Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

Postby JackRiddler » Tue May 26, 2020 6:33 am

I am not going to play an open-ended game of "are you saying __x__" when I did not write anything other than what I wrote, which can be read.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

Postby Belligerent Savant » Tue May 26, 2020 8:01 am

.

Per 0_0's last couple posts, scrutiny of the death count figures and how they're derived is absolutely important (I'm not suggesting anyone here is indicating otherwise), since they're being touted to justify excessive lockdown measures.

The numbers are simply not wholly reliable due to the methods being employed to register a cause of death as 'covid'. These aren't isolated incidents -- they're based on official press briefings and local/regional reporting. As mentioned before, it may be months, perhaps closer to a year, before we have a clearer view on the figures related to this strain (assuming, of course, current trends continue and death counts dissipate over time... a rebound later in the year may be in the cards as well, leading to another round of Fear Uncertainty and Doubt, and perhaps with it, a harder push on the current 'soft sells'*).




*immunity passports, stricter quarantine measures/travel bans, tracking/monitoring apps or wearables, mandated vaccination and/or testing, etc.
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5217
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

Postby JackRiddler » Tue May 26, 2020 12:22 pm

Anyone who wants to debate the various pandemic measures (their effectiveness, how they actually function, their possible real purposes, their origins) who plays into the denial that an unusually lethal contagion has killed numbers approximating the measured excess death tolls is losing that debate. It's like nominating the guaranteed loser in an election.

"It may be a year..." before we know exact causes. Obviously!

But some people already affect to know! The credulous and those with predetermined conclusions, or geniuses who think that if the corporate media lies then all they have to do is believe the opposite and they will be right, they will consult the same old tired sites for a daily fix and then present anything that can be twisted into a fit as "evidence," without any sense of filters, standards, fairness, or, often, decency.

The repetition of the same snippets of video in which people who talk in front of cameras for literally seven or eight or 20 hours a week seem to say something that can be misinterpreted or misunderstood is a prime example. It's the pizzagate method and it's trash, and posters who repeat it without ever varying on it or accepting any other possibility should be ashamed of themselves, especially when their whole schtick is to subtly deny the mass death that is actually happening.

Amid all this, excess death is real and undeniable.

(Have you ever made a statement like, 500,000 people were killed in Iraq by the 1990s sanctions? Guess what, that's not literally the case. The sanctions created conditions that resulted in excess death, measurable as the number of deaths over a past baseline average, adjusted for population. Measurement of excess death allowed one to measure the impact of the sanctions. This was real. You were right to talk about it, not to trivialize it. In that case, it was the defenders of the policy who engaged in denial of the epidemiology.)

(I mean, I get it, there are people here who fucking want to tell me no one died in New York on 9/11, it was all a staged fake, or no one died in Vegas, etc. All crisis actors.) Do you believe that eventually the excess death toll might be more due to the economic catastrophe (unaddressed by relief measures in the US)? So do I. Do you think that's already happened? Show it. If you can't, accept that you might have to wait a year before anyone can.

An accidental inclusion of a homicide among the tens of thousands of C19 bodies amid the chaos is not evidence of a system. There is a reason that some do not take excess death seriously, but do deny all the obvious incentives to undercount. The use of this pandemic for hyperexploitation of effectively forced labor and disaster capitalism are thus trivialized.

The fucking insane G5 theories may as well have been invented by the G5 industry intentionally to poison-pill movement against G5. They function as inoculation, and may have been invented as such. If the tobacco industry had figured this out, they would have gotten another 10 or 20 years out of uncontrolled smoking by seeding the idea that smoking was an alien plot to reverse the earth's gravitational field until we were all suddenly ejected into space. Every time a politician used the word "taxpayer," it was a code word for the fact that all taxpayers were getting imperceptibly lighter. They could have stringed hours of video in which politicians used that word. Evidence!
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

Postby 0_0 » Tue May 26, 2020 1:39 pm

Anyone who wants to debate the various pandemic measures (their effectiveness, how they actually function, their possible real purposes, their origins) who plays into the denial that an unusually lethal contagion has killed numbers approximating the measured excess death tolls is losing that debate. It's like nominating the guaranteed loser in an election.


You take "an unusually lethal contagion" as the given unquestionable starting point around which any legitimate debate must be centered. You seem to skip the part where the factual basis of this "unusually lethal contagion" is established. That important part is beyond discussion seemingly. And even more than that, questioning it should apparently be actively disparaged. Meanwhile the fatality rate seems to be between 0.2 and 0.3% of infected people. And in the UK about 0,25% of the population is estimated to be infected. How are you ever going to win a debate about whether the lockdown measures are proportionate if you're unclear about the actual risk of this virus?

But some people already affect to know! The credulous and those with predetermined conclusions, or geniuses who think that if the corporate media lies then all they have to do is believe the opposite and they will be right, they will consult the same old tired sites for a daily fix and then present anything that can be twisted into a fit as "evidence," without any sense of filters, standards, fairness, or, often, decency.


This is just disingenuous. Leaving aside the ad hominems which i have a hard time finding any justification for, the straw man argument and the lazy generalization, who is it exactly that "already affect to know" ffs? Who is it indeed if not our benevolent governments, allover this one big world. From day 1 they all seemed to know a suspicious amount about this new virus and how to cope with it.

The repetition of the same snippets of video in which people who talk in front of cameras for literally seven or eight or 20 hours a week seem to say something that can be misinterpreted or misunderstood is a prime example. It's the pizzagate method and it's trash, and posters who repeat it without ever varying on it or accepting any other possibility should be ashamed of themselves, especially when their whole schtick is to subtly deny the mass death that is actually happening.


I can't escape the distinct impression that like the corporate media you emote to evade a discussion. And add some more smears and lies to top it of. Nowhere did I deny people dying. I questioned what they were dying off. And it's very hard to misinterpret or misunderstand: "If you were in hospice and had already been given a few weeks to live, and then you also were found to have COVID, that would be counted as a COVID death. It means technically even if you died of a clear alternate cause, but you had COVID at the same time, it's still listed as a COVID death. So, everyone who's listed as a COVID death doesn't mean that that was the cause of the death, but they had COVID at the time of the death." But if that raises an eyebrow you're now not only a no-planer you're also a pizzagater, and presumably also a deplorable nascar enthusiast. I also can't help but wonder why the "mass death" seems very localized. Dare i suggest that maybe there's something wrong in NYC instead of necessarily the whole world? Or are the two the same? Asking for a foreign friend.

Amid all this, excess death is real and undeniable. (I mean, I get it, there are people here who fucking want to tell me no one died in New York on 9/11, it was all a staged fake, or no one died in Vegas, etc. All crisis actors.) Do you believe that eventually the excess death toll might be more due to the economic catastrophe (unaddressed by relief measures in the US)? So do I. Do you think that's already happened? Show it. If you can't, accept that you might have to wait a year before anyone can.


Again, a lot of ad hominems and straw man arguments with 9/11 (that national tragedy), crisisactors and what have you. Noone is denying death ok? I do believe eventually the excess death toll might be more due to the economic catastrophe (yay! something we agree on :hug1: ). As to me having to show that it already has or accept that we might have to wait a year: this is truly starting to look like opposites day! Surely it is not on me, an innocent bystander in all this, to show anything. It is on the people who force these draconian measures on us to show that they made a valid evaluation of all the negative effects it will cause.

An accidental inclusion of a homicide among the tens of thousands of C19 bodies amid the chaos is not evidence of a system. There is a reason that some do not take excess death seriously, but do deny all the obvious incentives to undercount. The use of this pandemic for hyperexploitation of forced labor and disaster capitalism are thus trivialized.


Who's clinging to one piece of anecdotal evidence to make their point now? Again, in the words of Deborah Brix, the US takes "a very liberal approach to mortality". That sounds like a system to me. And look, if according to you what we've been seeing these past months from government officials, experts and media pundits was underselling this here pandemic, i really don't know what to tell you.

The fucking insane G5 theories may as well have been invented by the G5 industry intentionally to poison-pill movement against G5. They function as inoculation, and may have been invented as such. If the tobacco industry had figured this out, they would have gotten another 10 or 20 years out of uncontrolled smoking by seeding the idea that smoking was an alien plot to reverse the earth's gravitational field until we were all suddenly ejected into space. Every time a politician used the word "taxpayer," it was a code word for the fact that all taxpayers were getting imperceptibly lighter. They could have stringed hours of video in which politicians used that word. Evidence!


Whatever can be said about 5G should probably be said over in the 5G topic.
playmobil of the gods
0_0
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:13 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

Postby JackRiddler » Tue May 26, 2020 6:07 pm

0_0 » Tue May 26, 2020 12:39 pm wrote:You take "an unusually lethal contagion" as the given unquestionable starting point around which any legitimate debate must be centered. You seem to skip the part where the factual basis of this "unusually lethal contagion" is established.


Except I don't. It is very well established and you skip the part wherein you acknowledge the severe death toll, or else seek to trivialize among other tolls the 25,000 dead in my city -- where only 20,000 of them have been counted as C19 deaths. (Birx and the other people appearing at Trump's press conferences don't diagnose anyone, whatever they claim the criteria are. Fifty states and literally thousands of institutions are involved in the processes of assigning causes of death and the excess death tolls suggest the overall results appears to be undercounts, not overcounts. There are of course many incentives to undercount, but that's the kind of complexity you do not acknowledge, because it blows apart your monolith thesis in which everything that has unfolded is the function of a single plot along the lines of your "crisis actor" scenarios.)

That important part is beyond discussion seemingly. And even more than that, questioning it should apparently be actively disparaged.


That there is a death toll is beyond discussion. Denial merits disparagement both for its insensitivity and inhumanity and as little more than the crisis actor schtick you've been propagating on this board for years, now writ super-large.

Meanwhile the fatality rate seems to be between 0.2 and 0.3% of infected people.


At the absolute minimum and, of course, is already a. horrific and genuinely a "severely lethal infection" and b., as many here have pointed out, including myself, something far less than the dire scenarios used to justify the most extreme measures and panic.

Thus there is a basis for debate of the measures and of the authorities' claims, beyond the death toll as established in excess death counts.

You are not going to flip this to make me into the friend of the establishment version. You are the one helping them.

The schtick engaged by the conspiratainment workshops whose output you dump here serves to render a broader discussion of the measures impossible, by denying and mocking the dead and alienating people who have reason to fear the contagion. It functions exactly like the no-planes and no-victims scenarios for 9/11 and mass shootings which of course has been your thing on this board for years.

These affect to be extreme anti-establishment positions (when not playing a naive empiricism in which nothing that doesn't fit the chosen scheme is ever acknowledged or allowed). They actually serve to buttress official stories and authorities by putting the stink of stupid and crazy on those who rationally question the measures and the claims of certain authorities (official and self-appointed). Objectively, you are the one helping the very people you claim to be opposing or exposing. Just like other tools of controlled opposition. I don't care what you believe you are doing, it more than merits the mild "disparagement" you are whining about.

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

Postby Belligerent Savant » Tue May 26, 2020 9:13 pm

.

Image
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5217
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

Postby 0_0 » Wed May 27, 2020 12:34 am

Jack i'm glad that we at least can agree that the coronavirus is far less deadly and contagious than the dire scenarios that were used to justify the worldwide lockdown measures. I'm not denying the death count, i do think we need to keep looking critically at what exactly caused the excess deaths. To me it doesn't seem ludicrous at all that the general chaos, panic and disarray, sent into a frenzy by the nonstop media, in and of itself caused a lot of preventable deaths, next to and above deaths caused by the coronavirus.
playmobil of the gods
0_0
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:13 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

Postby liminalOyster » Wed May 27, 2020 6:05 am

The notion of any "worldwide lockdown measures" is a strawman that basically dog-whistles Soros NWO CT. In the U.S., we've seen a weak patchwork of "Stay at home order," closing of loosely defined "non-essential businesses" for a very short period of time, some very limited travel restrictions in a couple states and a bunch of encouragements to wear masks with a few cities now making that "mandatory" in public places. For the most part, despite the odd incident of overreach sensationalized on FOX etc,these measures have been weak and in many cases functionally optional.

The second part of Jeff's tweet is 100% on the money but it reflects a very rapid acceleration of dystopian trends already underway for years. It doesn't require any sort of bullshit fishing expedition looking for a smoking gun that COVID isn't real. COVID's real. The most basic science of it is not controversial unless you want to cherrypick a few iconoclasts who'd like to make it so.

As for all the sad re-tweets about presumed COVID mortalities being counted as such, in real fascist regimes, like Bolsonaro's, people are up in arms about just the opposite - that the government is pushing to deny COVID attribution to deaths of people with comorbidity. The verdict on how deadly or contagious the virus is remains largely unknown.

It's ok to see the big takeover, degneration, serf-making and still wear a mask. The two aren't so closely related.
"It's not rocket surgery." - Elvis
User avatar
liminalOyster
 
Posts: 1873
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

Postby Belligerent Savant » Wed May 27, 2020 7:04 am

.

Meanwhile in Illinois, as just one example:



ILLINOIS ADJUSTS HOW IT CLASSIFIES COVID-19 DEATHS

The Illinois Department of Public Health will begin removing deaths with obvious other causes from its data of coronavirus deaths.

During Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s daily COVID-19 briefing on Tuesday, IDPH Director Dr. Ngozi Ezike said that as the state looks through and cleans the data that has been reported to it by county health departments, it will weed out deaths with other comorbidities that are not related to the virus.

That means that people who happened to test positive for COVID-19 at the time of their death but were killed in other circumstances such as a motor vehicle accident or a homicide will not be counted among the deaths from the pandemic.

In cases where someone had underlying conditions, however, like cancer or cardiac diseases, those deaths will stand as coronavirus-related deaths among the state’s data, Ezike said, because it is “less clear that COVID disease didn’t play a part in hastening the death.”

When asked why the state is not following the lead of the Centers of Disease Control, which reports a death due to coronavirus about one to two weeks after it is confirmed, Ezike said IDPH reports deaths that are reported to it “really, pretty quickly.” Those are the deaths that have COVID-19 on the death certificate, she said.

“Sometimes after further review ... we would have to adjust those numbers,” she said.


Etc.

https://www.bnd.com/news/coronavirus/ar ... 20426.html

The numbers are simply not reliable and should be presented with disclaimers, minimally.

Death/infection counts -- more specifically, the overly-broad/misleading methods in place for tallying these figures, whether it's due to nefarious intent, ineptitude, fear, 'following orders', itchy trigger fingers, all of the above or other -- are primary factors in justification for extent and severity of lockdown measures, which is the key point of contention here.


Also, as raised in prior comments, and touched on again here by 0_0:
To me it doesn't seem ludicrous at all that the general chaos, panic and disarray, sent into a frenzy by the nonstop media, in and of itself caused a lot of preventable deaths, next to and above deaths caused by the coronavirus.


Indeed. Perhaps not a primary cause for excess deaths, but a contributor nonetheless.
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5217
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

Postby cptmarginal » Wed May 27, 2020 8:31 am

Yes, and I still cringe every time I see the words "confirmed cases" used in reference to inaccurate PCR testing.

Such considerations are exactly why comparing overall death counts to previous years is one of the few reliable ways of determining that something bad is happening. At least in New York City, that is - the only location so far for which I have added up the numbers myself. That weekly data I posted on the previous page only covers 2019-2020; I'd still like to compare with 2017-2018, a nasty flu season.
The new way of thinking is precisely delineated by what it is not.
cptmarginal
 
Posts: 2741
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:32 pm
Location: Gordita Beach
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Wed May 27, 2020 2:55 pm

cptmarginal » Wed May 27, 2020 7:31 am wrote:Yes, and I still cringe every time I see the words "confirmed cases" used in reference to inaccurate PCR testing.

Such considerations are exactly why comparing overall death counts to previous years is one of the few reliable ways of determining that something bad is happening. At least in New York City, that is - the only location so far for which I have added up the numbers myself. That weekly data I posted on the previous page only covers 2019-2020; I'd still like to compare with 2017-2018, a nasty flu season.


This should be in front of the paywall: https://www.ft.com/content/6bd88b7d-338 ... 5c6fac846c
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10896
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

Postby JackRiddler » Wed May 27, 2020 3:40 pm

.

Exactly. Thank you WRex.

FT uses the same analysis as the above-posted from NYT, comparing registered deaths in 2020 (necessarily preliminary and subject to very small adjustments, generally upward) against baseline averages of recent years to produce figures for excess death for given periods of the year.

The raw figures come from a very large number of different state and municipal authorities around the world. They are not being fabricated by the publication as one poster above ludicrously suggested.

This is the same methodology possibly familiar to all of you because it was used to produce estimates of the toll taken by the 1990s sanctions and the 2003- invasion of Iraq, such as in the famous Lancet study. Except in this case it's restricted to tighter dates with far more reliable statistics in places that haven't already broken down, and bound to be much more accurate. (Again, unless you think dozens of municipal authorities and hospitals are making up phantom deaths, which after all is not so far from some points of view represented on this board at times.)

Now, a proportion of the remarkable excess death tolls (on the order of 250% for New York City for 11 March to 22 May, and that's after 400,000 residents blew out of town in March, generally from the richest neighborhoods) could be related to collateral or unintended effects of the measures, and that needs to be studied thoroughly.

After all, you also had the phenomenon of relatively empty hospitals (those not treating C19) because people weren't going in for emergencies or canceled surgeries. (The source of much despicable merriment by the Denialist Community, because - gasp - parking lots and lobbies were empty, or nurses had time to dance!)

Death from collateral effects may rise dramatically as this nightmare year progresses, given the economic catastrophe and disruptions in supply chains especially of food just starting to hit. But in the early phases this is going to be a small proportion at the maximum. Overwhelmingly the excess deaths are C19-related, with or without the major comorbidities, and regardless of whatever glitches and mistakes may end up counting someone who died of decapitation in a car accident as a C19 death.

And there are both incentives and unintentional reasons that C19 is undercounted, even with the payments supposedly guaranteed for C19 cases.

Obviously there's a huge discussion (and mobilization) to be had, and we've been having it here, about the exploitation of the crisis for class war, disaster capitalism, and creation of a forced labor class ("essential workers").

Or the forced rearrangements of societies and institutions based on pre-existing planning that has nothing to do with rational response to the C19 pandemic.

Or the intentional use of the crisis to bankrupt states, the public sector and small business, alongside the massively assisted further wealth redisribution to the top.

Or the responses by differing sectors of high capital (those who want to "reopen" as forced-labor super-low-wage depression paradise vs. those who want to launch new pandemic-panic industries on the backs of this event).

As well as the panic-mongering around "cases," death rates, claims that immunity cannot be acquired, outlandish claims about transmission routes, the possibly declining or skyrocketing R0s, fear-porn abuse of exceptional cases among the young or the "previously healthy," disinfectant insanity, masks, witchhunt beatings of joggers, etc.

Or the exploitation by fascist elements (largely astroturfed by the "reopen" segments of capital). And then the whole debate about possible origins of the virus.

None of these debates are hindered. but they are in fact facilitated by first making a sober acknowledgment that this fucking thing is real, it kills, and it spreads, and it hits certain vulnerable communities very hard.

And among those groups hardest hit (a point which really needs to be driven home) besides those warehoused in care homes, and those in the poorest and most crowded neighborhoods, are health care workers, mass-transit workers, and now meat slaughterhouse workers. These three professions have shown horrific casualty rates.

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

Postby Belligerent Savant » Wed May 27, 2020 3:54 pm

.

Snippets from the comments section of the FT article:



Willibobs
There comes a point where this is deliberately misleading.

Heart attack admissions are down 50%. Urgent cancer referrals down 75%. Normal cancer referrals down 85%. I personally know of two suicide attempts since lockdown.

If the headline said could be, or up to, or anything like that I'd give the FT the benefit of the doubt. But this is the second time they've included all excess deaths under "covid" and made it free to read for maximum publicity.

reply Chivo
In reply to Willibobs

To quote the article back to you "Some of these deaths may be the result of causes other than Covid-19, as people avoid hospitals for other ailments. But excess mortality has risen most steeply in places suffering the worst Covid-19 outbreaks, suggesting most of these deaths are directly related to the virus rather than simply side-effects of lockdowns."

Amateur
One perceives an ideological bias to defend lockdown.
"Covid" deaths may be over reported too, because people with Covid die from other preexisting conditions.
And Excess Mortality is adjudicated to Covid rather than to lockdown, without any supporting evidence. How can it be assumed, for example, that 26 million new unemployed in the US will not entail some mortality?

HLT
"In Ecuador’s Guayas province, just 245 official Covid-related deaths were reported between March 1 and April 15, but data on total deaths show that about 10,200 more people died during this period than in a typical year — an increase of 350 per cent." There is a very simple reason for that: They closed the hospital there for all other treatments except covid-19, so if you were hit by a lorry and you somehow could not prove to be covid-19 positive, tough shit. That is what the report I read about it said, the hospital is only open for Corona patients: https://nos.nl/artikel/2331528-lijken-o ... rfilm.html . The result: An enormous increase of deaths caused by insane reactions and measures....

ClaphamMan
What. a fear-mongering distorted headline. I would have hoped that the FT could at least be objective. Deaths are firstly deaths with Covid-19, not necessarily because of it. Most of the vulnerable would have died of something as they were so vulnerable; so the flu, pneumonia and the rest are off the hook. The other thing is that the those who have had it, unless they were hospitalised, which was only in the most severe cases, have been excluded from the figures, so the mortality figures look far far worse than they really are. But the story here shouldn't be Covid-19, but the over reaction of governments. The real loss of life are those of the young who might well be unemployed for the rest of their lives; that won't become quantifiable for a while yet, but will show the extra loss of life due to Covid-19 to be insignificant compared to the effects of lockdown.

reply Pseudonym
In reply to ClaphamMan
Maybe one day, you too will die gasping for breath and then you will know what you are asking of others.

reply HLT
In reply to Pseudonym
Oh, you sound so bitter, with globally only 206,000 covid-19 death so far we are still a long way of the global numbers of death caused by influenza which is annually about 500,000. You obviously really hope for more people to die....



reply lightandtruth
In reply to Girard
Even if you get the flu, you also have the possibility of heart damage, liver damage, lung damage.... no one ever discusses these things for flu but because COVID is in the spotlight, now we pay attention to the phenomenon. I've had respiratory problems since childhood (asthma) and once needed an inhaler but I have adapted by pursuing healthy living. I eat raw fruits and vegetables for 70% of my daily eating, do deep breathing yoga, walking/hiking, and I don't drink or smoke but I drink green matcha tea for the ECGC catechin (epigallocatechin gallate), which academic studies show reduces inflammation and fights viruses and bacteria. I check my vitamin deficiencies regularly via tests and always supplement my vitamin D and zinc and fish oil. As such, I haven't had an asthma attack in years. People don't need to become a chronic patient if they take a bad situation and learn how to adapt to it. The fact that they don't is because the disease care system we have doesn't encourage it, and because most individuals are too lazy perhaps to overcome that, or they are set in their ways (my Dad won't eat any vegetables except soup and white potatoes, preferably fried). Personal responsibility and moral hazard seem to have gone to the wayside both in the global financial crisis and this lockdown induced crisis, but individuals do have some control over their health. The state cannot save everyone, nor can it guarantee perfect health to those who do not make efforts on their own. Having had childhood asthma, I would probably be considered to have an underlying condition, but I am not afraid of this virus, because I almost never fall ill with the kind of lifestyle I live, and my physical exams reflect that as well. I have not put any pressure on the healthcare system. I pay a lab for my vitamin tests myself, and otherwise I almost never need to go to the doctor.

Jake
It will take some considerable time, but I suggest that we will need to arrive at a position of distinguishing between:

- FROM covid-19
- WITH covid-19
- From the effects of the RESPONSE to covid-19

reply IcurusCRB
In reply to Jake
That is the point of these statistics in many ways.

https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps ... by-country

PsychByte
But recent modeling is based on a crucial statistic: the % of those infected by the virus in a population who die. Imperial still insist this is about 1%.

Even if the death rate is doubled, this "mortality rate" will be significantly reduced if a great deal more people are infected than was previously believed. Data is slowly coming in to suggest that the numbers infected in most populations are indeed much greater than was previously assumed. This is possibly an error caused by using a test with relatively low sensitivity in a sample with low prevalence and will need to be confirmed. Such results from Finland are expected at the end of the month.

However if the mortality is closer to 0.1% than 1.0% it's going to make a big difference,

https://www.newscientist.com/article/22 ... n-tell-us/


reply Startup_Germany
In reply to randomthought
Every quarter, approx. 0.3% of the population dies (of all causes). Most of those people spend their final month(s) in the hospital. When the epidemic went rampant, it is extremely likely it spread in the hospitals, causing people to die either with COVID, or of COVID - but just a bit earlier than they otherwise would have. Check the average ages, similar to Italy they are often over the life expectancy. Look up harvesting.
A dialog showing a permalink to the comment
A popover with more user information

reply
In reply to Startup_Germany
Life expectancy in NY state is 80 years. More than half of deaths were in people aged less than 75. Almost a quarter are in the 45-65 age group.

Co-morbidities for covid-19 include high blood pressure and diabetes. 1 out of every 3 American adults is classified as having high blood pressure. 1 in 10 is classified as diabetic.

The data coming out of places like NY that have seen a lot of covid-19 are very concerning, no matter which way you look at them.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavir ... ographics/
https://www.heart.org/idc/groups/heart- ... 319587.pdf
https://www.diabetes.org/resources/stat ... t-diabetes


reply
In reply to randomthought
NYC death rates age 0-17 are 0.15%, age 18-44 0.27%, age 45-64 are 1.49%, age 65-74 are 4.29%, and age 75+are 11.3%. Most of the deaths are around age 45 and up. If you look at China's CDC data, the death rate is 0.2% up to age 40 and 0.4% 41 up to age 50, 1.3% from 50-59, then 3.6% in the 60s, 8% in the 70s, and 14.8% in the 80s. https://www.businessinsider.com/new-yor ... art-2020-3. The data actually follow the typical annual death rate pattern, as more old people tend to die than young in any given year, and obviously the closer you get to life expectancy norms (mid to upper 70s and up) the higher the mortality. But the BBC showed a chart that the probabilty of dying with coronavirus is the same as the probabilty of dying without it, i.e. the normal annual rate. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51979654. Even Dr. Fauci has co-authored a piece in the New England Journal of Medicine, where he also explains that the virus may not be as bad as initially thought, “If one assumes that the number of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of reported cases, the case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%. This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2002387

User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5217
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Coronavirus Crisis: Main Street

Postby Elvis » Wed May 27, 2020 4:41 pm

To what extent are the unprecedented modern crises associated with covid-19 the result of a secret plan?

(I don't know.)

Let's assume certain elite planners and/or calculating opportunists, in positions to influence the turn of events, anticipated something like this pandemic and figured out better than anybody else what they'd do in the event to maximize benefit to their aims, whatever exactly those would be.

The sudden economic upheaval and the pistol-whipping of main street seem much worse than they need to be. The major institutional rearrangements on the horizon beg the question.
“The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” ― Joan Robinson
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 7413
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

Postby JackRiddler » Wed May 27, 2020 5:37 pm

Most of this is not a secret plan. Why should it be?

The conspiracy tropes (anticonspiracist and proactive) serve to mystify much of the business planning long in place, which is based on the logic and incentives already obtaining within the society and economy.

Event 201 and all the other advance discussion of a potential pandemic and possible measures and preparations of inventions and future industries and scenario planning by the likes of the Gates and Bloomberg foundations and their colonies at WHO etc. show you one kind of planning.

The ultra-rapid bailouts in the trillions of the banksters and corporate sectors show you another kind. For these motherfuckers it's Christmas by Surprise. The lobbyists and their servants (your "representatives") plugged in their standing ideal wishlists, legislative language long-prepared for the inevitable next crash or sudden disaster moment.

These are the kinds of plans that are not generally published, not usually discussed on front pages (although obviously there is reporting and there are open meetings). they are continuously developed by well-funded planning divisions at the corporations and their banks and their consultancies, and waiting on the shelf.

Very little of it is "secret" in the sense of conspiratorial, and calling it that can serve to mystify it, so that liberals can call you a "conspiracy theorist" just for pointing to the existence of Event 201's own Youtube channel. It's confidential, generally, like business plans generally are. None or little of any of this planning is illegal or needs to be super-protected. It can be delicate and embarrassing if exposed in advance. But how big are the ripples, really? Remember the exposure Citibank's "Plutonomy" memo? When was that, 2005?! Did it stop anything?

Much of the response is so in accordance with capitalist logic that it may as well be instinctive, and can be predicted from the outside in advance. Does anyone really need to tell the likes of Amazon and Wal-Mart that this is a huge opportunity to further break and hyper-exploit their workers? Does anyone need to tell the universities and all the parasitic foundations seeking to "reform" them and all the politicians and state admins looking to gut any remaining public mission and turn them into low-wage vocational training centers that this is the long-awaited moment to roll out further adjunctification, further fold-ups of humanities and tenured positions, further implementation of "digital learning" platforms and all the rest of the long-planned long-heralded bullshit. Does anyone need to tell the Fourth Industrial Revolution and Internet of Things types that this is their moment?

Possibly the most important question: If it had been a different kind of disaster, don't you think each of these elements would have responded or sought to respond in the exact same way?

Jake
It will take some considerable time, but I suggest that we will need to arrive at a position of distinguishing between:

- FROM covid-19
- WITH covid-19
- From the effects of the RESPONSE to covid-19


Yes. Really it's two, from C19 and from the effects. But as of the, for example, New York peak starting on April 5th through the next three weeks, that was very early in the measures, and you can be sure from C19 accounts for the excess death. Going forward, the effects of the response (of the economic catastrophe, impoverishment, hunger and disruptions, breakdowns and destruction of public services) may well be far larger, and sadly I expect that. Note that "with" cannot account for too much of the excess death. If you're saying someone was about to die and C19 merely pushed them over the edge a few weeks earlier, that's presumably going to show up in lower death rates in the comorbidity categories (or among 80+ in age) for a few months as the contagion dies down. It's never going to account for very much out of an excess death of 250% over the two month period from March to May.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 15983
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 57 guests