleeding, so you live long enough to make it to surgery.

With enough time, effort, and assistance, you can recover from financial ruin. But can you bring the dead back to life? What good are businesses and an economy if you are dead, or survive but need organ transplants? It is a pretty simple calculus: you need to secure your physical survival before everything else.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
No, lockdowns are like applying a Band-Aid to a bullet wound. It is not intended to fix the injury, it is intended to slow the bleeding, so you live long enough to make it to surgery.

With enough time, effort, and assistance, you can recover from financial ruin. But can you bring the dead back to life? What good are businesses and an economy if you are dead, or survive but need organ transplants? It is a pretty simple calculus: you need to secure your physical survival before everything else.

Originally posted by Artol
That is a bit hurtful to read.

It was comedy...

According to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, COVID-19 is deadliest among older populations. In fact, through November 25, 92 percent of COVID-19 deaths nationwide have occurred among those ages 55 or older. Only 0.2 percent were younger than 25. This trend can also be found on the state level.

Seems like most are capable of survival without help.

Originally posted by snowdragon
Seems like most are capable of survival without help.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
long Covid is just one of the things many survivors face.

Seeing as how roughly 80% of the deaths that covid had a hand in were in retirement aged ppl it just seems like a really good idea to shut down the USA.

Those in retirement coulda just locked down.

The amount of ppl that required hospitalization under 60 for showing moderate symptoms of covid is something like 15% of all known infected.

So sayeth the CDC.

France phucked up the lockdown because they went straight from no interactions to do whatever you want. They should've passed through a partial lockdown like the one we currently have (schools are open, business are opening progressively, work from home is encouraged) instead of opening the gates straight up. They should have done a calendar clearly defining the industries that would open up and then potentially close up later to favor small businesses instead and only keep a diffent part of the population inactive instead of screwing small business.

But any solution other than yes and no seems too complicated for most of the population to grasp.

Remember when lockdowns were just supposed to flatten the curve so that hospitals could prepare and improve their situation to take care of people with covid later? Pepperidge farms remembers.

Originally posted by Bentley
France phucked up the lockdown because they went straight from no interactions to do whatever you want. They should've passed through a partial lockdown like the one we currently have (schools are open, business are opening progressively, work from home is encouraged) instead of opening the gates straight up. They should have done a calendar clearly defining the industries that would open up and then potentially close up later to favor small businesses instead and only keep a diffent part of the population inactive instead of screwing small business.

But any solution other than yes and no seems too complicated for most of the population to grasp.

Originally posted by Surtur
I'd say that to anyone here: there is no point in responding to posts you aren't even reading.

And you do it on a daily basis, multiple times a day.

You are learning Surt. Just move on. Let the Blue Ball Babies have their little Locked Down Safe Place to Cry and jerk each other off in.

It just isn't worth it any.

Trumpers: "The covid shutdowns are to hurt Trump's election chances and the Dems are doing it!"

Robtard: "The election is over, Trump's already lost, Biden is the President elect."

Trumpers: "ReeeEeeEEEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"