SARS-2-CoV (COVID-19)

[DaveTN]

Don’t people need to be aware of and investigate Covid conspiracy theories to make their own determinations on risk? Since the election is over; and friends and family members are getting sick or even dying, and state governments are having shutdowns that are destroying peoples businesses and lives; isn’t this the #1 health concern in our lives right now? I’ve never been big on conspiracies theories, but I see some that I think may be real. I just don’t know; but I would like to hear both sides of the equation and make an informed decision? What’s wrong with that?

[Erik88]

37 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

Don’t people need to be aware of and investigate Covid conspiracy theories to make their own determinations on risk? Since the election is over; and friends and family members are getting sick or even dying, and state governments are having shutdowns that are destroying peoples businesses and lives; isn’t this the #1 health concern in our lives right now? I’ve never been big on conspiracies theories, but I see some that I think may be real. I just don’t know; but I would like to hear both sides of the equation and make an informed decision? What’s wrong with that?

That would be a question for David as it's his rule and his house. He's not saying don't investigate them on your own. He just asked that we not post them all over TGO. 

[MacGyver]

10 hours ago, Raoul said:

What took so long?

Honestly, I've probably allowed a few voices to fester that I shouldn't have.  It's stumbled out of the General Politics forum into the larger forum and kind of made it into a place I don't want to hang out. I expect I'm not the only one for which that is true.

While we've long been a site that encourages honest debate - there are a handful of folks here that simply do not deserve the assumption of sincerity.

I'm going to correct that going forward.

26 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

Don’t people need to be aware of and investigate Covid conspiracy theories to make their own determinations on risk? Since the election is over; and friends and family members are getting sick or even dying, and state governments are having shutdowns that are destroying peoples businesses and lives; isn’t this the #1 health concern in our lives right now? I’ve never been big on conspiracies theories, but I see some that I think may be real. I just don’t know; but I would like to hear both sides of the equation and make an informed decision? What’s wrong with that?

I say this in all sincerity Dave, but what else are you looking for?

This whole thing has been done in public. All of it. Literally every piece of data you could ask for is available as we struggle with this as a society.

It may be too much? Maybe we don't know where to look or what to trust? Maybe that data doesn't align with the worldview we want to hold? I get all that. But there's more good data out there than has been available in the history of man.

Conspiracy theories attempt to assign simple explanations to hard problems. This is a hard problem - so if someone is giving you an an easy answer - it's probably wrong. Couple in the fact that as more and more scientists adopt consensus - the conspiracists have to go further and further to the extreme positions.  Sometimes I think we need to back up and just read some of these things out loud. That should likely settle it for any honest person.

Now, I'll agree that the average American is terrible at assessing risk. We've de-risked everything in our day to day lives to the extent that when faced with an unknown risk - most simply don't know how to approach it. You can never completely mitigate any risk - but neither should we simply assume all risk needs to be accepted.

The problem with the "both sides" approach is that one of those sides is literally killing folks right now. Add to that the above factor that the average American sucks at assessing risk, and that's the reason we're less than welcoming to some of this nonsense.

 

[DaveTN]

30 minutes ago, Erik88 said:

That would be a question for David as it's his rule and his house. He's not saying don't investigate them on your own. He just asked that we not post them all over TGO. 

 

12 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

Honestly, I've probably allowed a few voices to fester that I shouldn't have.  It's stumbled out of the General Politics forum into the larger forum and kind of made it into a place I don't want to hang out. I expect I'm not the only one for which that is true.

While we've long been a site that encourages honest debate - there are a handful of folks here that simply do not deserve the assumption of sincerity.

I'm going to correct that going forward.

I say this in all sincerity Dave, but what else are you looking for?

This whole thing has been done in public. All of it. Literally every piece of data you could ask for is available as we struggle with this as a society.

It may be too much? Maybe we don't know where to look or what to trust? Maybe that data doesn't align with the worldview we want to hold? I get all that. But there's more good data out there than has been available in the history of man.

Conspiracy theories attempt to assign simple explanations to hard problems. This is a hard problem - so if someone is giving you an an easy answer - it's probably wrong. Couple in the fact that as more and more scientists adopt consensus - the conspiracists have to go further and further to the extreme positions.  Sometimes I think we need to back up and just read some of these things out loud. That should likely settle it for any honest person.

Now, I'll agree that the average American is terrible at assessing risk. We've de-risked everything in our day to day lives to the extent that when faced with an unknown risk - most simply don't know how to approach it. You can never completely mitigate any risk - but neither should we simply assume all risk needs to be accepted.

The problem with the "both sides" approach is that one of those sides is literally killing folks right now. Add to that the above factor that the average American sucks at assessing risk, and that's the reason we're less than welcoming to some of this nonsense.

 

I’m not questioning David’s right to do want he or any other Mod wants to do on his forum. Zuckerberg and Dorsey do want they want on theirs.

 If it’s political ramblings or videos of Trump or Biden either one I can understand that. Nether of them are Doctors. But Doctors do not agree. Simple as that. Don’t you think that warrants discussion?

[MacGyver]

3 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

 

I’m not questioning David’s right to do want he or any other Mod wants to do on his forum. Zuckerberg and Dorsey do want they want on theirs.

 If it’s political ramblings or videos of Trump or Biden either one I can understand that. Nether of them are Doctors. But Doctors do not agree. Simple as that. Don’t you think that warrants discussion?

Serious doctors are quite in agreement. They're tired of getting their asses kicked night after night in emergency departments. They're tired of having patients leave AMA because they don't have a place to put them and will have to transfer them far from their home and loved ones. They're tired of losing patients who otherwise shouldn't be dying. They're tired of losing patients with other conditions that aren't getting appropriate treatment because they "don't know what to believe."  They're just exhausted.

Doctors who play doctors for the TV news - sure they don't agree. That's what they're there for.

This is a novel disease - and we're all scrambling in public to figure out how to treat it.  We don't know more than we do know - but we're closing that gap.  People are staying alive today that would have died in March.  Stuff like proning patients, convalescent plasma, Remdesivir, etc - when it's suggested - there are paths to try them with scaffolding in place so that we can see if they actually work. We run trials.

There's a reason for that structure - even when we want to hope that something works. Even when early results seem promising - we need data. Take something like hydroxycloriquine. You might say, "what's the harm." But, when we do actual trials, we can see that, "oh, there is significant risk of harm in some patients." so, it's not worth the risk in those cases. Or, in the case of convalescent plasma, we see that it might have beneficial effects in some groups - but not others - so that's helpful knowledge since we have limited supplies.

All of this is being done in public.  I get it that we all want this to be done with - but looking back - we'll be awed at how fast we inculcated battlefield knowledge into actual practice. Frankly, I hope that we take some of these learnings and in the future, streamline some of the overly burdensome regulatory stuff that limits us today.  

All that said, when a doctor or group comes forward and says, here's something promising - and we're moving it into trials where the results will be publicly available for peer review - that's great. When you have a doctor who says, "here's a miracle cure" - and especially when you have members of the political class amplify it - then you just need to look to see who's bought stock and who benefits from the position.

[AuEagle]

Interesting reversal by the ama, even more interesting timing on the release...

 

American Medical Association Rescinds Previous Statement Against Prescription of Hydroxychloroquine to COVID-19 Patients – Len Bilén's blog, a blog about faith, politics and the environment. (lenbilen.com)

[TGO David]

44 minutes ago, Big Gai Anti-Gun Communist said:

I remember when my dad called 9/11 being an inside job a "conspiracy". Now 20 years later, he admits he could be wrong, seeing the mass amount of disinformation and censorship of ideas that is going on while policies are being implemented that are wrecking world economies and eroding individual liberties. Calling things conspiracies, seems to be a simple way to shut out thoughts that go against approved and certified ideas.

Careful.  You've got a person in this thread who was there on 9/11 and spent weeks afterward digging through the rubble as part of recovery efforts.  You don't want to go down that road here.

 

[MacGyver]

4 hours ago, Big Gai Anti-Gun Communist said:

I remember when my dad called 9/11 being an inside job a "conspiracy". Now 20 years later, he admits he could be wrong, seeing the mass amount of disinformation and censorship of ideas that is going on while policies are being implemented that are wrecking world economies and eroding individual liberties. Calling things conspiracies, seems to be a simple way to shut out thoughts that go against approved and certified ideas.

Who is the arbiter of truth? The MSM, government officials, which ones? Each man is given a brain to think, let him use it and judge for himself what is a conspiracy. 

 

At least on this board, I have a say in what constitutes acceptable dialog.

You can believe whatever you want about that day - but take saying it out loud somewhere else.

There are those of us who go to sleep every single day with the vision of coworkers jumping out of windows and those towers falling. We can still smell it, and if we try real hard, we can taste it. Seems that sickeningly sweet, metallic taste never really goes away.

There are those of us who've been all over the world hunting the people who supported it and carried it out - only to be frustrated in those efforts for a whole host of reasons - political and otherwise. You can certainly be outraged by that.

You can be outraged by the fact that we've got people who enlisted after September 11 who've spent their entire careers at war - and are now retiring - many with PTSD that we're still so inadequate in treating.

We've lost so much and so many.

For those of you who've lost someone you care about or that you served with - I'm so sorry. Know that you're in my prayers daily. For those of you who struggle with post traumatic stress - know that you're in my prayers too. And, I'm always here if you need someone to talk. This community is better with you in it.

Yes, we all have fewer liberties than we enjoyed then.  We should push back against that.  Especially since many of them haven't made the world more safe.  I've flown hundreds of time since, and I'm certain I've not been more safe on an airliner than I was when I flew into New York on the afternoon of September 10.

But I simply will not allow anyone to disparage the memory of the 2,977 people who died that day.

There are plenty of places you can go talk that if you want - this isn't one of them.

[btq96r]

1 hour ago, MacGyver said:

...and kind of made it into a place I don't want to hang out. I expect I'm not the only one for which that is true.

You would be correct in your thoughts here...at least in my case.

 

1 hour ago, Big Gai Anti-Gun Communist said:

Calling things conspiracies, seems to be a simple way to shut out thoughts that go against approved and certified ideas.

Credible evidence makes a good dividing line.  Admittedly, credible evidence has become subject to confirmation bias, but the Snowden disclosures are a good example of things that were once conspiracy theories can be brought into the light through legit evidence that leaves no doubt something is occuring or had occurred.  The mountain of evidence around Jeffery Epstein is another one, though one without a clear conclusion, only raised more questions than answers... but it certainly moved the topic from conspiracy to debatable.

Random ideas that can't be completely ruled out don't qualify.  You need to have evidence to prove something rather than have the absence of evidence against the claim give it life.

[TGO David]

15 minutes ago, Big Gai Anti-Gun Communist said:

That 9/11 was blow-back from US military intervention in the Middle East for decades. I'm sure we have Vietnam vets here too who can attest to the awful experiences of that war and we know that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was a false flag. Back to COVID...

You know, you have inadvertently made a connection between 9/11, the Global War On Terror and COVID that I am willing to discuss.

Your call to the 9/11 Commission and their observation that the terror attacks on the US that day were retaliation for our involvement in the Middle East hints at the notion that we shouldn't have been over there in the first place.  The problem with that line of thinking is that it evokes the concept of appeasement and the flawed logic that assumes that we would be left alone if we left others alone... that doing nothing would be preferable to what we've done.

Unfortunately it doesn't work like that, regardless of whether you are discussing Islamic terrorism or the COVID-19 virus.  Doing nothing, in either case, is actually a decision for inaction and hoping that the threat goes away - which is still an action of doing something.  It's a completely useless something but it's a decision, a direction, and an [in]action nonetheless.

Our response to the threat of jihad waged against Western civilization may not have been perfect, but it was a response that worked very well when the public and our elected government still had the courage and resolve to wage a fight.  It's hard for the bully to throw punches when he's busy defending himself.  For a long while we kept the bully busy.  When we stopped doing that because we lost the resolve, he started hitting back.  Thankfully, after 9/11 we got our resolve back again.  For a while.

Our current response to COVID is to fight it through the application of some basic preventative measures and of some pretty advanced medical science.  We aren't just putting our heads in the sand and hoping that the virus goes away.

You seem to like quoting quotable people and written works, so this will be right up your alley:  "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph in the world is that good men do nothing.  (Edmund Burke)"

 

Don't be the guy that advocates for doing nothing and hoping the bad thing goes away.  It doesn't.  Ever.  Not without a fight.

 

[JunkiCosmonaut]

a conspiracy is not always a crazy tin-foil-hat concept that should always be seen negatively. Thats the "pop" definition of a conspiracy (see UFOs and big foot) something being a conspiracy and being debatable is not mutually exclusive. Something can be a conspiracy or a suspected conspiracy and be open to debate. I see a lot of people using the term "conspiracy" to derail and argument, if you present facts to support a supposition or an observation or whatever you like then simply calling those facts part of a conspiracy does not make them any less relevant to the argument. I would go as far to say that in the modern context the term conspiracy is used as censorship language far more often than used correctly. Its important to entertain a wide range of possibilities when you're discussing something that no one here has any insight into beyond what we are told or what we are shown. From the most ridiculous to the most mundane I beleive.

[MacGyver]

40 minutes ago, JunkiCosmonaut said:

a conspiracy is not always a crazy tin-foil-hat concept that should always be seen negatively. Thats the "pop" definition of a conspiracy (see UFOs and big foot) something being a conspiracy and being debatable is not mutually exclusive. Something can be a conspiracy or a suspected conspiracy and be open to debate. I see a lot of people using the term "conspiracy" to derail and argument, if you present facts to support a supposition or an observation or whatever you like then simply calling those facts part of a conspiracy does not make them any less relevant to the argument. I would go as far to say that in the modern context the term conspiracy is used as censorship language far more often than used correctly. Its important to entertain a wide range of possibilities when you're discussing something that no one here has any insight into beyond what we are told or what we are shown. From the most ridiculous to the most mundane I beleive.

This is not true.

People are certainly entitled to their own opinions. You're really not entitled to your own facts.

I recognize that there has been a large scale erosion of what the political class is willing to offer, what some members of the media are willing to report, and what the public at large and individually are willing to accept as "facts."

But, facts are supported by evidence that a curious person can go and independently verify.

So, sure. Alternative theories of events are fine - and even welcome. But, they have to be supported by actual evidence. And, the lack of evidence to the contrary is not the same as evidence.  Just because your "theory" can't be easily disproven - doesn't mean it's grounded in reality. It doesn't make it worthy of consideration. They can do a lot of harm in some cases.

For an alternative theory to be viable - there needs to either be evidence to support it - or it needs to point to a hole in the existing evidence that indicates that trust in an existing theory shouldn't be fully trusted. And, in the latter case, it needs to present a path to filling in those holes.

But yes, conspiracy theories are less relevant to the argument.

 

[MacGyver]

52 minutes ago, Big Gai Anti-Gun Communist said:

With regards to COVID, we spent months of Dr. Foul Cheese giving changing health guidance and suggestions, when he is just a government desk jocky and not an actual practicing doctor. 

I know we've cautioned people against pejoratives here in the past. I don't really care about that here.

I would just submit that it makes you seem not serious and takes away from whatever merits the rest of your argument may have.

[Moped]

On 12/11/2020 at 2:22 PM, Moped said:

Since I last posted the COVID Numbers as reported by Knox County on 12/02/2020, there have been 2,951 positive tests, and 29 deaths.

Since my last report, above, there have been 2,470 new positive cases in Knox County. That's a hair under the avg of 500 per day. If you you just take into account the last 4 days the average is 519 new cases per day. The death toll attributed to COVID has risen to 234, 26 new deaths in 5 days. 

Stats take from the The daily report by the Knox County Health Department.

[MacGyver]

I think I've mentioned it elsewhere, but if you haven't listened to WNYC's Blindspot - you should.

It's probably the best, most accurate reporting of the road to September 11th I've heard.

[Omega]

29 minutes ago, Moped said:

Since my last report, above, there have been 2,470 new positive cases in Knox County. That's a hair under the avg of 500 per day. If you you just take into account the last 4 days the average is 519 new cases per day. The death toll attributed to COVID has risen to 234, 26 new deaths in 5 days. 

Stats take from the The daily report by the Knox County Health Department.

Which puts Knox County at a .89% death rate, or .95% if you use the other table on the same page, which begs the question, why the difference.

https://covid.knoxcountytn.gov/case-count.html

Edit:  TN 2018 stats put Knox County at 10.3% death rate, no data I could find for 2019 or 2020 so far.

https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/health/documents/vital-statistics/death/2018/TN Deaths - 2018.pdf

Edit again: Knox County had 263 drug OD deaths in 2018.

https://www.tn.gov/health/health-program-areas/pdo/pdo/data-dashboard.html

Edited December 16, 2020 by Omega
Add Data

[JunkiCosmonaut]

52 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

This is not true.

People are certainly entitled to their own opinions. You're really not entitled to your own facts.

I recognize that there has been a large scale erosion of what the political class is willing to offer, what some members of the media are willing to report, and what the public at large and individually are willing to accept as "facts."

But, facts are supported by evidence that a curious person can go and independently verify.

So, sure. Alternative theories of events are fine - and even welcome. But, they have to be supported by actual evidence. And, the lack of evidence to the contrary is not the same as evidence.  Just because your "theory" can't be easily disproven - doesn't mean it's grounded in reality. It doesn't make it worthy of consideration. They can do a lot of harm in some cases.

For an alternative theory to be viable - there needs to either be evidence to support it - or it needs to point to a hole in the existing evidence that indicates that trust in an existing theory shouldn't be fully trusted. And, in the latter case, it needs to present a path to filling in those holes.

But yes, conspiracy theories are less relevant to the argument.

 

I get you, what I'm trying to say is this:

(I can see that you have some emotional turmoil tied into the topic of 9/11 in this thread so I first
want to assure you that this is not me advocating for any theories of conspiracy tied to 9/11
or otherwise. I know you have some emotional trauma and I'm not trying to antagonize you.)

I'm  only establishing that a conspiracy is not defacto false and uncredable. That is the main stream
conception but it is wrong I can verify this simply, again, with no attachment to any specific conspiracy
or facets. JUST TO SAY THAT A CONSPIRACY == FALSE all the time you would need to prove conspiracies never happen.

 
the definition of a conspiracy is this: a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.

If you believe all conspiracies are false you are immediately and demonstrably wrong. 
but this is my main point: calling something a conspiracy does not derail it and make the 
accused immune to all facts and evidence therein ascribed to point to that conspiracy. 

If I present to you a happening with factual evidence someone is intellectually dishonest, or lazy to immediately dismiss all of the verifiable facts to the subject on the grounds that 
the facts point to a conspiracy. I would further state that In "pop-culture" conspiracies are used
to ridicule or silence individuals with (possibly) factual claims from having the claims heard. 
further, you would note me not saying anything about "making up alternative facts"
the term "alternative facts" is an oxymoron. there are only the facts, and they point to the truth, and 
some people may not like that truth but it is what it is. 

[Grayfox54]

I saw this on the 5:00pm news and confirmed it on the official Shelby County Covid  website. Shelby County has set a new record (actually smashing anything previous) with 1,163 new active covid-19 cases reported in the last 24 hours. Death count now stands at 760. News also reports that there are only 12 available hospital beds in all of Shelby County. 

You still planning on traveling for Christmas? 

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Grayfox54 said:

I saw this on the 5:00pm news and confirmed it on the official Shelby County Covid  website. Shelby County has set a new record (actually smashing anything previous) with 1,163 new active covid-19 cases reported in the last 24 hours. Death count now stands at 760. News also reports that there are only 12 available hospital beds in all of Shelby County. 

You still planning on traveling for Christmas? 

Yes.  With normal good hygiene and all that.

[Oh Shoot]

Sudden distribution mystery:

Suddenly, many if not most states are being told by the feds that they'll get 30-35% fewer doses than promised.

Azar hinted that it was a Pfizer production problem. Pfizer put out statement that they have met all production schedules and have the stated number of doses "on the shelf" ready to send, but have received no more directives from the federal admin as to where they  should go.

Keep tuned.

- OS

[MacGyver]

55 minutes ago, Trigger Man said:

Unfortunately most of my family is out of state, so yes I will be traveling for Christmas. I keep telling them to move to TN for the sunshine and the moonshine, but probably not going to do that anytime soon. The huntin' and fishin' is better up North, but the taxes and regulations for small businesses are better here. I am not too worried about it though, they live in rural area in the Midwest with low case numbers. The news seems to focus a lot on COVID because it draws in viewers, but there a lot of other diseases and risks that they ignore in their coverage and I think they don't always provide the full context. 

I remember them talking about how bad Thanksgiving was supposed to be. But here's what happened in the Midwest:

I wonder if everyone in every single one of those states behaving recklessly, and then suddenly, right at Thanksgiving, they thought better of it. Or maybe the virus does its thing no matter what? I don't know, I am not a virologist. 

And what about hospitalizations? I found that Yinon Weiss (@yinonw) has dug up some relevant information on current hospitalization trends.

Most people who just read news headlines won't think the chart looks like that. I have family members who have been nurses most of their life, and ICU beds are pretty much always at capacity. Given that the U.S. has 6000+ hospitals, some number of them will experience high occupancy from time to time, as has happened numerous times in the past. The chart above shows the aggregate numbers, which do not appear to be abnormal. Don't have charts specific to Shelby or other TN counties though, so could be different here, but at least at a national level we seem to be doing okay. 

But with COVID hospitalizations increasing, though, how can this be? According to Yinon Weiss:

"1. Wide COVID spread means people coming in for non-COVID issues but still count as COVID patients."
"2. COVID patients replacing flu patients."

Which is better shown by this graph:

Finally, he also showed what's been happening in Los Angeles.

The average trendline in December for 2019 is shown above. I think it's important to know what last year looked like during flu season, and not get to bent out of shape, while still making sure to be safe and take necessary precautions. I'm a bit of germaphobe, so I like not having to explain to people why I don't shake hands anymore.  My elderly parents got the flu for the first time in over 20 years in 2018 and it was rough for them. Same with many of my previous co-workers. Not saying COVID is the same as the flu, but people seem to gloss over it and forget about the spike in flu cases we had two years ago when we just focus on COVID. I'm in my 40's and in okay shape, so I personably am not too worried about Flu or COVID, but I certainly want other high risk people to be safe.

I think this is why decontexualized numbers don't help us. We need to know what's typical. Saying an ICU is 85% occupied sounds scary to people who don't know much about how hospitals are run. But they generally have to be at least that occupied for a hospital to stay afloat. Just like restaurants can't afford to stay in business if they are operating only at half capacity during peak hours.

  

Welcome to TGO. I think. 

[TGO David]

39 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

Welcome to TGO. I think. 

Registered 9 hours ago, immediately in this thread... proxy IP address.

 

[Chucktshoes]

12 minutes ago, TGO David said:

Registered 9 hours ago, immediately in this thread... proxy IP address.

 

Am I alone in thinking this thread should move to the new “Controversial Topics” subforum?

[Oh Shoot]

17 minutes ago, Chucktshoes said:

Am I alone in thinking this thread should move to the new “Controversial Topics” subforum?

If you could separate the "controversial" parts, sure. But otherwise, what is more pressing a matter these days? There's a lot of real "unadorned" info in here.

Hell, I even do math to post the ongoing TN daily death rate updates.

Oh, right, I forgot, the whole thing is word's biggest hoax, nobody dies from Covid at all.

- OS

[Erik88]

I was just about to say, a pandemic really shouldn't be controversial. Sad times we live in.