99% Survival rate

[Mety]

But no one was asking which side was more logical.

You have put it nicely that favors your position, but still have not proven about the long term effects of Covid in health. You only demonstrated what you believe with sources you might have on your own from articles, etc.

Logic is logic...logic may not fit your personal feeling or sense but that does not negate objective logic.  You can continue to argue that 1+1 is not 2 but that doesn't change the logic or math of it.

You seem to be confusing logic with personal preference and subjective "common sense".

How exactly would you like to it to be proven?  Conversely, what is your evidence that there are no material long-term effects?

"Logic is logic like math is math" does sound correct, but the issue is that which logic are we talking about? You can say my logic is like math 1+1=2. Sure, but your logic might be illogical to others. You don't think so? You say that is a subjective common sense, but how do you know your logic is not a subjective common sense? You say 1% of the US population is huge. Yes, that is logical. But others might say 1% is a too small of a number. That is logical too. You don't think so? What makes your logic deserves to be the only logic where there is a counter logic which is also true? My point here is not to prove I'm more logical. My point here is what you say logical might actually be a preference subjective matter after all. Of course, you won't admit it.

I'm not in a position to prove or debunk the long term effects. You guys are the ones who say there are long term effects with Covid. YOU need to prove it. I'll say though, we're less than a year having this virus. How can we determine it'll have long term effects while we have only studied this virus less than a year? Am I being illogical?

No...the effects of the disease is not debatable.  What we do in response to that those effects are.  As you said...whether 3.3 million death is acceptable is subjective but that decision needs to be based upon 3.3 million...not hey..it's not really 3.3 million. 

That's the mark difference...almost every argument I have had on this issue starts with 1) COVID is not that bad, 2) most people don't die from it, and 3) it's not really 250K. 

The debate should start with...250K are dead and our medical system is being stretched to the limit...are we okay with that and if we are, what are we willing to accept.  Is 500K death okay?  What about 1 million?

In many ways, I am okay with Qwerty's analysis on issues (although I disagree with them) because he recognize the risk and simply states that he is okay with the outcomes.  Most people are not willing to accept those outcome and try to belittle or ignore those potential outcome because it does not fit their beliefs or narratives. 

Just come out and say that you are okay with like 400K death by January because it probably won't affect you and you think being with your family and friend to eat turkey is more important.  Not this "oh my goodness George Washington and the gang are turning over in their graves" bit.

There is evidence that COVID has longterm effects...one year is long term.  You confuse long term from permanent.

So all you tried to prove about Covid's long term effect here is by sayin we've been into a year by now. Ok. I'll see if others will take that as a good evidence.

I guess I was right you wouldn't admit your logic being a preference.

 

[Mety]

You see, IC and IHO? qwerty is following the logic he believes. What say you?

I say when it comes to healthcare and public policy issues, I follow what the experts and scientists say. 

Just like when there is a lawsuit, I follow the advice of counsel and what the judges say rather than just make up my own set of laws and procedures.

You mean experts and scientists YOU CHOOSE to listen to? Are you sure all 100% of them are saying the same thing?

I choose to listen?  No...it's what almost all of the scientists and experts say...I don't need 100% agreement to make decisions. 

If you go to 10 doctors and 9 of them say you have cancer and need treatment...do you say...hey I probably don't have cancer cause not all ten agree?

Oh so you're in favor of 90% or 99% here instead of 1%? Hmm....

 

[Mety]

Yeah, that's funny. Who said that? I don't think anyone said that here.

That doesn't matter because there are plenty of people who do...including Trump and various GOP leaders who repeatedly stated that COVID is overblown, overhyped by the media, and will go away as soon as the November elections are over.

That is a lie. I don't support Trump, but I don't think he said Covid is fake and not that serious. He might have not handled like how you prefer, but saying he thinks Covid is fake and not serious is something else. I think you're very emotional in dealing with facts.

 

[irvinehomeowner]

@Mety:

When the President says publicly that Covid will "magically disappear", what message does that tell people?

There may be scientists on both sides, but so far, the ones who said to take Covid seriously have been more correct than not. Covid was supposed to go away during the summer... it hit all time highs in July... Covid was supposed to go away after November... numbers are approaching those July highs.

And... this is with restrictions in place. Imagine if we did nothing. **Logically**, do you think it would be worse?

 

[zubs]

Yeah, that's funny. Who said that? I don't think anyone said that here.

That doesn't matter because there are plenty of people who do...including Trump and various GOP leaders who repeatedly stated that COVID is overblown, overhyped by the media, and will go away as soon as the November elections are over.

That is a lie. I don't support Trump, but I don't think he said Covid is fake and not that serious. He might have not handled like how you prefer, but saying he thinks Covid is fake and not serious is something else. I think you're very emotional in dealing with facts.

Trump and crew have been trying to down play COVID for 8 months now.  Where have you been? 
Iowa just put in mandatory mask order because their hospitals are crying they don't have enough staff to man the ICU beds.


Just read starman & morekaos covid denial posts here.

 

[Mety]

@Mety:

When the President says publicly that Covid will "magically disappear", what message does that tell people?

There may be scientists on both sides, but so far, the ones who said to take Covid seriously have been more correct than not. Covid was supposed to go away during the summer... it hit all time highs in July... Covid was supposed to go away after November... numbers are approaching those July highs.

And... this is with restrictions in place. Imagine if we did nothing. **Logically**, do you think it would be worse?

Post the full video of when he said "magically disappear." Sure he said some hilarious stuff all the time, but I really don't like how media takes just some portions of the clips to report in public. That's the wrong action by both parties JIMHO. I saw very few videos of his daily briefings and he was saying Covid was looking real bad. We can all take portions of what he said and conclude total different outcomes. But this is not the point of this thread.

Even if we had less or no restriction at all, I don't think the outcome would have been too different in terms of fatality rate. But I could be very wrong. We would never know, but we all know people are more rebellious under restrictions. I think better results would have come if we could have continued as normal while suggesting masks and distancing guidelines. Things didn't have to get closed down. But again, it's just my humble opinion here.

Talking about Covid going away in Nov, the vaccine is here, so I guess it'll start going away soon. Good for Biden.

 

[irvinehomeowner]

@Mety:

When the President says publicly that Covid will "magically disappear", what message does that tell people?

There may be scientists on both sides, but so far, the ones who said to take Covid seriously have been more correct than not. Covid was supposed to go away during the summer... it hit all time highs in July... Covid was supposed to go away after November... numbers are approaching those July highs.

And... this is with restrictions in place. Imagine if we did nothing. **Logically**, do you think it would be worse?

Post the full video of when he said "magically disappear." Sure he said some hilarious stuff all the time, but I really don't like how media takes just some portions of the clips to report in public. That's the wrong action by both parties JIMHO. I saw very few videos of his daily briefings and he was saying Covid was looking real bad. We can all take portions of what he said and conclude total different outcomes. But this is not the point of this thread.

Why do I need to post it? His followers will not think about context or "portions" of what he says... that's what I mean. Obviously it's logical to take everything into context but the illogical don't... you just proved my point.

Even if we had less or no restriction at all, I don't think the outcome would have been too different in terms of fatality rate. But I could be very wrong. We would never know, but we all know people are more rebellious under restrictions. I think better results would have come if we could have continued as normal while suggesting masks and distancing guidelines. Things didn't have to get closed down. But again, it's just my humble opinion here.

If Covid is spreading this much with restrictions, safety protocols, at least part of the population wearing masks... it would be much worse otherwise. That is not opinion, that is logic.

Talking about Covid going away in Nov, the vaccine is here, so I guess it'll start going away soon. Good for Biden.

And there you go again with lack of logic. It will take many months... even maybe a year or two for the vaccine to be administered to enough of the population to effectively reduce the spread. And then who knows if the vaccine will be effective against future strains.

This isn't about Biden or Trump... it's about public health... and logic.

 

[Mety]

@Mety:

When the President says publicly that Covid will "magically disappear", what message does that tell people?

There may be scientists on both sides, but so far, the ones who said to take Covid seriously have been more correct than not. Covid was supposed to go away during the summer... it hit all time highs in July... Covid was supposed to go away after November... numbers are approaching those July highs.

And... this is with restrictions in place. Imagine if we did nothing. **Logically**, do you think it would be worse?

Post the full video of when he said "magically disappear." Sure he said some hilarious stuff all the time, but I really don't like how media takes just some portions of the clips to report in public. That's the wrong action by both parties JIMHO. I saw very few videos of his daily briefings and he was saying Covid was looking real bad. We can all take portions of what he said and conclude total different outcomes. But this is not the point of this thread.

Why do I need to post it? His followers will not think about context or "portions" of what he says... that's what I mean. Obviously it's logical to take everything into context but the illogical don't... you just proved my point.

Even if we had less or no restriction at all, I don't think the outcome would have been too different in terms of fatality rate. But I could be very wrong. We would never know, but we all know people are more rebellious under restrictions. I think better results would have come if we could have continued as normal while suggesting masks and distancing guidelines. Things didn't have to get closed down. But again, it's just my humble opinion here.

If Covid is spreading this much with restrictions, safety protocols, at least part of the population wearing masks... it would be much worse otherwise. That is not opinion, that is logic.

Talking about Covid going away in Nov, the vaccine is here, so I guess it'll start going away soon. Good for Biden.

And there you go again with lack of logic. It will take many months... even maybe a year or two for the vaccine to be administered to enough of the population to effectively reduce the spread. And then who knows if the vaccine will be effective against future strains.

This isn't about Biden or Trump... it's about public health... and logic.

So you're saying what you *believe* is logic. Sounds more like your opinion to me. That's what I'm saying though. What we see logic might not be logic to others. Get it now? We're all playing with our preferences and beliefs. How can you say what you believe is the absolute logic?

BTW, yeah it would take some time for vaccine to be used, but I meant to say Biden gets to be the President when people actually get to be vaccinated. Good for him to get all credits. The accuracy of it is a complete separate matter.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

So all you tried to prove about Covid's long term effect here is by sayin we've been into a year by now. Ok. I'll see if others will take that as a good evidence.

I guess I was right you wouldn't admit your logic being a preference.

No...that's not what I said.  I said that your definition of "long term" is wrong...one year is longterm for purposes of studying a disease.  If you had a year-long cough after an illness, that's a long-term effect.  It may not be permanent but it is long-term. 

There have been studies about the long-term effect of COVID and plenty of data showing that such effects and issues exists.  The question now is whether how long they last and whether they are permanent or irreversible.  There is also evidence of that including permanent damages to organs including the brain and the heart.

You have this habit of reading what you believe to be said rather than what is actually said.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

Yeah, that's funny. Who said that? I don't think anyone said that here.

That doesn't matter because there are plenty of people who do...including Trump and various GOP leaders who repeatedly stated that COVID is overblown, overhyped by the media, and will go away as soon as the November elections are over.

That is a lie. I don't support Trump, but I don't think he said Covid is fake and not that serious. He might have not handled like how you prefer, but saying he thinks Covid is fake and not serious is something else. I think you're very emotional in dealing with facts.

There you go again projecting talking points...point out where in my post did I use the word "fake" or how he handled it..or my opinions on what he did.  Point out where I said that you supported Trump?  You totally missed the point of my post.

Again...Trump and GOP have repeatedly stated that COVID is overblown, media is overhyping it, and that it will go away after the November elections.  There are numerous examples of them saying those things literally...in fact Trump himself stated that he purposively downplay the virus to avoid a panic. 

Stop setting up strawpeoples to knock down and then acted outraged about it.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

So you're saying what you *believe* is logic. Sounds more like your opinion to me. That's what I'm saying though. What we see logic might not be logic to others. Get it now? We're all playing with our preferences and beliefs. How can you say what you believe is the absolute logic?

BTW, yeah it would take some time for vaccine to be used, but I meant to say Biden gets to be the President when people actually get to be vaccinated. Good for him to get all credits. The accuracy of it is a complete separate matter.

How is it opinion?  There are numerous studies and data showing that the lockdowns and protocols helps to reduce the spread of the disease.  I can cite those evidence to you but it doesn't seem to matter.

You just agree with IHO's statement that the implementation of vaccine will take time...how is that an opinion?

What is your definition of logic and opinion?  Reminds me of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sav2L2E38XA

 

[Irvinecommuter]

Even if we had less or no restriction at all, I don't think the outcome would have been too different in terms of fatality rate. But I could be very wrong. We would never know, but we all know people are more rebellious under restrictions. I think better results would have come if we could have continued as normal while suggesting masks and distancing guidelines. Things didn't have to get closed down. But again, it's just my humble opinion here.

Talking about Covid going away in Nov, the vaccine is here, so I guess it'll start going away soon. Good for Biden.

Yes we do know the outcome...states and countries that imposed stricter guidelines and restrictions far better than those who did not.  There are actual studies and data to show this...it's not a thought experiment.
https://www.popsci.com/story/health/masks-states-mandates/

Data from states and counties that have so far required masks in public show that when these policies go into effect, cases and deaths decrease. Models predict that if the US adopted a universal mask mandate, cases would almost immediately drop and lower death tolls would follow. But 14 states across the country still don?t have a sweeping policy for the protective gear. ?This is something that states should have taken care of before,? says Christopher Adolph, professor of political science and statistics at the University of Washington and leader of the COVID-19 State Policy Project. ?If they haven?t yet, it?s a very low-cost thing that everyone can do.?

 

[Irvinecommuter]

Post the full video of when he said "magically disappear." Sure he said some hilarious stuff all the time, but I really don't like how media takes just some portions of the clips to report in public. That's the wrong action by both parties JIMHO. I saw very few videos of his daily briefings and he was saying Covid was looking real bad. We can all take portions of what he said and conclude total different outcomes. But this is not the point of this thread.

Here is a handy guide with links to when he said them:
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2020/10/politics/covid-disappearing-trump-comment-tracker/

Also...the leader of the free world shouldn't be on the fence...he should have an understanding of the disease, what we are doing about it, and what the possible outcomes are.  It is not sufficient for him to say that the disease will go away 50% and then the disease is bad the other 50%...that's poor leadership.

BTW:  Trump knew how bad it was back in February...he admitted it to Woodward on tape.  He just wanted to pretend it was not going to be and then refused to move off the narrative.  He even admits to purposively downplaying the disease out of fear that it would panic people. 

It is amazing to me that people rather believe that nothing more could have been done despite all the evidence to the contrary.

 

[irvinehomeowner]

@Mety:

Again, logic is logic, just like math is math.

There is no belief system or opinion for logic.

Like IC was saying, does anyone not "believe" 1+1=2? No, because 1+1 *is* 2... regardless of emotion, belief or opinion.

 

[Mety]

@Mety:

Again, logic is logic, just like math is math.

There is no belief system or opinion for logic.

Like IC was saying, does anyone not "believe" 1+1=2? No, because 1+1 *is* 2... regardless of emotion, belief or opinion.

If that's what you guys believe, then there is no point of me talking any further on this matter. The definition of logic is: a proper or reasonable way of thinking about something. It is not an absolute truth as if saying 1+1=2. But again, no need to discuss further. Everyone will believe what they want to believe. Seems like you and I and many here all wear masks and be careful which are all we can do anyways so it's all good.

 

[nosuchreality]

It?s a combination of logic and value system.  We all make decisions or have opinions based on our sensibilities. I find religion to be extremely illogical. I think a lot of folks here are pretty smart and religious. One could easily argue how ridiculous religion is and it wouldn?t change a believers mind.

Beliefs around covid are no different. I consider myself to be pretty practical. I take the view that people die every day and the covid deaths are just one more type of death that can be prevented. A lot of deaths that happen every day can be prevented/mitigated by taking drastic measures similar to the drastic measures we have taken fir covid but we have never chosen to prevent those deaths before. We can ban alcohol and prefer alcoholism and the related abuse that comes with and that would get rid of the drunk driving deaths. You could ban guns as well, etc. but it seems too many people like to drink and have their guns so the majority generally wins.  For
Covid it seems like we don?t quite have a majority so a good part of the population is split. I definitely understand the arguments on both sides.

No one really answered my question before but  I already know the answer. Will the people that are strong proponents of masks for covid continue to push mask wearing to prevent old people from catching the flu so they don?t die. Will you do permanent remote learning to prevent the old folks living at home from getting the flu and potentially dying? A lot of people use the  vulnerable population as a big reason to do the shutdowns and remote learning - to prevent the spread from getting the vulnerable population from getting covid. I?m guessing the answer is no. Society does the cost benefit on the acceptable level of deaths. For some reason we have tweaked the cost benefit for covid. Not sure what the magic number of deaths is that causes people to care more about covid.

Being bluntly honest I really hope schools step up and keep up the hardline on undiagnosed respiratory illnesses sitting in class. I dispise the yearly bribes given out for 'perfect' attendence so that parents send their kids until they're too sick to walk.

We didn't take draconian action in a vacuum, China had a pretty good shitshow with the virus, Cali issed the first widescale stay at home on March 19, by then Italy was already in shitshow status.

Case fatality rate was extremely high due to lack of testing.

John Hopkins reports today that we are 257,671 deaths, (in basically 9 months) and likely isn't reflecting many of the coming deaths from nearly two millions new cases in the last two weeks. The flu kills on average 36,000. 

Personally, I think people in general are overly cavalier about the flu.  On average drunk driving kills a little over 10,000 a year and as a society we greatly condemn it, and steadily tightened laws on it.

The most important thing though is of those 99% survivors, 90% haven't had it, yet. 

The other big difference, with the flu, even in bad years, we have enough beds, enough medical staff to treat effectively. Uncontrolled covid, we don't.

That 90% doesn't want it.  We may not be able to stop them from getting it, but slower and later is better.

 

[Mety]

If I were to say I had a power to prove that by one post here, that would be illogical, wouldn't it?

Not sure if you've studied science deeply, but more and more you get to know how this universe runs and how a small creature in this universe, a human, is functioning with cells, molecules, and all the biological components, you WILL come to conclude there must be a God who makes and controls all these. Sure, that is an emotional belief. But that is also a logic concluded by many scientists.

And there are plenty of people and scientists who believe the opposite..because humans cannot prove God.  He either is or is not.  You certainly cannot prove that your version of God is the "right" version...you cannot even prove the existence of God because our minds are so tiny that we cannot fathom.  Conversely...you cannot disprove God or religion because they are not proveable things.

Point is that faith is belief in the absence of objective proof or logic.  You hold those belief regardless of what the outside world or proveable facts are. 

Logic requires proveability and replication...God by definition is not proveable to anyone outside of yourself.

Even in the Bible, God had to reveal Himself in physical ways such as a burning bush or having a big fish swallow a person for that person to believe.

Maybe your faith is grater than mine, but I see Christianity very provable and logical once you accept The Bible as the inerrant Word of God.

God's revelations and Jesus' miracles were illogical if you were to see from natural perspective since those were supernatural events. But once you know why He did those, they become very logical.

Just believing doesn't really work for me. God showed proofs and evidences that are logical of His existence and His Words to be true. The most important evidence we can see from one another is *love*. If you do all things out of love, then you know you belong to Christ. If you do things out of self intelligence or even self righteousness, then I don't think you can see God as a logical being. 

 

[Irvinecommuter]

Maybe your faith is grater than mine, but I see Christianity very provable and logical once you accept The Bible as the inerrant Word of God.

God's revelations and Jesus' miracles were illogical if you were to see from natural perspective since those were supernatural events. But once you know why He did those, they become very logical.

Just believing doesn't really work for me. God showed proofs and evidences that are logical of His existence and His Words to be true. The most important evidence we can see from one another is *love*. If you do all things out of love, then you know you belong to Christ. If you do things out of self intelligence or even self righteousness, then I don't think you can see God as a logical being.

Hmm...you literally just pointed out how belief in God is personal and subjective.  It makes sense to you because you are a Christian.  That does not make it objectively logical.

The fact that you believe that 1) God exists, 2) that the Bible is the "inerrant word of God, 3) there was a Jesus, 4) that He performed miracles, and 5) Jesus sacrificed Himself to save the world are expressions of faith...many people don't think those things happened and are nothing more than fantastical tales.

If you ask believers of other religions or even non-believers, you will get their explanations as to the things that you talk about and it will be "logical" to them.  Can you provide any evidence or proof that you are more "correct" than a Muslim or a Buddhist?  No..because it's not something that is provable.  Those are matters of faith.  Buddhist, Muslim, Sikh, Muslim, and non-believers all explain "love" in their own way.  Subjective belief is not logic...it's subjective. 

You are actually engage is reductive reasoning...which is the opposite of deductive reasoning that science and logic are based upon.  It is fine...religion in general is reductive because it seeks to narrow the answers while logic and science are supposed to be open to new and different possibilities. 

Data and effects of COVID are objective (i.e. 1 to 2% mortality rate...number of cases)...what you think should be done and the impact on society are subjective.

 

[irvinehomeowner]

@Mety:

I think the disconnect is semantics. You are using the definition of logic as a "way of thinking"... such as "What is your logic" or "I can see your logic". I am using logic as  more the scientific term, that adheres to certain rules like math. It's data based... not belief or opinion based.

And yes, as someone who believes in God, like qwerty wonders, that is not logical.

But conversely, when you look at life and the wonders of the world, my "logic" (using your definition) is how can one not think God exists?

So maybe that's the struggle the anti-Coviders have... since they really don't see the impact of Covid on their lives, it is "logical" for them to think it's not a big deal. You can see this same difference in attitudes in people who have never had a loved one pass from cancer vs a cancer survivor. It's only real when it happens to you.

That's the individualism that really prevents us from not just tackling Covid, but racism, poverty and whatever else ails society.

 

[Mety]

Maybe your faith is grater than mine, but I see Christianity very provable and logical once you accept The Bible as the inerrant Word of God.

God's revelations and Jesus' miracles were illogical if you were to see from natural perspective since those were supernatural events. But once you know why He did those, they become very logical.

Just believing doesn't really work for me. God showed proofs and evidences that are logical of His existence and His Words to be true. The most important evidence we can see from one another is *love*. If you do all things out of love, then you know you belong to Christ. If you do things out of self intelligence or even self righteousness, then I don't think you can see God as a logical being.

Hmm...you literally just pointed out how belief in God is personal and subjective.  It makes sense to you because you are a Christian.  That does not make it objectively logical.

The fact that you believe that 1) God exists, 2) that the Bible is the "inerrant word of God, 3) there was a Jesus, 4) that He performed miracles, and 5) Jesus sacrificed Himself to save the world are expressions of faith...many people don't think those things happened and are nothing more than fantastical tales.

If you ask believers of other religions or even non-believers, you will get their explanations as to the things that you talk about and it will be "logical" to them.  Can you provide any evidence or proof that you are more "correct" than a Muslim or a Buddhist?  No..because it's not something that is provable.  Those are matters of faith.  Buddhist, Muslim, Sikh, Muslim, and non-believers all explain "love" in their own way.  Subjective belief is not logic...it's subjective. 

You are actually engage is reductive reasoning...which is the opposite of deductive reasoning that science and logic are based upon.  It is fine...religion in general is reductive because it seeks to narrow the answers while logic and science are supposed to be open to new and different possibilities. 

Data and effects of COVID are objective (i.e. 1 to 2% mortality rate...number of cases)...what you think should be done and the impact on society are subjective.

I can prove Christianity God as the only God ONLY IF you believe The Bible as the inerrant Word of God. Believing as such might be a subjective matter for you, but once we settle that matter, The Bible provides plenty of evidences for God. That's what the Apostles were doing after Jesus ascended. Proving Jesus as the Son of God from the Scriptures. Fully believing is the work of the Holy Spirit, but logically the science and datas keep proving the existence of God even until now.

There are other things also such real believing Christians' fruits. That is love. I'm talking about the love that is defined from The Bible, not what the world is saying of it or how you define in your own way. So you're partly right saying that religion is not logical, but once you take the Word of God as is, everything becomes very logical for Christian believers at least. Not saying you're doing that, but I don't think believing just because is that good idea IMHO.