Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Discuss anything you want.
For discussions about politics, please use the Politics area instead.
User avatar
In2ition
Posts: 7141
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:35 pm

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by In2ition » Sun Nov 22, 2020 4:13 pm

Cap wrote:
Sat Nov 21, 2020 7:02 pm
In2ition wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 9:03 am
I think it was 1.8% were infected that wore the mask and 2.1% for those without a mask. It can offer more protection to others if the mask wearer is infected. So, if that's the case, should everyone be forced to wear them, or just those infected?
That’s a little bit like asking whether everybody should wear a condom, or just those with STDs. Many people are infected and don’t know it. If you’re having casual sex you should wear a condom, and if you’re exchanging casual air you should wear a mask.

Sure, if you’re hanging at home with your wife and kids, you don’t need to wear masks, and you probably don’t need to wear a condom when you fuck your wife. But with everybody else, you should.

Even if you’ve been tested and just come out of quarantine and know you’re not infected, you should still wear a mask, because the behavior is as contagious as the virus.

I’m not going to get into the argument of whether it should be a legal mandate or legally voluntary. Either way, it’s a moral imperative. Just wear it.
Wearing a mask if you aren't infected is a moral imperative? You have a 0% chance of infecting someone else if you aren't infected yourself. If the difference in protecting yourself from being infected is not conclusively shown to improve with wearing a mask vs not wearing a mask, what is it for?

If you are infected, it's more likely a moral imperative to wear a mask and quarantine yourself to make sure you don't infect anyone, which is shown to at least improve the chance of not transmitting it to others.

Shouldn't making sure that you don't kill small businesses with lockdowns be a moral imperative? Instead, big businesses and the super rich have thrived while the small businesses die.

Shouldn't doing things like keeping schools open to cut down on teen suicide and domestic violence be a moral imperative?

Shouldn't being faithful to your wife be the moral imperative, as opposed to just making sure you use a condom with whoever you are cheating on her with?

"...the behavior is as contagious as the virus." is just a bit too 1984ish for me. Sorry, I don't mean any offense by that, but I am not going to agree with that, but go ahead and believe anything you want.

BTW, your analogy was both crude and intellectually dishonest. People wear condoms not just for STDs, but for birth control too. You don't wear a mask for something other than...what? Especially when wearing a mask is about as preventative to the transmission of covid as using a sheet of cloth to cover the hole on the bottom of a boat is to keeping out water and preventing your boat from sinking.
"30 wins would be an extremely disappointing season" yeah, I said it and I mean it.
"When we all think alike, nobody is thinking" - Walter Lippmann

Online
User avatar
Nodack
Posts: 4141
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by Nodack » Sun Nov 22, 2020 6:16 pm

From what I have read, most of the infections occur when people have Covid but don’t know they have it and walk around feeling fine but, are spreading Covid.

All these people who refuse to wear a mask and gathering in super spreader groups are just playing Russian roulette with everyone’s lives imo. If everyone wore a mask in public we probably wouldn’t need any lock downs. If Trump listened to the experts and told his supporters to wear masks because it’s the right and patriotic thing to do they would all do it without question and we would all be wearing masks without making it a political statement. Maybe that would eliminate the need for any lockdowns. It seems logical to me. What we have do e has been nothing short of insane IMO.

Red state Governors have apposed mandating masks because it’s political suicide. Now that Covid is raging in their states many have been faced with the reality that their hospitals are overrun with Covid and are at the breaking point and have issued mandate on masks even though they know they will face a political price. I respect them doing the right thing for once instead of the politically correct thing.

User avatar
In2ition
Posts: 7141
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:35 pm

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by In2ition » Sun Nov 22, 2020 7:40 pm

Nodack wrote:
Sun Nov 22, 2020 6:16 pm
From what I have read, most of the infections occur when people have Covid but don’t know they have it and walk around feeling fine but, are spreading Covid.

All these people who refuse to wear a mask and gathering in super spreader groups are just playing Russian roulette with everyone’s lives imo. If everyone wore a mask in public we probably wouldn’t need any lock downs. If Trump listened to the experts and told his supporters to wear masks because it’s the right and patriotic thing to do they would all do it without question and we would all be wearing masks without making it a political statement. Maybe that would eliminate the need for any lockdowns. It seems logical to me. What we have do e has been nothing short of insane IMO.

Red state Governors have apposed mandating masks because it’s political suicide. Now that Covid is raging in their states many have been faced with the reality that their hospitals are overrun with Covid and are at the breaking point and have issued mandate on masks even though they know they will face a political price. I respect them doing the right thing for once instead of the politically correct thing.
Can you please explain how inmates in prison are forced to wear a mask 24/7 and are locked down in their cells separated from others, because of covid, yet covid still goes through the prison like it's nothing?

Which Red states are you talking about?
"30 wins would be an extremely disappointing season" yeah, I said it and I mean it.
"When we all think alike, nobody is thinking" - Walter Lippmann

Online
User avatar
Nodack
Posts: 4141
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by Nodack » Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:37 am

I can’t imagine every inmate following mask protocols when half the country doesn’t. Two guys in one tiny cell with cells packed together like sardines and all the cells are open to the rest of the inside. Mess hall? Did they wear masks when they eat together? Do they eat together? The more people you put in a tight area the more chance of Covid. People touching everything. Do they sanitize everything? Wearing a mask is no guarantee. Wearing gloves and sanitizing is no guarantee. All the health experts I listen too like the CDC or WHO say wear a mask. There is nothing to argue about imo. You either listen to the experts and wear a mask or you listen to non experts and blow off a mask.

I have a gig at a nursing home on Tuesday. I am not even allowed to go into the building. I have to go thru the back and play in a courtyard between buildings outside.

User avatar
specialsauce
Posts: 4787
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 8:45 pm

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by specialsauce » Mon Nov 23, 2020 8:25 am

Masks are effective but if you sit among a group not distanced with surgical masks on it’s not fool proof. You need masks and appropriate behaviors. They’re great for grocery shopping where you’re passing by people quickly.

Jails, dorms, etc are close quarters. They’ve always been highest risk for any communicable disease. COVID is not an exception here.

User avatar
specialsauce
Posts: 4787
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 8:45 pm

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by specialsauce » Mon Nov 23, 2020 8:29 am

In2ition wrote:
Sun Nov 22, 2020 4:13 pm
Cap wrote:
Sat Nov 21, 2020 7:02 pm
In2ition wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 9:03 am
I think it was 1.8% were infected that wore the mask and 2.1% for those without a mask. It can offer more protection to others if the mask wearer is infected. So, if that's the case, should everyone be forced to wear them, or just those infected?
That’s a little bit like asking whether everybody should wear a condom, or just those with STDs. Many people are infected and don’t know it. If you’re having casual sex you should wear a condom, and if you’re exchanging casual air you should wear a mask.

Sure, if you’re hanging at home with your wife and kids, you don’t need to wear masks, and you probably don’t need to wear a condom when you fuck your wife. But with everybody else, you should.

Even if you’ve been tested and just come out of quarantine and know you’re not infected, you should still wear a mask, because the behavior is as contagious as the virus.

I’m not going to get into the argument of whether it should be a legal mandate or legally voluntary. Either way, it’s a moral imperative. Just wear it.
Wearing a mask if you aren't infected is a moral imperative? You have a 0% chance of infecting someone else if you aren't infected yourself. If the difference in protecting yourself from being infected is not conclusively shown to improve with wearing a mask vs not wearing a mask, what is it for?

If you are infected, it's more likely a moral imperative to wear a mask and quarantine yourself to make sure you don't infect anyone, which is shown to at least improve the chance of not transmitting it to others.

Shouldn't making sure that you don't kill small businesses with lockdowns be a moral imperative? Instead, big businesses and the super rich have thrived while the small businesses die.

Shouldn't doing things like keeping schools open to cut down on teen suicide and domestic violence be a moral imperative?

Shouldn't being faithful to your wife be the moral imperative, as opposed to just making sure you use a condom with whoever you are cheating on her with?

"...the behavior is as contagious as the virus." is just a bit too 1984ish for me. Sorry, I don't mean any offense by that, but I am not going to agree with that, but go ahead and believe anything you want.

BTW, your analogy was both crude and intellectually dishonest. People wear condoms not just for STDs, but for birth control too. You don't wear a mask for something other than...what? Especially when wearing a mask is about as preventative to the transmission of covid as using a sheet of cloth to cover the hole on the bottom of a boat is to keeping out water and preventing your boat from sinking.
Give me a break In2. You just got to let your refusal to buy into masks and distancing rest. The world is a wreck.

For the thousandth time, you can’t rely on people wearing a mask only when they’re infected because you’re most infectious 3 days before you even show symptoms on average.

And how many people have you seen that say, “I don’t have COVID it’s just a head cold!” These are some of the bigger idiots in town.

Just wear a fucking mask and tel your friends and family to do the right thing for your neighbor and we can all go on living our lives. It’s not that hard. If you want to pick a “free America” battle, then battle the requirement to wear pants and underwear. It’s my dick, my choice.

User avatar
Indy
Posts: 12474
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by Indy » Mon Nov 23, 2020 9:25 am

specialsauce wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 8:29 am
It's my dick, my choice.
Sauce, your signature absolutely needs to be "It's my dick, my choice."
Last edited by Indy on Mon Nov 23, 2020 10:06 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
In2ition
Posts: 7141
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:35 pm

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by In2ition » Mon Nov 23, 2020 9:29 am

specialsauce wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 8:29 am
In2ition wrote:
Sun Nov 22, 2020 4:13 pm
Cap wrote:
Sat Nov 21, 2020 7:02 pm
In2ition wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 9:03 am
I think it was 1.8% were infected that wore the mask and 2.1% for those without a mask. It can offer more protection to others if the mask wearer is infected. So, if that's the case, should everyone be forced to wear them, or just those infected?
That’s a little bit like asking whether everybody should wear a condom, or just those with STDs. Many people are infected and don’t know it. If you’re having casual sex you should wear a condom, and if you’re exchanging casual air you should wear a mask.

Sure, if you’re hanging at home with your wife and kids, you don’t need to wear masks, and you probably don’t need to wear a condom when you fuck your wife. But with everybody else, you should.

Even if you’ve been tested and just come out of quarantine and know you’re not infected, you should still wear a mask, because the behavior is as contagious as the virus.

I’m not going to get into the argument of whether it should be a legal mandate or legally voluntary. Either way, it’s a moral imperative. Just wear it.
Wearing a mask if you aren't infected is a moral imperative? You have a 0% chance of infecting someone else if you aren't infected yourself. If the difference in protecting yourself from being infected is not conclusively shown to improve with wearing a mask vs not wearing a mask, what is it for?

If you are infected, it's more likely a moral imperative to wear a mask and quarantine yourself to make sure you don't infect anyone, which is shown to at least improve the chance of not transmitting it to others.

Shouldn't making sure that you don't kill small businesses with lockdowns be a moral imperative? Instead, big businesses and the super rich have thrived while the small businesses die.

Shouldn't doing things like keeping schools open to cut down on teen suicide and domestic violence be a moral imperative?

Shouldn't being faithful to your wife be the moral imperative, as opposed to just making sure you use a condom with whoever you are cheating on her with?

"...the behavior is as contagious as the virus." is just a bit too 1984ish for me. Sorry, I don't mean any offense by that, but I am not going to agree with that, but go ahead and believe anything you want.

BTW, your analogy was both crude and intellectually dishonest. People wear condoms not just for STDs, but for birth control too. You don't wear a mask for something other than...what? Especially when wearing a mask is about as preventative to the transmission of covid as using a sheet of cloth to cover the hole on the bottom of a boat is to keeping out water and preventing your boat from sinking.
Give me a break In2. You just got to let your refusal to buy into masks and distancing rest. The world is a wreck.

For the thousandth time, you can’t rely on people wearing a mask only when they’re infected because you’re most infectious 3 days before you even show symptoms on average.

And how many people have you seen that say, “I don’t have COVID it’s just a head cold!” These are some of the bigger idiots in town.

Just wear a fucking mask and tel your friends and family to do the right thing for your neighbor and we can all go on living our lives. It’s not that hard. If you want to pick a “free America” battle, then battle the requirement to wear pants and underwear. It’s my dick, my choice.
I'll go backwards on this. Sauce, I wear a mask all the time, in every "appropriate" instance, walking into work, going through the drive thru, walking up to the counter of an outdoor restaurant, going into a restaurant, going into a store, going into a medical facility, walking around my office, etc. This is a dumb straw man argument that you are making and I know you are very very smart.

I have never heard this excuse, not my argument.

So it's best to assume everyone is sick? Is that your argument? If it is, fine.

I'm not discounting distancing, but I am only providing data that apparently everyone else is ignoring. You can take your grievances up with whoever made the studies or you can argue with me that they are wrong. I just ask that you bring your own facts and studies. Hell, you can have your own opinion, I certainly not going to tell you to be an automaton.
"30 wins would be an extremely disappointing season" yeah, I said it and I mean it.
"When we all think alike, nobody is thinking" - Walter Lippmann

User avatar
specialsauce
Posts: 4787
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 8:45 pm

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by specialsauce » Mon Nov 23, 2020 10:54 am

In2ition wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 9:29 am
specialsauce wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 8:29 am
In2ition wrote:
Sun Nov 22, 2020 4:13 pm
Cap wrote:
Sat Nov 21, 2020 7:02 pm
In2ition wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 9:03 am
I think it was 1.8% were infected that wore the mask and 2.1% for those without a mask. It can offer more protection to others if the mask wearer is infected. So, if that's the case, should everyone be forced to wear them, or just those infected?
That’s a little bit like asking whether everybody should wear a condom, or just those with STDs. Many people are infected and don’t know it. If you’re having casual sex you should wear a condom, and if you’re exchanging casual air you should wear a mask.

Sure, if you’re hanging at home with your wife and kids, you don’t need to wear masks, and you probably don’t need to wear a condom when you fuck your wife. But with everybody else, you should.

Even if you’ve been tested and just come out of quarantine and know you’re not infected, you should still wear a mask, because the behavior is as contagious as the virus.

I’m not going to get into the argument of whether it should be a legal mandate or legally voluntary. Either way, it’s a moral imperative. Just wear it.
Wearing a mask if you aren't infected is a moral imperative? You have a 0% chance of infecting someone else if you aren't infected yourself. If the difference in protecting yourself from being infected is not conclusively shown to improve with wearing a mask vs not wearing a mask, what is it for?

If you are infected, it's more likely a moral imperative to wear a mask and quarantine yourself to make sure you don't infect anyone, which is shown to at least improve the chance of not transmitting it to others.

Shouldn't making sure that you don't kill small businesses with lockdowns be a moral imperative? Instead, big businesses and the super rich have thrived while the small businesses die.

Shouldn't doing things like keeping schools open to cut down on teen suicide and domestic violence be a moral imperative?

Shouldn't being faithful to your wife be the moral imperative, as opposed to just making sure you use a condom with whoever you are cheating on her with?

"...the behavior is as contagious as the virus." is just a bit too 1984ish for me. Sorry, I don't mean any offense by that, but I am not going to agree with that, but go ahead and believe anything you want.

BTW, your analogy was both crude and intellectually dishonest. People wear condoms not just for STDs, but for birth control too. You don't wear a mask for something other than...what? Especially when wearing a mask is about as preventative to the transmission of covid as using a sheet of cloth to cover the hole on the bottom of a boat is to keeping out water and preventing your boat from sinking.
Give me a break In2. You just got to let your refusal to buy into masks and distancing rest. The world is a wreck.

For the thousandth time, you can’t rely on people wearing a mask only when they’re infected because you’re most infectious 3 days before you even show symptoms on average.

And how many people have you seen that say, “I don’t have COVID it’s just a head cold!” These are some of the bigger idiots in town.

Just wear a fucking mask and tel your friends and family to do the right thing for your neighbor and we can all go on living our lives. It’s not that hard. If you want to pick a “free America” battle, then battle the requirement to wear pants and underwear. It’s my dick, my choice.
I'll go backwards on this. Sauce, I wear a mask all the time, in every "appropriate" instance, walking into work, going through the drive thru, walking up to the counter of an outdoor restaurant, going into a restaurant, going into a store, going into a medical facility, walking around my office, etc. This is a dumb straw man argument that you are making and I know you are very very smart.

I have never heard this excuse, not my argument.

So it's best to assume everyone is sick? Is that your argument? If it is, fine.

I'm not discounting distancing, but I am only providing data that apparently everyone else is ignoring. You can take your grievances up with whoever made the studies or you can argue with me that they are wrong. I just ask that you bring your own facts and studies. Hell, you can have your own opinion, I certainly not going to tell you to be an automaton.
I know everything you do is responsible. Your behaviors are great but just seems like you’re always looking for something to prove it’s okay to go back to normal life, which is a natural instinct but just wrong right now.

Yes my belief is you have to assume everyone is infected because they are most infectious prior to development of symptoms and others completely disregard their symptoms for allergies or a cold (at this point pure ignorance).

User avatar
specialsauce
Posts: 4787
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 8:45 pm

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by specialsauce » Mon Nov 23, 2020 10:54 am

Indy wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 9:25 am
specialsauce wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 8:29 am
It's my dick, my choice.
Sauce, your signature absolutely needs to be "It's my dick, my choice."
Lol taken out of context that could really go sideways

User avatar
Indy
Posts: 12474
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by Indy » Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:07 am

specialsauce wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 10:54 am
Indy wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 9:25 am
specialsauce wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 8:29 am
It's my dick, my choice.
Sauce, your signature absolutely needs to be "It's my dick, my choice."
Lol taken out of context that could really go sideways
Only if you get excited.

Online
User avatar
Superbone
Posts: 19682
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 11:44 am
Location: Escondido, CA (Phoenix Native)

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by Superbone » Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:11 am

specialsauce wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 10:54 am
Indy wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 9:25 am
specialsauce wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 8:29 am
It's my dick, my choice.
Sauce, your signature absolutely needs to be "It's my dick, my choice."
Lol taken out of context that could really go sideways
Yours too? :lol:
Wormwood/Superbone 2019/2020 season bet: Suns win < 30 games, Wormwood wins, else 'Bone wins. 1 month avatar shame starting July 1st of winner's choosing. ACCOMPLISHED! 34 wins in a shortened season!

Online
User avatar
Superbone
Posts: 19682
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 11:44 am
Location: Escondido, CA (Phoenix Native)

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by Superbone » Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:14 am

I see Indy and I are on the same wavelength.

And what's with calling everybody's argument a "straw man argument"? That's getting old. You can't just say that every time somebody refutes you.
Wormwood/Superbone 2019/2020 season bet: Suns win < 30 games, Wormwood wins, else 'Bone wins. 1 month avatar shame starting July 1st of winner's choosing. ACCOMPLISHED! 34 wins in a shortened season!

User avatar
In2ition
Posts: 7141
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:35 pm

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by In2ition » Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:38 am

Superbone wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:14 am
I see Indy and I are on the same wavelength.

And what's with calling everybody's argument a "straw man argument"? That's getting old. You can't just say that every time somebody refutes you.
When you use those tactics, I will continue to call them out. What's wrong with that? Besides, I get it, everyone is thinks they work. That's fine, go ahead and call each of these things bs. You should be able back it up without resorting to techniques that only appeal to everyone else here, like "gotcha" with that zinger. I'm not trying to push disinformation, just the information that's available. You all can read it and think for yourselves. If it's BS, you can call it BS, tell me why and I'll agree with you if I think you make a great point. Sauce made a great point about prisons and dorms being susceptible to viruses. I agree, dorms especially, since young students don't seem to be very willingly to social distance at all times. I think prisons can be much more controlled and separated, especially if they decide to have only one prisoner per room, but it still runs through there just as easily.
"30 wins would be an extremely disappointing season" yeah, I said it and I mean it.
"When we all think alike, nobody is thinking" - Walter Lippmann

Online
User avatar
Superbone
Posts: 19682
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 11:44 am
Location: Escondido, CA (Phoenix Native)

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by Superbone » Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:44 am

In2ition wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:38 am
I'm not trying to push disinformation, just the information that's available.
No, just a small subset of the information that's available that supports your arguments. A lot of it not very scientific.
Wormwood/Superbone 2019/2020 season bet: Suns win < 30 games, Wormwood wins, else 'Bone wins. 1 month avatar shame starting July 1st of winner's choosing. ACCOMPLISHED! 34 wins in a shortened season!

Online
User avatar
ShelC
Posts: 7188
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 6:00 am

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by ShelC » Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:48 am

I can't wait for 6 months from now when we shift from debating facemasks and social distancing to debating the vaccines. You'll see a lot of the same takes on social media - "how do we know they really work?", "here are the numbers of people who are sicker after taking the vaccine than prior to taking it", "getting the vaccine is actually worse than getting Covid!", "Fauci's only pushing Pfizer's vaccine because he's got some stake in it", "my body, my choice if I don't want to get vaccinated" and all the other anti-vaxxer BS that's been brewing the past 20 years.

Should be a fun spring!

Online
User avatar
Superbone
Posts: 19682
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 11:44 am
Location: Escondido, CA (Phoenix Native)

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by Superbone » Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:50 am

ShelC wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:48 am
I can't wait for 6 months from now when we shift from debating facemasks and social distancing to debating the vaccines. You'll see a lot of the same takes on social media - "how do we know they really work?", "here are the numbers of people who are sicker after taking the vaccine than prior to taking it", "getting the vaccine is actually worse than getting Covid!", "Fauci's only pushing Pfizer's vaccine because he's got some stake in it", "my body, my choice if I don't want to get vaccinated" and all the other anti-vaxxer BS that's been brewing the past 20 years.

Should be a fun spring!
Oh, joy. And I know you're right.
Wormwood/Superbone 2019/2020 season bet: Suns win < 30 games, Wormwood wins, else 'Bone wins. 1 month avatar shame starting July 1st of winner's choosing. ACCOMPLISHED! 34 wins in a shortened season!

User avatar
Indy
Posts: 12474
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by Indy » Mon Nov 23, 2020 12:01 pm

In2ition wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:38 am
Superbone wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:14 am
I see Indy and I are on the same wavelength.

And what's with calling everybody's argument a "straw man argument"? That's getting old. You can't just say that every time somebody refutes you.
When you use those tactics, I will continue to call them out. What's wrong with that? Besides, I get it, everyone is thinks they work. That's fine, go ahead and call each of these things bs. You should be able back it up without resorting to techniques that only appeal to everyone else here, like "gotcha" with that zinger. I'm not trying to push disinformation, just the information that's available. You all can read it and think for yourselves. If it's BS, you can call it BS, tell me why and I'll agree with you if I think you make a great point. Sauce made a great point about prisons and dorms being susceptible to viruses. I agree, dorms especially, since young students don't seem to be very willingly to social distance at all times. I think prisons can be much more controlled and separated, especially if they decide to have only one prisoner per room, but it still runs through there just as easily.
Honestly, In2, it is very easy to find science-based refutations of every one of these things you post as "interesting. what do you all think" posts. For example:

The most recent one wasn't even accepted at the first few journals it was submitted to. It doesn't even look at the impact to the population, only the people in the study. And it was done in a place that had no recommendations for masks at all. And it only followed the people for 30 days (when we know the incubation period is around half of that time, you are throwing out half of the results).

It just isn't worth regurgitating all of the science in here. It like you are posting these youtube videos from flat-earthers and asking us what we think or where is the data to show the earth is round.

User avatar
Indy
Posts: 12474
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by Indy » Mon Nov 23, 2020 12:02 pm

Superbone wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:50 am
ShelC wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:48 am
I can't wait for 6 months from now when we shift from debating facemasks and social distancing to debating the vaccines. You'll see a lot of the same takes on social media - "how do we know they really work?", "here are the numbers of people who are sicker after taking the vaccine than prior to taking it", "getting the vaccine is actually worse than getting Covid!", "Fauci's only pushing Pfizer's vaccine because he's got some stake in it", "my body, my choice if I don't want to get vaccinated" and all the other anti-vaxxer BS that's been brewing the past 20 years.

Should be a fun spring!
Oh, joy. And I know you're right.
I think it already started in this thread saying that the head of Pfizer is not going to take it so why should we.

User avatar
In2ition
Posts: 7141
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 1:35 pm

Re: Coronavirus: When should we be concerned?

Post by In2ition » Mon Nov 23, 2020 12:29 pm

Indy wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 12:01 pm
In2ition wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:38 am
Superbone wrote:
Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:14 am
I see Indy and I are on the same wavelength.

And what's with calling everybody's argument a "straw man argument"? That's getting old. You can't just say that every time somebody refutes you.
When you use those tactics, I will continue to call them out. What's wrong with that? Besides, I get it, everyone is thinks they work. That's fine, go ahead and call each of these things bs. You should be able back it up without resorting to techniques that only appeal to everyone else here, like "gotcha" with that zinger. I'm not trying to push disinformation, just the information that's available. You all can read it and think for yourselves. If it's BS, you can call it BS, tell me why and I'll agree with you if I think you make a great point. Sauce made a great point about prisons and dorms being susceptible to viruses. I agree, dorms especially, since young students don't seem to be very willingly to social distance at all times. I think prisons can be much more controlled and separated, especially if they decide to have only one prisoner per room, but it still runs through there just as easily.
Honestly, In2, it is very easy to find science-based refutations of every one of these things you post as "interesting. what do you all think" posts. For example:

The most recent one wasn't even accepted at the first few journals it was submitted to. It doesn't even look at the impact to the population, only the people in the study. And it was done in a place that had no recommendations for masks at all. And it only followed the people for 30 days (when we know the incubation period is around half of that time, you are throwing out half of the results).

It just isn't worth regurgitating all of the science in here. It like you are posting these youtube videos from flat-earthers and asking us what we think or where is the data to show the earth is round.
Your second paragraph makes a very good point. Perhaps they need to do a much better, larger and longer study on it.

As far as your first paragraph. Would you accept it if I just said "there are many many science-based studies that prove the masks do not make a difference"? I don't think you would at all.

You know this is a flat earth theory, come on.
"30 wins would be an extremely disappointing season" yeah, I said it and I mean it.
"When we all think alike, nobody is thinking" - Walter Lippmann

Post Reply