Lockdowns never again: Sweden was right, and we were wrong

[RuthAnne]

Cops breaking stupid laws. I’m far from alone here. There are more people in the stores here who are not wearing silly diapers on their faces than there are people who are wearing them.

 

[FrankFletcher]

Cops breaking stupid laws. I’m far from alone here. There are more people in the stores here who are not wearing silly diapers on their faces than there are people who are wearing them.

I asked before – who’s wearing diapers on their faces?? I wear a mask and so does everyone around me. I don’t appreciate being mocked as wearing a diaper on my face because I actually care about the well-being of my neighbors.

Is this really a Catholic forum? Doesn’t seem like it sometimes.

 

[RidgeSprinter]

I asked before – who’s wearing diapers on their faces??

Relate it to Trumpism. When Trump don’t like something, he childishly gives it a name.

Is this really a Catholic forum? Doesn’t seem like it sometimes.

It is what it is.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Most countries have more protection because of the aggressive public health measures they have taken.

Many countries don’t have HIPAA, which prevents disclosure by health officials of the identities of people who test positive. In South Korea, for example, they posted the names of those infected and those exposed so people would be able to avoid contact with those people.

Seems to me there are so many variables it’s not reasonable to compare one country or even one state with another just on the numbers.

 

[Ridgerunner]

572 dead per million is not “done well”

I don’t think we’re going to know for quite some time which countries have “done better” than others. If this disease become endemic, (and it seems likely) then it’s only a matter of time before everyone without natural immunity in any given country is going to get the disease. Eventually even very isolated communities will get it, like those tribes in the Amazon that have almost no contact with the outside world, yet turn up its diseases.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I am sure some have natural immunity. At present, Fauci doesn’t seem to think any vaccines are going to have lasting effect. So, what’s to prevent all susceptible people in a population from getting it eventually?

 

[Ridgerunner]

An effective, temporary vaccine will starve the virus of the source it needs to propagate.

Like the flu, for instance?

I don’t see why Covid19 will somehow die out when other coronaviruses common in the world do not and the flu doesn’t either.

Some 20% of all colds in the U.S. are coronavirus of a different strain, but nobody has come up with a vaccine for it yet. And nobody knows for sure whether it’s 20% or 60% or just what because most people are never tested to see whether it’s coronavirus or rhinovirus.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

I don’t see why Covid19 will somehow die out when other coronaviruses common in the world do not and the flu doesn’t either.

Polio died out. Why do you think SARS/Cov2 is more like the flu than polio?

Some 20% of all colds in the U.S. are coronavirus of a different strain…

“Coronavirus” is not a genetic grouping. It is an outward appearance (from the pointy-looking projections on its surface). There is no genetic similarity impied. It would be like classifying bats and birds together because they look similar in flight, or because they both start with the letter “b”.

 

[Sarcelle]

Is this really a Catholic forum? Doesn’t seem like it sometimes.

It is a Catholic forum, unfortunately tainted with the corrupting influences of American politics.

 

[Ridgerunner]

“Coronavirus” is not a genetic grouping. It is an outward appearance (from the pointy-looking projections on its surface). There is no genetic similarity impied. It would be like classifying bats and birds together because they look similar in flight, or because they both start with the letter “b”.

Not quite. Viruses that act in more or less the same way do not have to have the same genetic progenitors (and we don’t know that they dont) to be similar in effects or the antibodies that are effective against them. After all, vaccine made from the similar cowpox was the vaccination for small pox. Clearly they had more characteristics in common than the term “pox” which they shared.

“Researchers have identified seven strains of the coronavirus that can infect humans. Four of them are very common and tend to cause mild symptoms, including a runny nose, sore throat, headache, cough and low grade fever. These four strains are so widespread that most people will have been infected by one of them at least once in their lifetime, though they likely won’t know it since the symptoms are indistinguishable from symptoms of other viruses that cause the common cold.”

Health Library | GoHealth Urgent Care

 

[Sarcelle]

You can mock me all you want.

My conscience is clear.

I wear a mask to protect others and protecting others is more important than my right to not be uncomfortable or to not be mocked.

So, mock away.

 

[RuthAnne]

It’s okay. Sometimes I have to wear a diaper on my face too. I generally won’t patronize stores and restaurants that enforce it, but there are times when I just do it to humor them.

 

[Theo520]

I went back to your graph.
a)It us normalizing data based on population. That skews the actual data.
b)Also it is pulling population data from wikipedia.

It’s actually your graphs that skew the data, you don’t compare the data with common scale and using totals hides the recent trend since NY was so abysmal when this all started, no many preventable nursing home deaths.

My chart uses a common scale and normalizes the data by population, the only way to make such a comparison.

 

[Cathoholic]

LeafByNiggle . . .

Because the CDC has determined it is not reasonably efficacious.

Then WHY are studies still on-going?

And what were these phantom “determinations” based upon?

There are lots of medications that are deemed as ineffective.

If a physician gives a patient an ineffective Vitamin B12 shot when their B12 levels are normal but the patient requests it anyway and her Dr. agreed, the Government does not swoop in on such decisions between a woman and her doctor.

You also don’t see FAKE “research” articles condemning its usage in such prestigious journals as the Lancet and The New England Journal of Medicine.

These are not two-bit “junk journals”.

You also don’t see Governors attempting to write bogus “executive orders” over such things.

You also have people (pro-aborts) that pretend they really care about Government not getting into decisions made between a woman and her doctor that seem to have gone silent (because they don’t give a hoot about doctor-patient decisions. They just care about ABORTION and are willing to pretend they are “concerned” about doctor-patient autonomy to advance their abortion agenda).

There has been a concerted effort to muzzle information and FORCE the inability to use hydroxychloroquine.

This is not normal behavior.

No Leaf.

It is OBVIOUS this push AGAINST hydroxychloroquine is political and financial.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle . . .

Because the CDC has determined it is not reasonably efficacious.

Because that’s how science works. But you don’t authorize doctors to use a treatment before the evidence of studies indicate that it is effective. That’s how we regulate medicine to make it safer.

What were these phantom “determinations” based upon.

The absence of convincing results.

There are lots of medications that are deemed as ineffective.

If a physician gives a patient a Vitamin B12 shot and their B12 levels are normal, the Government does not swoop in on such decisions between a woman and her doctor.

No, but if a doctor gives a patient a Vitamin B12 shot for the purpose of treating a brain tumor, you can be sure that doctor will be shut down as a quack.

 

[Cathoholic]

LeafByNiggle . . .

Because that’s how science works.

No. That is NOT how science works.

We don’t have ongoing studies with harmful substances.

And even if you pretend that is how “science works” (I have explained this to you at least a dozen times) you cannot just do studies with whatever you want whenever you want.

You have to submit reasons WHY, and preliminary efficacy data if you are going to get ANY such study past a human studies committee to even begin such research.

They obviously have done this.

The absence of convincing results.

You don’t have an iota of such data. We have talked about this a dozen times.

You keep going to ridiculous foreign studies (like the Brazil study where they used 10X + dosages of chloroquine and poisoned their patients) or studies that look at the wrong cohorts.

I have asked many times for just ONE of these studies and so far none of the opposers of patient care here have been able to provide me with ANY.

No, but if a doctor gives a patient a Vitamin B12 shot for the purpose of treating a brain tumor, you can be sure that doctor will be shut down as a quack.

Yet they have approved hydroxychloroquine human studies.

And these studies are underway.

And there are NO studies for B-12 used to “treat” brain cancers.

(Which SHOULD tell you Leaf, your inappropriate “comparison” just is not equivalent. If you cannot figure out WHY, I can break it down for you.)

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle . . .

Because that’s how science works.

There you go, changing the premise! I never said it was harmful. I just said its effectiveness has not been demonstrated.

And even if you pretend that is how “science works” (I have explained this to you at least a dozen times) you cannot just do studies with whatever you want whenever you want.

And as I have explained in the past, there is a big difference between allowing a drug to be used in a study and allowing that same drug to be prescribed as a matter of course to treat a specific condition.

The absence of convincing results.

You don’t have an iota of such data.

You don’t get data that shows an absence of something. You just notice that the thing you are looking for has not been found yet. i.e. it is absent so far. It is on those who want to claim that HCQ is effective to come up with the data showing it to be so, not on those asking for that data to “prove” it is ineffective.

You keep going to ridiculous foreign studies

I am not citing any studies at all - at least not in the last month.

No, but if a doctor gives a patient a Vitamin B12 shot for the purpose of treating a brain tumor, you can be sure that doctor will be shut down as a quack.

Yet they have approved hydroxychloroquine human studies.

Yes, and they might even approve vitamin B12 for human studies on brain tumors if someone found some laboratory reason why it might work, like they found laboratory reasons for why HCQ might work, but that does not mean doctors can start prescribing it for brain tumors generally before that study is done.

 

[jack63]

Too bad LifeSiteNews had to be the ones coming out with this article. I for the most part agree with it. How is that for a begrudging agreement . Sweden’s results are very legitimate counter argument against lock downs.

As for the argument about how lock downs may protect elderly…maybe on the surface this makes sense. In reality I truly believe that these lock downs have the potential to break down family bonds and this will lead to elderly deaths. For example, if a family member has to go through a 14 day quarantine to visit their parent, they’re not going to visit their parent. Visiting a parent may save that parent’s life, especially if a son or daughter can identify a health problem and get their parents some help.

 

[jack63]

jack63:

Sweden’s results are very legitimate counter argument against lock downs.

Well, except for having a death rate 10 times their Nordic neighbors.

Yeah…perhaps…but I sincerely doubt it…time will tell. The problem is I see no solution to Covid-19…vaccines…cures…knock out punches. If you lock down, and then relax the lock down and just start experiencing death again, what is the point?! You can’t lock down forever.

There have been some moderately effective treatments…Remdesivir…I could even argue Hydroxychloroquine, but no major breakthrough in sight.

 

[Cathoholic]

I just said its effectiveness has not been demonstrated.

Yes it has.

You have even admitted it to me but complained that the demonstration was anecdotal.

Remember that?

If there has been “no demonstration” they could not be taking the studies to the level that they are.

allowing that same drug to be prescribed as a matter of course to treat a specific condition.

Politicians do not determine off-label usage of approved drugs.

You have a distorted idea of how that works (despite having it explained to you many times), or your politics has blinded you to these facts.

It just isn’t going to work pretending this is not political Leaf.