Horowitz: A supernatural virus: Is coronavirus now causing motorcycle accidents?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cathoholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
LeafByNiggle . . .
It is nonsense to count only those deaths of people in perfect health
Click to expand...
Nobody has suggested that here. Nobody.

LeafByNiggle . . .
So far your anecdotes have cast doubt on 3, maybe 4 of these deaths.
Click to expand...
Baloney.
40.png
San Diego Supervisor Says Only 6 Of 194 Coronavirus-Recorded Deaths ‘Pure’ Coronavirus Deaths World News
Over in Colorado a man who obviously died of alcohol poisoning was signed out as corona virus (which sounds like it may have been incidental). Someone suggested that was only “one” incidence (here). Well here in San Diego there is more than one. (It sounds like this default coding as a corona virus death is a nation wide phenomenon. A nurse told my wife and I that a couple of weeks ago too.) MAY 14TH, 2020 San Diego Supervisor Says Only 6 Of 194 Coronavirus-Recorded Deaths ‘Pure’ Coronavi…
Click to expand...
40.png
Pennsylvania Forced To Remove Hundreds Of Deaths From Coronavirus Death Count After Coroners Raise Red Flags World News
A “Thank you” to @YooHyuk here for this link . . . San Diego County supervisor says six of 194 confirmed deaths are ‘pure, solely coronavirus’ deaths By Andrew Mark Miller May 15, 2020 - 11:52 AM
Click to expand...
40.png
Horowitz: One chart exposes the lie behind universal lockdowns associated with Corona Virus World News
. . . . “This simple fact makes a world of difference both to our targeted response to the virus and also to the degree of panic that should and should not be infused into society so as not to keep people away from hospitals when they are experiencing other potentially dangerous medical conditions” . . . The average age of people dying WITH corona Virus in the US? About 82 years old. The average age of people dying WITHOUT corona Virus in the US? About 82 years old (actually closer to 77% if…
Click to expand...
.

Don Jr. Tweeting this out awhile back to make fun of CNN’s hysterics in this area . . .

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

.

Leaf.

Do you think George Floyd, who tested positive for corona virus at his autopsy, died from his corona virus infection?

Or do you think he died from Derek Chauvin killing him?

Why do you think what you think on this?
 
Last edited:
Cathoholic said:
LeafByNiggle . . .
It is nonsense to count only those deaths of people in perfect health
Click to expand...
Why, you did, when you said:
40.png
Cathoholic:
And people need to quit falsely attributing deaths WITH incidental corona virus, as deaths FROM corona virus.
Click to expand...
Since you did not define what you mean by “incidental”, I took it to mean any situation where an underlying health condition made the person more likely to die from corona virus. But if you meant only cases like the guy who crashed his motorcycle and was found to test positive, then I agree with you. In cases like that only, where covid-19 played no role in the death, those deaths should not be counted as covid-19 deaths. But other than the motorcycle guy, how many more have you cited? A significant fraction of 137,000? I don’t think so. Therefore we can take that as a valid working number.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
vz71 said:
We know the numbers are wrong.
Click to expand...
I believe Trump used the number of 100,000 deaths to measure the success of his administration in dealing with the virus. We are way over that no matter how you count them. Or do you have 40,000 who say otherwise?
 
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle . . .
Why, you did, when you said:
Click to expand...
No I didn’t.

People with other diseases are not “in perfect health”, but they don’t necessarily die of Corona virus either.

Do you think George Floyd died of a Corona virus infection?

.
But if you meant only cases like the guy who crashed his motorcycle and was found to test positive, then I agree with you.
Click to expand...
But it is not necessary you agree with me.

The health officials reviewing these cases have been taken back enough where the “figures” have needed to be amended. Substantially amended. (Which just raises more obvious questions.)
 
Last edited:
vz71 said:
I’m going to drop this here… enjoy.
Click to expand...
A robust discussion and scrubbing of data is a good thing. It makes for better data and more actionable insights.

So, this is good, isn’t it?
 
I think it becomes a problem when the number of people dying from the disease and not something else is in the majority. That indicates a problem. It looked more like a problem in China (and maybe Italy) than it did anywhere else, at least when I was paying attention.

At the point of the year where typically 1.5M Americans would’ve died, only about 100,000-150,000 had died from this virus, and less than 1.5M with purported adverse effects, which may/may not be lifelong. It’s really borderline worrisome, but not as bad as I’d expected in January/February from the looks. What has been bad is this bait and switch/goal post movement from [flatten the curve] to [wait for the vaccine before society can go to complete normalcy]…People were so obedient for flattening the curve, then got switched into panic and fear just as it should’ve become very obvious from the actual numbers that the reality wasn’t matching the fairy tale.

I did some various adjusted numbers to how it’d be…but realize…if it’s that bad, and people are still and always were shopping like normal, with or without masks, since it takes 10 minutes of contact with most disinfectants to kill this virus, purportedly, well…[eta: referring to shopping/grocery stores/etc:] many people touching and not buying things would’ve gotten others sick inadvertently without so much as being in the same room as them at the same exact time.

I can verify that while I don’t know anyone with any adverse effects that was diagnosed (and know a number of people diagnosed), someone I am related to lost her husband because of the nursing home fiasco. So there’s that. I also know someone that was diagnosed for several weeks, probably added to the tally (of positives, not dead), tested numerous times, always negative…finally they tested for other things: she had mono.
 
Last edited:
The numbers are being heavily inflated.
To what end? I don’t know.

But I suspect that after the election one of two things will happen. Trump will win, and the media will ramp up the insanity to levels we previously had thought impossible.
Or Trump will lose. And the media will suddenly discover things were never as bad as were projected.
 
Last edited:
TheIttyBitty . . .
What has been bad is this bait and switch/goal post movement from [flatten the curve] to [wait for the vaccine before society can go to complete normalcy]
Click to expand...
Great point TheIttyBitty!
 
1cthlctrth said:
more than 90% of the deaths are over age 55. Protect the vulnerable, and let the rest of us keep this country producing.
Click to expand...
Not possible. That would involve separating families. But then the administration had no trouble doing this to immigrant families. I guess we should not be surprised that Trump supporters want to tear apart families of American citizens too.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Not possible. That would involve separating families. But then the administration had no trouble doing this to immigrant families. I guess we should not be surprised that Trump supporters want to tear apart families of American citizens too.
Click to expand...
The usual Leaf deflection.

Nearly half the death toll has been in long term care facilities. That toll was severely exacerbated by orders given in several states to force care facilities to accept the return of infected patients even when they did not have any way to isolate them as called for in the CDC regulations. But Leaf keeps waving hands and stamping feet to say nothing to see here!

Leaf is still calling for lockdowns when it is clear the toll isn’t among the younger people what it is in people over 55. Leaf never cared that much about the economic damage done and still doesn’t. I volunteer at a local food bank one or two days a week and I sure see it every time I’m there. A few months back Leaf stated this would be mostly over by July and businesses will start coming back and they’ll hire everyone back. Well … that is not aging so well.

Let me illustrate the problem with an anecdote. I know Leaf dislikes them, but there are points to be made here. Some years ago, I knew a young man with leukemia who battled it bravely for a long time before succumbing. There were times during his treatment when his immune system was stripped away to the point a simple cold could kill him. So his family had to be very careful at home around him, be mindful of their hygiene around him. By the same token they had to ask visitors including the young man’s friends to sanitize themselves on entry. The young man could not go out with his family to the restaurant or the mall. Because that would be to demand that everyone there sanitize themselves for his sake and he had no right to force his entire world to conform to his requirements. So no restaurant or grocery store trips, no going to Mass and so on.

Two points to be made here:
The vulnerable can isolate themselves the way this young man did and the people they live with can exercise care with them. Remember even a simple cold could have killed that guy and how easy are colds to catch? By the same token, maybe not for all, but certainly for many, it is possible to live that way for Covid-19.

The lockdowns and the social distancing is about forcing the healthy to live like the sick. Telling the healthy we’re assumed to be sick too. At no time in history has this ever been done before. At every epidemic, it has always been the sick who were isolated or quarantined. This time, we reversed that. I hope we never do it again.
 
It is worth noting that in Zzyzx_Road’s response, nothing in my quoted posting was addressed, despite the fact that my posting was a direct response (and not a deflection) to the proposal by 1cthlctrth that we “protect the vulnerable” while letting the rest of the nation go on with business as usual. Therefore Zzyzx_Road’s response was the real deflection, as it deflected from my valid points that directed refuted the posting by 1cthlctrth.

To repeat and clarify: 1cthlctrth’s proposal is not feasible because “protecting the vulnerable” while letting all the young get infected would require total isolation of the “vulnerable” from their families. Perhaps that is why Zzyzx_Road chose to reduce the “vulnerable” to “those in long-term care facilities” because that is one place where they are already somewhat isolated from their families. This is not a valid view to take because many of the vulnerable are not in long-term care facilities, but are living with their extended families. And even those that are in long-term care facilities used to get visits from their family. This proposal is nothing less than extreme age-based segregation. It was immoral when it was race-based and it is immoral when it age-based.
 
So discriminating against the sick and the vulnerable as was done in the past is now the new immorality.

I brought up the point about the leukemia victim as a counterpoint to Leaf’s desire for all of society to conform to the desires of the sick and the vulnerable. Leaf assumed I only meant long term care facilities, but I brought up the leukemia story to illustrate that it is possible for care for the vulnerable to take place at home.

There is a logical endgame to what Leaf desires of us: that destroying the economy is necessary to protect the vulnerable. So Leaf now posits for us that it is immoral to discriminate against the sick and the vulnerable. That said isolation done in 1918 and in many plagues before that was immoral and should never have been done, that the healthy should have voluntarily led themselves off the cliff economically for the sake of the sick. What happens when the healthy can no longer support the sick? I don’t believe Leaf has thought this through that far. Or maybe Leaf doesn’t care what happens to our livelihoods. It takes a long dang time for a wrecked economy to get back to anywhere near where it was. Or maybe Leaf skipped over that in history class.

When the economy gets destroyed enough, there won’t be the support for the medical system there is today and we’ll all be vulnerable to that. The authorities allowed the restart of elective care in the hospitals and clinics not out of any sense of care for the non-Covid-19 infected, but because the hospitals’ cash flow was suffering badly. Hospitals everywhere outside of the hardest hit areas were experiencing poor cash flows to the point they were putting staff on furlough and there are a fair number of articles about that. A few of which I posted. But the economy is not at all important to Leaf.

There are tradeoffs here, but Leaf doesn’t want to hear about those. They’re immoral, remember?

I raised my voice about the effects on the economy back way back when. Which was continually minimized. And now here we are. I get to see the damage done. Well played.
 
Zzyzx_Road said:
What happens when the healthy can no longer support the sick? I don’t believe Leaf has thought this through that far. Or maybe Leaf doesn’t care what happens to our livelihoods.
Click to expand...
Or maybe the wearing of masks and adopting common sense anti-infection measures is not the same thing as destroying the economy. We never did have a shutdown, except for a couple of weeks. Since then the country has been largely open for business. The businesses are still suffering not just from the temporary shutdown, but from the the public’s distrust of visiting those businesses. Look at the airline industry. It is bleeding money. But not because of mandated shutdown, but because the public’s unwillingness to fly. You can’t wave a magic wand and put everything back together. Government is not the problem. The virus is the problem.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Or maybe the wearing of masks and adopting common sense anti-infection measures is not the same thing as destroying the economy. We never did have a shutdown, except for a couple of weeks. Since then the country has been largely open for business. The businesses are still suffering not just from the temporary shutdown, but from the the public’s distrust of visiting those businesses. Look at the airline industry. It is bleeding money. But not because of mandated shutdown, but because the public’s unwillingness to fly. You can’t wave a magic wand and put everything back together. Government is not the problem. The virus is the problem.
Click to expand...
So what were Governors like Newsom, Cuomo, Whitmer, Wolf, et al ordering us to do?

We never locked down or otherwise severely restricted the healthy before. Not ever in the entire known history of humanity. That is one thing no one can get away from because that history is there staring us in the face, but some want to pretend it’s not there.

The lie was shown to us with the governors’ support of the BLM protestors and again demonstrated to us with their failure to social distance for the Lewis funeral service. In light of what they did for that service, why are most churches still closed or otherwise severely restricted in most states?

We didn’t lockdown the healthy in 1968.
We didn’t lock down the healthy in 1957.
We didn’t even do it in 1918! Sure large gatherings were banned. The sick were isolated and quarantined. But no statewide shutdown ever took place. The authorities never told churches or restaurants they couldn’t open.

The economy went down a little in 1968 and 1957, a little bit more in 1918. But nothing remotely close to 2020. Not even in 1918. We did this to ourselves and those governors led the way. In other words, government was the bigger problem this year than the virus.
 
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle . . .
That would involve separating families.
Click to expand...
Faucis suggested policies separating families right now.

Try to get into see a loved one in a nursing home or a hospital bed and get back to me on how it went.
 
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle said:
1cthlctrth’s proposal is not feasible because “protecting the vulnerable” while letting all the young get infected would require total isolation of the “vulnerable” from their families
Click to expand...
Most nursing homes did not permit visitors. Where have you been?
Well, other than COVID patients:


Calls to protect the elderly went unheeded by Democratic Governors Cuomo, Whitmer, Wolf, and Newsom.
They appear to have willfully endangered those most at risk by forcing nursing homes to admit coronavirus patients.
USA Today noted: “New Jersey had 3,200 residents of long-term care homes die due to complications from the virus, about 40% of the statewide total”.
In New York, over 5,000 nursing home dwellers died on Governor Andrew Cuomo’s watch. That’s a quarter of the state’s deaths.
In Pennsylvania, Governor Tom Wolfe (D) approved nursing homes’ mandatory acceptance of previous virus patients from hospitals, and “about 65% of coronavirus deaths were nursing-home residents.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top