New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Up, up and away...

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
At least you TRIED to make a point that time.

But smart people know there are many factors affecting the spread of infections. Your “point” seems to be that reducing vaccinations, mask usage, distancing etc., is the way to go if one wants to keep infection numbers down. That’s idiotic, but at least you tried that time.

For example, in the last few months there has been an inverse relationship between vaccination rates and infection rates in US states. That’s far more telling, but you ignore it. Why?
It's actually not "idiotic" - unless you think thousands of scientists are "idiots:"

The-Great-Barrington-Declaration.pdf (bfc4u.org)
 

God of War

Lets go Brandon!
Masks work, in medical settings when worn by professionals - mask mandates for the general public do not. What happens in effect is that they, at best, change who gets the disease - and by that I mean they may prevent some airborne transmission, but they contribute to just as many (if not more) infections from fomites, as people a) feel they give them the "safety" to go out when sick, and b) they fiddle with their masks with their hands and then touch common surfaces. You simply cannot find any valid data that shows these general mask mandates had any dampening effect on the rate of transmission of covid-19.
Well, 40% of Swedish households are of people who live alone. Probably the single most important reason (among ohers) Sweden has done relatively well in the pandemic. You of course argue not to have masks worn in public crowded places but for MASK WEARING EDUCATION (how to wear a mask well and the difference between hygenic and sterile mask wearing). Something which never happened in the U.S.

Mask wearing societies in Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan proved masks do work as very early on they had lesser spread than the non-mask wearing societies. Of course fatigue set in and the mask wearing efficacy declined. Even in the U.S. masks worked as a speed bump to the rate of transmission. There was a time Florida was being lauded by the anti-maskers as proof masks weren't needed and yet in Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach people overwhelmingly used masks.
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
It's actually not "idiotic" - unless you think thousands of scientists are "idiots:"

The-Great-Barrington-Declaration.pdf (bfc4u.org)
Thousands? That screed sure doesn’t list thousands of signers.

Anyway, you must think that screed refutes something I said. Make your case, if you can. Quote something I said and quote something in the screed that supposedly refutes it. Thus far, you’re just playing another one of your dishonest games.
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
Sweden because the 40% single person households lessen the rate of transmission.
Well it didn't really lessen it early on. Their single person households among the elderly are comparable to any other country. There are more young people living alone there, and they may have slowed but never stopped going out to clubs and such. I really don't think that accounts for their (current) low transmission and low death rates. They likely had a High incidence of natural immunity among their young from asymptomatic cases - which is how we beat novel viruses for thousands of years (until the progressives took over running all the shows).
 

God of War

Lets go Brandon!
Well it didn't really lessen it early on. Their single person households among the elderly are comparable to any other country. There are more young people living alone there, and they may have slowed but never stopped going out to clubs and such. I really don't think that accounts for their (current) low transmission and low death rates. They likely had a High incidence of natural immunity among their young from asymptomatic cases - which is how we beat novel viruses for thousands of years (until the progressives took over running all the shows).
blah, blah, :0)

In epidemics separation works. Live as hermit in a cabin in the woods and you will not get a human transmissible disease. In epidemics it is about probabilities and not sureties. From moment to moment you have a probability of being infected and the less time you spend in a High probability moment the less likely you will become infected. If you are exposed to disease inoculum the more in amount the more likely you'll get sick and the greater you sickness. This is a continuum not a binary.
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
blah, blah, :0)

In epidemics separation works. Live as hermit in a cabin in the woods and you will not get a human transmissible disease. In epidemics it is about probabilities and not sureties. From moment to moment you have a probability of being infected and the less time you spend in a High probability moment the less likely you will become infected. If you are exposed to disease inoculum the more in amount the more likely you'll get sick and the greater you sickness. This is a continuum not a binary.
Where did my post say that isn't the case? Obviously, the object is to not get sick. If it were possible for everyone to not be around others, an epidemic will get nipped in the bud. Of course, it is not, so the alternative is to do what Sweden did, and let natural immunity (which we now know is up to 27 times better than a vaccine) develop asap.
 

EatTheRich

President
Where did my post say that isn't the case? Obviously, the object is to not get sick. If it were possible for everyone to not be around others, an epidemic will get nipped in the bud. Of course, it is not, so the alternative is to do what Sweden did, and let natural immunity (which we now know is up to 27 times better than a vaccine) develop asap.
But aren’t people far more likely to be reinfected after surviving wild Covid than to have a breakthrough infection after getting the vaccine?
 
Top