Coronavirus 2019-nCov: Political Thread

[WstateU]

First, I'm a law abiding citizen (and probably in a 'higher risk' category than most of you) and will be wearing a mask as required, but I'm pretty much hunkered down until this wave blows over. Yes, the video posted below is 'Fox News', but what do these two doctors have to gain with their opinions? Watch all or go to the 10 minute mark. I don't watch a lot of cable news, but it did catch my attention while flipping through channels last night. I'd much rather watch Southpark or Forensic Files.

[C0|dB|00ded]

It’s almost as if you’re mad (or don’t believe the numbers, ironic I know) that Sedgwick County had a string of nearly 4 weeks without a Covid death.

It's that you are misrepresenting the seriousness of the issue by stating the death numbers in Wichita, Kansas. We don't matter. We are not representative. We are "flyover country". Perhaps even El Corona got the memo. Lucky us! This may be the only instance when it's lucky to live in Wichita. But don't get cute. We aren't immune, and the virus is here and spreading. We absolutely could be caught up in a shitstorm before you can say, Doo-Dah Diner.

But if you Google "Covid-19 Pandemic" you'll find ample examples of the danger it presents to mankind.

India is about to get a really tough lesson.

P.S. There was a local article on why we didn't have a death for weeks. It was due to a "lag in reporting". There were a couple deaths that happened over that 4 week period.


T


...

[C0|dB|00ded]

First, I'm a law abiding citizen (and probably in a 'higher risk' category than most of you) and will be wearing a mask as required, but I'm pretty much hunkered down until this wave blows over. Yes, the video posted below is 'Fox News', but what do these two doctors have to gain with their opinions? Watch all or go to the 10 minute mark. I don't watch a lot of cable news, but it did catch my attention while flipping through channels last night. I'd much rather watch Southpark or Forensic Files.

I already posted this on here somewhere. Throughout the "Ingraham Angle" she mocked the idea of wearing a mask. I think maybe she needs a dose of Karma for the millions of people she is deceiving in the name of "Liberty". *sigh*

What does SHE have to gain for kowtowing to the president on this issue? Perhaps an exclusive interview? Maybe she's just deluded and believes the Liberals are out to get her and force her to wear a mask.

Free speech.

Whatever. :(


T


...

[WstateU]

I already posted this on here somewhere. Throughout the "Ingraham Angle" she mocked the idea of wearing a mask. I think maybe she needs a dose of Karma for the millions of people she is deceiving in the name of "Liberty". *sigh*

What does SHE have to gain for kowtowing to the president on this issue? Perhaps an exclusive interview? Maybe she's just deluded and believes the Liberals are out to get her and force her to wear a mask.

Free speech.

Whatever. :(


T


...

You must have posted in another thread? Sorry, I missed it.
I've been busy watching a tennis match.

[C0|dB|00ded]

You must have posted in another thread? Sorry, I missed it.
I've been busy watching a tennis match.

MMMmmmmaria Sharapova... back in the day.


T


...

[wufan]

I don't get this argument at all. Have the scientists been wrong? Sure. That's literally part of the scientific method. Form a hypothesis, test, then adjust based on those results. Normally this can be done in a controlled environment. Yet they were thrust into making very public choices before being able to validate their conclusions. They used the data they had available and made the best suggestions based on that. That data was based on other previous "similar" viruses. My sister is a hospital based doctor that has had to deal with this. Her words were that this virus is so unpredictable. They don't know when someone comes in with it whether that person will be able to be sent home in a day or will be put on a ventilator by then. The data in the past wasn't helpful but they are starting to get enough real data to make better suggestions of how to control this.

While I am sympathetic to the notion that we are trying to get through a ton of data in a short amount of time, meaning that as new data is available, opinions on the matter change, that’s not what’s happening here. As you noted, policies are being enacted “before being able to validate their conclusions.” That’s not relying on data, that’s going with your gut. A scientist doesn’t do that, a politician does. Studies are being published in the media before they are accepted in journals. Journals are accepting studies before peer review. The whole scientific discovery is being circumvented. The “good” work being done isn’t being published yet because they haven’t validated their conclusions or sought publishing. You are left reading the views of people with agendas. To further illustrate, your sister the doctor said, “it’s unpredictable”. What good is science if it’s unpredictable? Why would any scientist, let alone major scientific groups say, “racism kills more people than Coronavirus.”? I’d like to see their data. These aren’t scientists, they are activists.

[wufan]

So I don't get how you can "not trust" scientists because their suggestions change as their data changes. That doesn't make them wrong, that's what makes them right. They are evolving their potential solutions as the data matures.

Scientists don’t make suggestions. They make conclusions. Scientists don’t make policy, they make statistical if/then statements. Activists make suggestions and politicians make policy. If you are getting medical advice from the media, you are listening to politicians that are leveraging activist articles.

[wufan]

The most trusted scientific journals in America:

https://www.statnews.com/2020/06/04/lancet-retracts-major-covid-19-paper-that-raised-safety-concerns-about-malaria-drugs/

[C0|dB|00ded]

Scientists don’t make suggestions. They make conclusions. Scientists don’t make policy, they make statistical if/then statements. Activists make suggestions and politicians make policy. If you are getting medical advice from the media, you are listening to politicians that are leveraging activist articles.

You know what you did just there? You made a generalization. Not very scientific of you. I've posted a plethora of scientific studies as well as expert opinions. Both are admissible in a court of law. Both are far from some political journalist spinning a narrative. Now the facts could be wrapped in a narrative, complete with click bait titling, but the contents are valid. It's up to the reader to separate the wheat from the chaff. Sprinkle in a little critical thought and logical deduction and you can make a home out of a few solid factual bricks. :)


T


...

[wufan]

You know what you did just there? You made a generalization. Not very scientific of you. I've posted a plethora of scientific studies as well as expert opinions. Both are admissible in a court of law. Both are far from some political journalist spinning a narrative. Now the facts could be wrapped in a narrative, complete with click bait titling, but the contents are valid. It's up to the reader to separate the wheat from the chaff. Sprinkle in a little critical thought and logical deduction and you can make a home out of a few solid factual bricks. :)


T


...

You’re correct. There is still lots of very good work going on. Most of the work isn’t profound, but validates or invalidates a single fact or theory. Social scientists and journalists take a series of unrelated papers and write some nonsense. They interview a scientist activist and get a ridiculous quote to support whatever.

So much chaff out there, and all for activist bias, and now the journals are getting involved.

[revenge_of_shocka_khan]

You’re correct. There is still lots of very good work going on. Most of the work isn’t profound, but validates or invalidates a single fact or theory. Social scientists and journalists take a series of unrelated papers and write some nonsense. They interview a scientist activist and get a ridiculous quote to support whatever.

So much chaff out there, and all for activist bias, and now the journals are getting involved.

If it supports my position and propaganda = good
If not, bad.

Kind of like your position on masks, right?

Both the right and the left produce propaganda to support their points.

[revenge_of_shocka_khan]

I already posted this on here somewhere. Throughout the "Ingraham Angle" she mocked the idea of wearing a mask. I think maybe she needs a dose of Karma for the millions of people she is deceiving in the name of "Liberty". *sigh*

What does SHE have to gain for kowtowing to the president on this issue? Perhaps an exclusive interview? Maybe she's just deluded and believes the Liberals are out to get her and force her to wear a mask.

Free speech.

Whatever. :(


T


...

Last I saw Laura Inghram, she was hanging out with Kaleigh Maga-ninny.....

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/laura-ingrahams-descent-into-despair/614245/

[Shockm]

If it supports my position and propaganda = good
If not, bad.

Kind of like your position on masks, right?

Both the right and the left produce propaganda to support their points.

I shouldn't speak for Wufan, and allow him to state his own opinions. However, I will take a stab at it and then he can shoot me down if he needs to.
I think that Wufan's point is that Scientists having political viewpoints is natural. And just like anyone, their political opinions will sometimes cloud their scientific opinions.

However the next statement here that he wrote is a problem.
"So much chaff out there, and all for activist bias, and now the journals are getting involved."

Scientific journals should only state facts from the data they have, and they shouldn't print bad studies based on bad data and bad scientific method.

[WstateU]

Last I saw Laura Inghram, she was hanging out with Kaleigh Maga-ninny.....

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...espair/614245/

This probably belongs in it's own "censorship" thread, but I'll place it here since you mentioned Kaleigh. A couple of weeks ago there were numerous Kaleigh McEnany 'gifs' on the 'Giphy' site owned by Facebook (I know my gifs pretty well). I look today, and there's only one. Of course there's a "Black Lives Matter" banner prominently flashing in your face and I did notice a 'Mark Burns' "All Lives Matter" gif.

Kaleigh's hot, Kaleigh's smart, and Kaleigh is an enemy of the press and is now being censored. Continue to beware, our lives are being controlled. Things/events in the US and world continue to line up; some would say, the prophecies are being fulfilled.

Here's the only 'gif' of Kaleigh I could 'quickly' locate. Maybe I'm just having a bad day. I feel better, I got that off my chest. TGIF!

[abdullah_sharif]

This probably belongs in it's own "censorship" thread, but I'll place it here since you mentioned Kaleigh. A couple of weeks ago there were numerous Kaleigh McEnany 'gifs' on the 'Giphy' site owned by Facebook (I know my gifs pretty well). I look today, and there's only one. Of course there's a "Black Lives Matter" banner prominently flashing in your face and I did notice a 'Mark Burns' "All Lives Matter" gif.

Kaleigh's hot, Kaleigh's smart, and Kaleigh is an enemy of the press and is now being censored. Continue to beware, our lives are being controlled. Things/events in the US and world continue to line up; some would say, the prophecies are being fulfilled.

Here's the only 'gif' of Kaleigh I could 'quickly' locate. Maybe I'm just having a bad day. I feel better, I got that off my chest. TGIF!

love watching kaleigh... on mute.