Jump to content


Supreme User
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Negatory

  1. Whether you like it or not, ROE lims will exist. Bet we aren’t gonna be allowed to use tactical nukes unless very specific circumstances are met. And I bet most of us are fine with that. If anything, those wars you listed should have taught us that military action alone is incapable of solving complex geopolitical disagreements effectively. We have basically lost, from a national objectives standpoint, nearly every single kinetic war since WWII. Our greatest success was likely the Cold War, which ironically effectively used diplomacy, information, and economic warfare successfully, but almost no direct military response.
  2. Selection bias is rife. Yesterday’s conspiracy theories have often been actually conspiracy theories. See how COVID was over in Apr 2020, then Aug 2020, then Apr 2021, then… or how hydroxychloriquine was a miracle drug… etc. Im just posting data. You guys can get offended at data if you like, but we’re at the point of no more rational discourse if that’s the case.
  3. If you think the fact that we have multiple orders of magnitude more people on ventilators for respiratory distress than previous years is due largely to hospitals forcing otherwise healthy people to be intubated, then I’ve got nothing for you. We can discuss data at face value, or we can be skeptical of literally everything. I’m not gonna engage with super conspiracy theories with almost no evidence.
  4. Yeah, it’s generally less severe than the already non-severe for our demographic delta. But it’s significantly more transmissible. John’s Hopkins, the CDC, and the NYT are tracking hospitalizations in that ballpark. But maybe that’s not confirmed enough.
  5. Sure. If you can show me that a cold causes 150k concurrent hospitalizations, I’ll agree with you.
  6. Ah. Do you see something in the article that is not corroborated by the study? Or is there something in the study that is intentionally left out of the article. I guess I don’t see the issue if it generally accurately portrays the main points of the study.
  7. Yes they are, don’t where you’re basing your opinion from. The study is at the top of the article, I’ll assume you didn’t read it. Check it out: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.01.11.22269045v1.full-text They clearly control and account for vaccination status, previous infection, age, sex, and comorbidities. The data shows BOTH that omicron is likely less severe AND vaccines are effective at reducing hospitalization/death.
  8. https://www.axios.com/cdc-omicron-death-delta-variant-covid-959f1e3a-b09c-4d31-820c-90071f8e7a4f.html Keeping up with the data. Current studies are showing Omicron has a ~90% reduction in mortality, ~75% reduction in ICU admission, and ~50% reduction in hospitalization compared to previous variants. Would be nice if it was 90% across the board, because this will still overrun the hospital systems based on having 5-10x the cases. Oh well.
  9. You say zero evidence? Like when Rudy called for “trial by combat?” I know how this conversation will go, but your attempt to feign ignorance by taking things literally when it suits you and saying it’s a metaphor when it works in your favor is par for the course. News flash: You don’t have to support an insurrection just because the last one was instigated by conservatives. Just like how those conservatives don’t have to define conservatives as a whole.
  10. I agree with you, but I do find it funny. You know the Spanish flu barely killed anyone in the beginning, then killed the vast majority after a major mutation? The truth is, we don’t know how this will go. For all we know, this could go the way of the bubonic plague and be endemic for decades and have a similar mortality rate throughout. Hope not, though.
  11. Agreed. Arguing it’s no big deal is a real cop out argument. A potential 10-20% reduction in transmission traded for an inability to accurately portray or determine emotions is not worth it from a human social connection standpoint.
  12. Some good charts showing how a simple offset of 4 days for hospitalizations or 21 days for deaths can potentially predict effects. Here’s hoping that both of those things don’t follow the curves of the past.
  13. Doesn't appear that is the case. Although the positivity rate has increased by an order of magnitude. https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states
  14. https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/04/us-global-record-more-than-1m-daily-covid-cases @ViperMan et al? Looks like your feelings based argument that we would never go a multiple above 250k isn’t panning out. Just like COVID going away on its own, ending when it heats up, disappearing, etc…
  15. This is ironically great because it’s how it should work, but doesn’t. Reference the 2 bros I’ve seen get Art-15d by the group commander for drunken sexual jokes they made in front of the wrong person.
  16. No one here is arguing for this guy to be locked up. They are arguing that this guy is a douche, and that everyone should think that he’s a douche. Big difference. While the first amendment let’s you say almost whatever you want with a few caveats, it only protects you from the government. Private citizens, private organizations, and private businesses have all the rights in the world to never interact with this guy in a positive way again based on what he said if they want. We can judge his speech harshly. We can denounce him and convince others to denounce him. We could petition Twitter and Facebook to deplatform him right now with no real constitutional recourse - and before you tell me I’m wrong, they already did it with Trump. Twitter/Facebook could choose to do that on their own! I can even openly advocate for other free citizens to legally boycott this guy based on his beliefs. I can tell everyone else that this guy is a shitty dude, if I want. I can try to convince others of the same. As long as I don’t lie about facts, I am absolutely protected, and you should embrace that no matter how much you dislike it. It’s a common misconception that the first amendment gives you any more protection for yourself than freedom from gov persecution. It’s not freedom from societal judgment. Not even an iota. Also, arguing tolerance of all free speech could be what brings us back to the middle is a ridiculous over generalization. Would you have been the one arguing for tolerance of the American Nazi Party’s platform in 1946? Sure, the gov shouldn’t do anything if it’s not criminal. But private society choosing to harshly judge someone for being a childish douche? Sorry bout ya.
  17. We just got to 2X on confirmed cases. Probably 1.0M a day if you include unreported literally now. I’m not kidding you! https://www.marketwatch.com/story/coronavirus-tally-us-counts-more-than-500000-new-covid-cases-in-a-day-lifting-the-daily-average-to-a-near-1-year-high-2021-12-28
  18. Also nice to see people not engage in any amount of data analysis and instead sit on the sidelines with a sense of smug superiority.
  19. Okay, we’ll I’m not okay with a 5-15% and 30% mortality rate for a population that will almost surely get infected with entirely unmitigated spread. That’s where we disagree! Great, we figured it out.
  20. There are many ideas that are not just "I support mandates" or "I don't support mandates." For example, I think that mandating vaccines for high risk populations - those at a 10%+ risk of being admitted to the hospital, based on age, gender, race, BMI, previous health conditions - could be in the interest of America. If you don't like the idea of a mandate, then let's do it economically. Maybe we should increase taxes on society by a blanket 3% and then offer a grant to any high-risk person who gets vaccinated while offering the vaccine to everyone. I talked about it at the beginning of the pandemic, but I was strongly in support of providing a temporary monthly unemployment allowance to those over the age of 60 or anyone who is provably high risk so that they could isolate if they choose. If they don't, then they go to the hospital and die on their own dime. The rest of society keeps working and chugging along. Once the vaccine came out, let it be a personal decision, for the most part, as to how much risk you wanted to accept from COVID. If you choose to not get vaccinated when you're high risk, then you do so at your own risk. And to be clear, the only reason I don't support continued mandates is because everyone has been given the opportunity to protect themselves. I would not have supported no mandates or government intervention prior to about March this year. Do you see how this is a gray continuum that is different than mandates forever or no mandates ever?
  21. We aren't arguing about a personal decision to get a vaccine. We're arguing about ethics of vaccine mandates. You are mad at pawnman, for example, because he believes that you, ethically, should be required to get the vaccine. You believe that vaccine mandates are wrong. And your reasoning, as just stated, was because it's "anything but proven." Which is entirely based off of feelings. Numerous studies show that the vaccine decreases hospitalization and death rates by an order of magnitude. And the only statistically significant scientifically proven side effect to this point is a mild increase in risk of myocarditis in males under the age of 30. Also, your comments about "individual research" are a copout to try to legitimize any idea, regardless of source or evidence to the contrary. And I don't believe in blanket vaccine mandates, which, again, is hilarious in how you can't wrap your mind around that.
  22. Show me any proof of this. I think this is gonna be a tough one for you. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence - how do you make policy when you actually have so many unknowns? Cloth masks have been shown to be at least 20-30%+ effective with current terrible usage, increasing with N95s. I personally don't agree with using them, but it is a far cry for someone to try to say that they are wholly ineffective. With that being said, based on the risks to emotional health/interpersonal relationships, I believe we should accept the increased spread that would come with unmasking. But that is a different argument than "mask don't work." There is 100% a scientific justification that isolation prevents spread. Don't see how that is unscientific. Sure, the kids may not die if they get COVID, but I don't see how you can argue that this wouldn't reduce spread to their families and therefore the rest of America. The middle is the way forward. Maybe this is the fundamental disagreement that we won't see eye-to-eye on. Compromise and understanding is the way forward. An America of 330M people, not just half on one side or the other, is the right way.
  23. Fixed that for you, buddy. Gotta love when bullies on both sides play the victim.
  • Create New...