The coronabrexit thread. I mean, coronavirus thread

[PistoldPete]

1 hour ago, Leeds Ram said:

Figures lie all the time as they are almost always entirely dependent upon context and in other fields sampling. If you look at figures outside of this framework you can make them say what you want. 

Oh sure its not precise and there are margins of error. but the COVID deniers saying there is some massive overstatement of COVID deaths are just perpetuating pure fantasy.  As Eddie has said you can look at excess deaths which point to the fact that more people have died since the pandemic in broadly equal numbers to the numbers of COVID deaths. and you can track it even better than that as each wave of COVID, each winter season , excess deaths track fairly precisely the pattern of the spread of the COVID infections and then fall away again in the summer. It really isn't that difficult to figure out what is going on and I see no point in people trying to deny it.. other than to confirm some whacky theory they have read on the internet or justify why we shouldn't be locked down ( and I accept lockdown is a terrible price )  or be vaccinated (which is no real deal in my opinion but I do respect some people's wish not to have one ).   

[Archied]

1 hour ago, PistoldPete said:

Oh sure its not precise and there are margins of error. but the COVID deniers saying there is some massive overstatement of COVID deaths are just perpetuating pure fantasy.  As Eddie has said you can look at excess deaths which point to the fact that more people have died since the pandemic in broadly equal numbers to the numbers of COVID deaths. and you can track it even better than that as each wave of COVID, each winter season , excess deaths track fairly precisely the pattern of the spread of the COVID infections and then fall away again in the summer. It really isn't that difficult to figure out what is going on and I see no point in people trying to deny it.. other than to confirm some whacky theory they have read on the internet or justify why we shouldn't be locked down ( and I accept lockdown is a terrible price )  or be vaccinated (which is no real deal in my opinion but I do respect some people's wish not to have one ).   

If you suddenly start putting down deaths as covid deaths that clearly are not then no surprise excess deaths and covid reported deaths track to a degree ,

covid deniers ,very emotive language and intentional parallels there , im not some covid denier ,it’s very real and very sad but what’s been done in its name will turn out to be more damaging in lives lost and health issues including mental health,,,, you don’t and that’s fair enough ??‍♂️

Edited January 28, 2022 by Archied

[G STAR RAM]

4 hours ago, PistoldPete said:

Oh sure its not precise and there are margins of error. but the COVID deniers saying there is some massive overstatement of COVID deaths are just perpetuating pure fantasy.  As Eddie has said you can look at excess deaths which point to the fact that more people have died since the pandemic in broadly equal numbers to the numbers of COVID deaths. and you can track it even better than that as each wave of COVID, each winter season , excess deaths track fairly precisely the pattern of the spread of the COVID infections and then fall away again in the summer. It really isn't that difficult to figure out what is going on and I see no point in people trying to deny it.. other than to confirm some whacky theory they have read on the internet or justify why we shouldn't be locked down ( and I accept lockdown is a terrible price )  or be vaccinated (which is no real deal in my opinion but I do respect some people's wish not to have one ).   

So you must believe that lockdowns and lack of access to medical facilities has led to no additional deaths?

[Archied]

8 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

So you must believe that lockdowns and lack of access to medical facilities has led to no additional deaths?

The lack of medical and emotional care for the most vulnerable in care homes during these draconian measures over the last few years especially early on , how many deaths caused and registered as covid ?

[G STAR RAM]

1 hour ago, Archied said:

The lack of medical and emotional care for the most vulnerable in care homes during these draconian measures over the last few years especially early on , how many deaths caused and registered as covid ?

None apparently 

[PistoldPete]

On 28/01/2022 at 21:35, G STAR RAM said:

So you must believe that lockdowns and lack of access to medical facilities has led to no additional deaths?

I certainly think that lockdown last winter led to fewer deaths from winter infections ,.. flu, noravirus and so on.  Lockdowns throughout have led to fewer deaths on the road. Lack of access to medical facilities has led to extra deaths on balance. The net effect seems (so far) to have been pretty neutral.    

[DarkFruitsRam7]

 

[Wolfie]

Because a couple of these claims below get brought up on here....

 

"Joe Rogan has been criticised for helping spread misinformation on his podcast.

Spotify reportedly paid $100m (£75m) in 2020 for rights to The Joe Rogan Experience, which is the streaming service's top podcast. It is reportedly downloaded almost 200 million times a month.

On the show, the US broadcaster hosts a wide variety of guests who discuss their views on a range of topics - but some episodes have featured false and misleading claims.

Here are four of them fact-checked"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/60199614

[Norman]

30 minutes ago, Wolfie said:

Because a couple of these claims below get brought up on here....

 

"Joe Rogan has been criticised for helping spread misinformation on his podcast.

Spotify reportedly paid $100m (£75m) in 2020 for rights to The Joe Rogan Experience, which is the streaming service's top podcast. It is reportedly downloaded almost 200 million times a month.

On the show, the US broadcaster hosts a wide variety of guests who discuss their views on a range of topics - but some episodes have featured false and misleading claims.

Here are four of them fact-checked"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/60199614

Reads like a list of misinformation from a year ago. Vaccines stop you getting re-infected. Cloth masks work. It didn't come from a Chinese lab. You won't need booster jabs. There won't be vaccine passports. It's about protecting the elderly, we will only lockdown to protect the NHS. It's just a circuit-breaker. We haven't been having parties in the middle of all this.

Today 800,000 re-infections have been added to the official figures. That skews a lot of stats.

Who knows what to believe. But let's not stop the conversation happening. Don't protest to silence. Debate them.

[G STAR RAM]

19 hours ago, Norman said:

Reads like a list of misinformation from a year ago. Vaccines stop you getting re-infected. Cloth masks work. It didn't come from a Chinese lab. You won't need booster jabs. There won't be vaccine passports. It's about protecting the elderly, we will only lockdown to protect the NHS. It's just a circuit-breaker. We haven't been having parties in the middle of all this.

Today 800,000 re-infections have been added to the official figures. That skews a lot of stats.

Who knows what to believe. But let's not stop the conversation happening. Don't protest to silence. Debate them.

Debate them? You're having a laugh right?

You seem to be forgetting that we have a generation who believe their knowledge is so superior to everyone else's that they don't need to waste time debating things. All they have to do is tell you that you're wrong, label you something derogatory and then that's the debate won.

In relation to the actual article you you was discussing, I find it absolutely hilarious that the BBC think they are in a position to be fact checking anyone when it comes to reporting on Covid, they've been the biggest propoganda machine since the 1930s.

[Stive Pesley]

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

Debate them? You're having a laugh right?

There seems to be a misunderstanding that people like Joe Rogan want to enter into a debate. That's not the business they are in

The fact he has come out grovelling and saying he will try and make his shows more balanced - at the very first sign that his megabucks deal with Spotify might be in danger - tells you all you need to know

 

[G STAR RAM]

28 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

There seems to be a misunderstanding that people like Joe Rogan want to enter into a debate. That's not the business they are in

The fact he has come out grovelling and saying he will try and make his shows more balanced - at the very first sign that his megabucks deal with Spotify might be in danger - tells you all you need to know

It's not about him debating, its about him raising points, that he knows some will find controversial, and other people debating him.

We've reached a stage where people will dismiss anything someone says without even considering what has been said.

You're definitely right on your second point though, it really shows how the big corporations pander to the noisy minority, and threaten people's livelihoods rather than let sensible debate take place.

 

[Stive Pesley]

3 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

We've reached a stage where people will dismiss anything someone says without even considering what has been said.

Yep - people on both extremes are the same. And in the middle - the facilitators get rich. All they have to do is find people with controversial opinions - give them airtime/column inches and then sit back and watch the money roll in

It's so boring. 

 

[Eddie]

7 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

It's not about him debating, its about him raising points, that he knows some will find controversial, and other people debating him.

We've reached a stage where people will dismiss anything someone says without even considering what has been said.

You're definitely right on your second point though, it really shows how the big corporations pander to the noisy minority, and threaten people's livelihoods rather than let sensible debate take place.

 

One person's 'controversial' is another person's 'pants on head stupid'.

Agreed, the points should be debated, but when a topic or subject is proven beyond all reasonable doubt (e.g. Ivermectin not helping one jot, the benefits of vaccines far exceeding the side effects etc), the debate shouldn't continue to rumble on, because there is no longer a debate to have.

[G STAR RAM]

10 minutes ago, Eddie said:

One person's 'controversial' is another person's 'pants on head stupid'.

Agreed, the points should be debated, but when a topic or subject is proven beyond all reasonable doubt (e.g. Ivermectin not helping one jot, the benefits of vaccines far exceeding the side effects etc), the debate shouldn't continue to rumble on, because there is no longer a debate to have.

I've never seen a debate on either to be honest.

Just seen people, like yourself, just dismiss the ideas as stupid based on cherry picking information that supports your view.

Of course if I'm wrong there I will stand corrected.

Out of interest, which professionals have you heard debate the points you refer to above?

Just as an example:-

"The world-leading experts on reviewing medical evidence, Cochrane, concluded based on just these reliable trials that there was "insufficient evidence" to recommend the drug."

So I dont read that as saying it has been proven beyond all doubt that Ivectermin does not help one jot. Why are they basing recommendations on cherry picked data? Surelt using the other data should make it easier to prove it does not work one jot?

Edited February 2, 2022 by G STAR RAM

[Norman]

6 minutes ago, Eddie said:

One person's 'controversial' is another person's 'pants on head stupid'.

Agreed, the points should be debated, but when a topic or subject is proven beyond all reasonable doubt (e.g. Ivermectin not helping one jot, the benefits of vaccines far exceeding the side effects etc), the debate shouldn't continue to rumble on, because there is no longer a debate to have.

And this is a 'pants on head stupid' post. 

You don't shut down debate because some people think it should no longer be debated. 

You would have been quite happy shutting down the debate on the virus coming from a Chinese Lab 2 years a go. So would all of social media. Actively banning posts stating the above. Dangerous. Extreme.

[Wolfie]

31 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

It's not about him debating, its about him raising points, that he knows some will find controversial, and other people debating him.

We've reached a stage where people will dismiss anything someone says without even considering what has been said.

But the "why it's being said" is just as important IMO.....

31 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

You're definitely right on your second point though, it really shows how the big corporations pander to the noisy minority, and threaten people's livelihoods rather than let sensible debate take place.

 

Bit of a contradiction there. How can sensible debate thrive with people whose livelihoods depend on being controversial to generate paid click / advertsing revenues. Descent into dumbed down circular shouting contests is inevitable. It's good for the bank balance.

You'd think if they felt their opinions were so important and strongly held, they'd want to get the information out there for free. I wonder why that doesn't happen?

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, Wolfie said:

But the "why it's being said" is just as important IMO.....

Bit of a contradiction there. How can sensible debate thrive with people whose livelihoods depend on being controversial to generate paid click / advertsing revenues. Descent into dumbed down circular shouting contests is inevitable. It's good for the bank balance.

You'd think if they felt their opinions were so important and strongly held, they'd want to get the information out there for free. I wonder why that doesn't happen?

Because MSM do not give a platform to people with alternative views.

Do you not think the 'official narrative has been good for many people's bank balances'

[Wolfie]

11 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Because MSM do not give a platform to people with alternative views.

Do you not think the 'official narrative has been good for many people's bank balances'

You're kidding. The Beeb is criticised all the time for having to provide balance to everything.

There are plenty of routes to get information out there for free. But then celebrity lifestyles don't pay for themselves.

[maxjam]

48 minutes ago, Eddie said:

One person's 'controversial' is another person's 'pants on head stupid'.

Agreed, the points should be debated, but when a topic or subject is proven beyond all reasonable doubt (e.g. Ivermectin not helping one jot, the benefits of vaccines far exceeding the side effects etc), the debate shouldn't continue to rumble on, because there is no longer a debate to have.

Ivermectin is still undergoing trials, but maybe they should just all stop as the media have told us its useless.

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/japans-kowa-says-ivermectin-effective-against-omicron-phase-iii-trial-2022-01-31/