Ray's perspective on the pandemic

[chimpanzee]

You sure do love pretending to be dumb don't you.

Thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt but I assure you I'm just as dumb as I seem.

 

[KTownSatfats]

So you finally agree, lockdowns are effective in controlling the spread of infections, period. That's all I was saying, nothing more nothing less. I've said over and over that lockdowns are undesirable and not a good way to deal with the situation but you choose to ignore that and instead interpret me as a lockdown defender. I hate lockdown as much as the next guy, I haven't seen my girlfriend in over a year but when you talk about something you need to leave your bias at the door. Some people said that there's no evidence that lockdowns reduce the spread of the virus and the mortality and that there is no decrease in mortality when they are implemented (obviously it will lag behind a few weeks but it's plain to see). This is plain false, and if we call out people from the other side for spreading lies, we should do the same when someone who shares the same view as us does the same.

Do lockdowns cause lasting issues in the population and economy as well as erode the rights of the population? Yes, I'll agree completely.
But if you tell me that lockdowns don't reduce the spread and mortality at all and that there's no countries where you can see a clear spike followed by a drastic lowering of cases and try to tell me it's due to "too much population being infected", or "there's no difference in mortality before and after lockdowns" then I'm going to need to call you out. There's no need to spread lies to defend your position.

I thought you were taking a break? You really do need to calm down your emotions a bit.

 

[KTownSatfats]

Thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt but I assure you I'm just as dumb as I seem.

How is this possible?

 

[chimpanzee]

I thought you were taking a break? You really do need to calm down your emotions a bit.

Thanks for the tip I'll go breathe into a paper bag. I said I'll stop arguing, and I'm doing that. If you want me to stop posting altogether stop quoting me, simple as that.

 

[Missenger]

Thanks for the tip I'll go breathe into a paper bag. I said I'll stop arguing, and I'm doing that. If you want me to stop posting altogether stop quoting me, simple as that.

You seem pretty self-aware so I wouldn't imagine it. Willing ignorance also murders.

 

[chimpanzee]

You seem pretty self-aware so I wouldn't imagine it. Willing ignorance also murders.

Or maybe consider the possibility that my ignorance isn't willful and I've just formed my views from a different country with different experiences and that not being exposed to the same information sources as you have for for over a year could lead to a differing view on reality. When the forum disagrees with someone who has a different view with personal attacks, dismissals, changing the topic and ignoring his points, not acknowledging when some information they've provided is incorrect, etc. then it just drives that person away and inches a step closer to being an echo chamber. I had a chance to become a little less ignorant but I came out of it still the same. I know that's not everyone and appreciate everyone who answered reasonably and respectfully.

 

[tankasnowgod]

I live in Spain and we were hit by the first wave before the US and most western countries with the exception of Italy, and we were hit harder than any other country for a long time. Even though our government tried to hide a lot of deaths to appear less incompetent, we have had a massive excess mortality increase which have only been curbed because of lockdowns. Graphs and maps from EUROMOMO. My region wasn't even hit particularly hard in the first wave and the ICUs were still full for the first time ever as far as I know. A regular cold or flu doesn't do that.

Why do you think excess mortality was "curbed because of lockdowns?"

DG Rancourt argued that the excess mortality spike happened only AFTER the WHO declred a Pandemic and all sorts of countries tried various methods of lockdowns.

https://pashev.me/files/rancourt-2020-mortality.pdf

The latest data of all-cause mortality by week does not show a winter-burden mortality that is statistically larger than for past winters. There was no plague. However, a sharp “COVID peak” is present in the data, for several jurisdictions in Europe and the USA.

This all-cause-mortality “COVID peak” has unique characteristics:
• Its sharpness, with a full-width at half-maximum of only approximately 4 weeks;
• Its lateness in the infectious-season cycle, surging after week-11 of 2020, which is unprecedented for any large sharp-peak feature;
• The synchronicity of the onset of its surge, across continents, and immediately following the WHO declaration of the pandemic; and
• Its USA state-to-state absence or presence for the same viral ecology on the same territory, being correlated with nursing home events and government actions rather than any known viral strain discernment.

These “COVID peak” characteristics, and a review of the epidemiological history, and of relevant knowledge about viral respiratory diseases, lead me to postulate that the “COVID peak” results from an accelerated mass homicide of immune-vulnerable individuals, and individuals made more immune-vulnerable, by government and institutional actions, rather than being an epidemiological signature of a novel virus, irrespective of the degree to which the virus is novel from the perspective of viral speciation.

Again, you can't point to any population in excess of 1 million that was locked down in some way for a month or more prior to December 2019 to suggest that this is an effective tool. It was an experiment, and from any perspective of "stopping the spread" or "saving lives," it was an abject and abysmal failure, with all sorts of economic detructrion to boot.

Finally, before you are tempted to label me as a close minded sheep I am just following the facts and trying to come to my own conclusions. I try to never take sides so I tend to get labeled as the enemy from both sides. This has happened when I have told coworkers that I will not be taking the vaccine since it's too early to call it safe and it has not been proved to stop the spread so I would not even contribute to herd immunity. If you have facts that contradict mine please share, I have an open mind and I'm willing to listen to arguments from both sides. I do not agree with the government's lockdowns, policies etc. I'm not on their side, I'm just someone trying to be as unbiased as possible and form my own opinions.

You are very wise to avoid the vaccine, especially since the trials are still ongoing, and won't be complete until January 2023.

If you really want to look at the facts here, look at the excess mortality graphs in relation to when the lockdowns started (basically, Week 10 on Euromomo data). The spike happens right afterwards, in several different countries and areas-

Lockdowns don't appear to have "curbed" anything, instead, it seems they spiked excess mortality in early spring right as the normal winter mortality was on the decline.

Even if you think Lockdowns might be an effective tool at stopping a new germ....... it only has the potential to work if the germ is truly new. There are all sorts of bacteria, fungi, mold, and viruses already out there, many in and on your body and house, so it will do nothing to stop their spread.

By the way, I have been concerned about the health cost of lockdowns for a year now, in addition to the economic cost. I created a thread about it last March-

The Health Cost Of Lockdowns- Death Tolls From Increased Suicide, Blood Shortages, And Other Effects

I wanted to create this thread specifically about the Health Costs of Lockdowns. A lot of people who think these lockdowns are justified in any way completely disregard financial cost, the idea being that no amount of money is worth even a single life, and therefore, financial effects suffered...

raypeatforum.com

It's certainly not a benign tool, in any way, shape or form. Even in the best case, you are swapping deaths for other deaths.

 

[cgh4444]

The point made above is a good one- even if we grant you that lockdowns are an effective tool to deal with a virus- you are at the end of the day just swapping deaths from one cause to deaths from another.

 

[chimpanzee]

First, thanks for your detailed response.

Again, you can't point to any population in excess of 1 million that was locked down in some way for a month or more prior to December 2019 to suggest that this is an effective tool. It was an experiment, and from any perspective of "stopping the spread" or "saving lives," it was an abject and abysmal failure, with all sorts of economic detructrion to boot.

Yeah which is why it seems more likely to me that it's a move born out of desperation for having failed to manage the oncoming crisis early due to incompetence, than to assume that countries from all over the world with no incentive to work together all coordinated an attack on their population.

If you really want to look at the facts here, look at the excess mortality graphs in relation to when the lockdowns started (basically, Week 10 on Euromomo data). The spike happens right afterwards, in several different countries and areas-

I promised people here that I won't argue any more so I'll just refer to my previous posts where I argue that diagnosis lags behind days after infection and mortality lags behind weeks after diagnosis, it's not instant. It seems like the most obvious explanation is that lockdowns happened when diagnosed cases spiked, which meant there's a lot more undiagnosed cases brewing and weeks later the deaths started happening. At the time with the data I had this was my opinion, and it seemed insane to allow rallies and football games with the cases rapidly rising even if mortality was still low since that's how exponentials work. Following the data after the lockdowns and looking at those graphs it still seems consistent but I'd be curious to hear your point of view on why lockdown spiked mortality.

 

[chimpanzee]

The point made above is a good one- even if we grant you that lockdowns are an effective tool to deal with a virus- you are at the end of the day just swapping deaths from one cause to deaths from another.

That seems like a pretty reasonable argument.

 

[Nemo]

Well the quotes don't say it's not responsible for the excess deaths, they deny that excess deaths exist. Maybe on a yearly aggregate that's true for the US, but it's easy to see massive peaks before lockdowns in many countries. What caused these peaks if not the virus? Also even if you say it has been planned (which I find hard to believe but not impossible) there would have to be many countries which were not in on it. New Zealand managed to control it early, and Australia later. I am really sure that Spain would not have been in on it and their response has been every bit as pathetic as the US one so it's not unreasonable to assume that it's been due to incompetence too in the US.

There are no massive peaks that aren't present every year from the flu.

 

[chimpanzee]

And to sum up my thinking because otherwise it just seems like I'm arguing with everyone here:

- I think the virus exists. I believe it's pretty likely that it escaped from the Wuhan lab. I don't believe it was released on purpose or that scientists are capable of creating it, just studying it.
- I think it's a mild virus, but still between an order of magnitude or two more deadly than the flu
- I think the focus should be on preventing serious cases and there's enough evidence that with safe preventative measures like vitamin D and aspirin among other things you could bring down mortality enough to make lockdowns unnecessary. A lot of people stand to profit from vaccines so that's probably why there's no incentive to investigate that
- I think preventing the virus from entering in the first place like New Zealand is the most desirable option, followed by preventative measures, followed by either doing nothing or a full lockdown until it's nonexistent like Australia, and the worst option by far having partial lockdowns to "curb the spread".
- I find conspiracy theories about it being a planned event really hard to believe but I'll admit I'm not informed on them
- I think the vaccine is rushed, risky, unproven and there's plenty of incentives to exaggerate it's safety and effectiveness
- I don't understand people who claim that the spike protein in the vaccine is harmful because it can cross the blood brain barrier and permeate every organ but somehow say that the virus, which has the same spike protein is completely harmless.

That more or less sums my point of view, if it seems foolish to everyone here then so be it.

 

[cgh4444]

I think if social media and the internet didn’t exist barely anyone would even know there was a new and unique virus. So there’s that.

 

[chimpanzee]

I think if social media and the internet didn’t exist barely anyone would even know there was a new and unique virus. So there’s that.

I feel like when half your office loses their sense of smell at the same time, half of them get out of breath from walking from their car to the door and 25% of everyone's grandparents die in the same year it would be fairly noticeable. But sure, most of us would be ok.

 

[cgh4444]

I feel like when half your office loses their sense of smell at the same time, half of them get out of breath from walking from their car to the door and 25% of everyone's grandparents die in the same year it would be fairly noticeable. But sure, most of us would be ok.

where is this happening lol? And don’t say “where I am” and extrapolate that to everywhere else. I have friends and family all over the us and nothing like this occurred or has occurred outside of the usual. Also, Sense of smell goes away with about 90 other viruses too bud.

25 percent of everyone’s grandparents die in the same year? I don’t even know where to begin with the absurdity of that one.

 

[cgh4444]

When you’re afraid you’ll find any reason to validate your fear.
It’s all over your posts.

 

[tankasnowgod]

Yeah which is why it seems more likely to me that it's a move born out of desperation for having failed to manage the oncoming crisis early due to incompetence,

Funny, I have been saying for a long time that this Pandemic was run by Prophecy. Neil Ferguson's model was a prediction, and with his track record, you would expect it to be a terrible one.

You're getting at the same thing here....... "failed to manage the oncoming crisis." This is pure Prophecy. There was no evidence that anything was different, healthwise, from any other cold and flu season, until the moment that countries started to "lockdown." Either the virus is really, really smart......... sitting, hiding in various countries in Europe and states in the US, waiting for the EXACT moment that the WHO declares a pandemic and governors and health officials treasonously enact "lockdowns" to start really killing people....... or, you have the conclusion that it was government interference (a medical experiment) that caused the increase in deaths right after it happened.

Again, these were not governments responding to actual symptoms or cases, but computer assisted Prophecy.

 

[Perry Staltic]

- I think it's a mild virus, but still between an order of magnitude or two more deadly than the flu

Probably not one or two orders of magnitude, That would 10-100 times worse than the flu.

 

[tankasnowgod]

where is this happening lol? And don’t say “where I am” and extrapolate that to everywhere else. I have friends and family all over the us and nothing like this occurred or has occurred outside of the usual. Also, Sense of smell goes away with about 90 other viruses too bud.

25 percent of everyone’s grandparents die in the same year? I don’t even know where to begin with the absurdity of that one.

It's pretty obviously silly. There are about 56 Million people over age 65 in the US. Say, half of those people are grandparents. There have been about 500,000 Covid Associated deaths in the US. Even if 100% of those occurred in the 28 Million grandparents, that would be 1.8% of people's grandparents that have died. Over ten times lower than the 25% exaggeration he stated above.

Of course, since a single person can have a maximum of 4 Grandparents, it's quite likely some people experienced the death of 25% or more of their own grandparents in any given year, 2020 being no exception.

 

[TheBeard]

.