Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
4 hours ago, rumak said:

21 posts (of yours on this thread) .     not quite a record ,   but good effort young man

not so young man.

my apologies for tormenting you with my covid-induced neurosis.

  • Haha 2
Posted

Off-topic, troll posts and replies removed.  Continue and face a suspension.  

 

Posted
On 5/1/2021 at 5:52 PM, covidiot said:

Vitamin D strenthens the immune system.

 

Human beings are only susceptible to viruses due to weak immune systems. 

 

The doctor you quoted in your first post is fear-mongering and being dishonest or misinformed.

 

Keep your immune system up and avoid the media nonsense.

 

 

Vitamin D is a good thing.

 

But the correlation/causation between Vitamin D deficiency and Covid infection is not proven. Since so many elderly contract the disease, they tend to go outside less, and as it is the case that the virus spreads more readily indoors, the elderly are therefore more at risk. And have less Vitamin D in their system.

  • Confused 1
Posted (edited)
On 5/2/2021 at 2:53 PM, GrandPapillon said:

don't think anyone denies the severity of the virus, it's just the silly reactions of world leaders thinking they could beat this thing with "gel" for hands and lockdowns. Obviously they have failed. It never stopped the virus from spreading. And we still not entirely sure how it's spreading and why it's spreading so fast.

Lockdowns have been very effective in stopping the spread of the virus. Lockdowns, however, cannot eliminate the virus without draconian efforts.

 

I should note that the Denier hive mind has changed the talking points concerning lockdowns: last year it was “lockdowns cannot stop the spread of the virus”, but this year it’s “lockdowns cannot eliminate the virus”.

Edited by Danderman123
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

let me tell you a big secret: the Powers that Be rely on something called the “scientific method”

We don't agree about reliable sources.

Then it becomes a complex philosophical debate that will take decades. 

We shall agree to disagree and leave it at that.

 

 

  • Like 2
Posted
54 minutes ago, covidiot said:

We don't agree about reliable sources.

Then it becomes a complex philosophical debate that will take decades. 

We shall agree to disagree and leave it at that.

 

 

If you don't understand the scientific method, then we don't have a disagreement. We have an educational opportunity.

 

Just because you seemingly failed science in school, doesn't mean that science is wrong.

  • Confused 1
  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Just because you seemingly failed science in school, doesn't mean that science is wrong.

Edit:

Ok, so where do you want to go with this? My source is a quack? The scientific method is foolproof? 

 

You missed the other important point I made. Vitamin D has been promoted in the SAME mainstream media that is promoting vaccines. There have been multiple articles encouraging the use of Vitamin D over the past year in the mainstream media that I read.

 

But people don't notice these articles. They only focus on the sensationalism, the noise, the fear, the statistics. People only pay attention to the news that gets repeated over and over. They miss the subtle messages in one-off articles. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by covidiot
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
17 minutes ago, covidiot said:

Edit:

Ok, so where do you want to go with this? My source is a quack? The scientific method is foolproof? 

 

You missed the other important point I made. Vitamin D has been promoted in the SAME mainstream media that is promoting vaccines. There have been multiple articles encouraging the use of Vitamin D over the past year in the mainstream media that I read.

 

But people don't notice these articles. They only focus on the sensationalism, the noise, the fear, the statistics. People only pay attention to the news that gets repeated over and over. They miss the subtle messages in one-off articles. 

 

 

 

Vitamin D is a good thing. It may not help with Covid prevention, though. What is lacking is a rigorous explanation of the functionality of Vitamin D in stopping the virus.

 

Yes, your guy is a quack.

 

Another name for the scientific method is “the best way to figure stuff out”. Before the scientific method, we lived in the Medieval world, where diseases were caused by witches. 

  • Like 2
Posted
46 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

we lived in the Medieval world, where diseases were caused by witches. 

What are you talking about? I thought you weren't superstitious.

 

Scientists never cause disease?

 

Who created cigarettes? It wasn't scientists who put 600 harmful chemicals together in that little stick?

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
On 5/2/2021 at 9:26 AM, aboctok said:

That's called dissembling. Covidiot did not merely say that most healthy people can avoid serious illness by having a healthy immune system; he asserted something more concrete: that humans are only susceptible to viruses when their immune system is "weak." I'm interested to know whether people who hold such views also believe the corollary: that someone with a healthy immune system is impervious to viruses.

I also think that there is a kind of circular definition of a healthy immune system.  How do you identify a healthy immune system?  A person with a healthy immune system doesn't get sick from infections, right?  So if you have a healthy immune system you avoid serious infections and if you avoid serious infections you have a healthy immune system.  As the French say, Viola!!! (sorry stolen from Quickdraw McGraw).

So not a very informative statement to say " people can avoid serious illness by having a healthy immune system".

It's like saying "you can avoid getting sick by not getting sick".

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
On 5/2/2021 at 5:26 PM, aboctok said:

That's called dissembling. Covidiot did not merely say that most healthy people can avoid serious illness by having a healthy immune system; he asserted something more concrete: that humans are only susceptible to viruses when their immune system is "weak." I'm interested to know whether people who hold such views also believe the corollary: that someone with a healthy immune system is impervious to viruses.

There is a clue in the name I guess.

  • Confused 1
  • Haha 2
Posted
14 minutes ago, cdemundo said:

The scientific method is self-correcting.

Today's conclusions can be demonstrated to be wrong tomorrow by experiment.

ergo they are just hypothesis and as things change they prove the prior hypothesis as being now invalid.

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, covidiot said:

The amount of ketogenic products being sold is increasing yearly. It's probably a 15 billion dollar industry. But the newspaper you trust told you it's bad, so it must be true. 

 

By your standard of rising sales, tobacco was a great idea...until it wasn't.

Sales are driven by demand, not common sense.  EG. Goop by Ms Paltrow.

Edited by gamb00ler
  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, ThailandRyan said:

ergo they are just hypothesis and as things change they prove the prior hypothesis as being now invalid.

Yes.  Another term for experiment is "hypothesis testing".

This is what is missing from a lot of armchair science is that a plausible hypothesis is put forth and argued about.  If it goes nor farther it is just "plausible Bullshxt".

That is not science.  Science is the process of asking "why" or "how" and putting forth a hypothesis. 

Then designing an experiment to test the validity of the hypothesis.

Edited by cdemundo
second thought
  • Like 2
Posted
On 5/2/2021 at 7:34 AM, covidiot said:

One final point I would like to make.

People are debating science, people are still getting drawn in to the fear, the numbers ... 

Don't forget to focus on all the positive stuff that is emerging from this situation.

 

Be sure to pass your message on to the families of these poor folk.....

image.png.d65d4737e81e74148c1d33cf9f374ab1.png

 

According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), there were as many new infections of Covid-19 globally last week as there were during the entire first five months of the pandemic.

 

For nine weeks in a row, the number of cases worldwide has reached a new high and for six weeks running the number of deaths has eclipsed the week before.

 

Second, third and fourth waves of the virus in countries like India, Brazil and Iran are contributing heavily towards those grim figures. India in particular has seen its healthcare system collapse under the weight of infections as patients are turned away from hospitals because of oxygen shortages.

 

But as the world watches on and help flows to countries most in need, there are several new hotspots worth paying attention to including Canada, Sri Lanka and Turkey.

 

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/covid-19-coronavirus-world-records-as-many-cases-in-one-week-as-in-first-five-months-of-pandemic/D7SZAKRAF2GEQMLBGQDGKHQ3SI/

 

 

  • Haha 1
Posted
20 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

but there is no real evidence that lockdowns did slow down the spread,

 

in statistics, I can't remember the term used exactly, but there is a situation where results are attributed to the wrong event or the wrong cause

 

the spread happens in waves, so the temporary declines could have happen naturally, sans lockdowns, and it could rise greatly, even with lockdowns, like we saw it happened in Europe in the first wave.

You are wrong.

 

There are many documented cases when cases dropped immediately after a lockdown starts.

 

But, I suspect that such facts don’t mean anything to you, as you just don’t like lockdowns, even if they do work. So, I should ask you explicitly: if it were proven that lockdowns flatten the curve, would you support them?

 

or would you move the goalposts “lockdowns don’t cure cancer” or change the subject?

  • Haha 1
Posted
20 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

but there is no real evidence that lockdowns did slow down the spread,

 

in statistics, I can't remember the term used exactly, but there is a situation where results are attributed to the wrong event or the wrong cause

 

the spread happens in waves, so the temporary declines could have happen naturally, sans lockdowns, and it could rise greatly, even with lockdowns, like we saw it happened in Europe in the first wave.

You’re talking about “correlation does not equal causation”

 

Here is a link to some very extensive research into which measures have/had most effect in reducing the spread of Sars-Cov2. 
 

“The most effective NPIs include curfews, lockdowns and closing and restricting places where people gather in smaller or large numbers for an extended period of time. This includes small gathering cancellations (closures of shops, restaurants, gatherings of 50 persons or fewer, mandatory home working and so on) and closure of educational institutions.”

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0

  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Gulfsailor said:

You’re talking about “correlation does not equal causation”

 

Here is a link to some very extensive research into which measures have/had most effect in reducing the spread of Sars-Cov2. 
 

“The most effective NPIs include curfews, lockdowns and closing and restricting places where people gather in smaller or large numbers for an extended period of time. This includes small gathering cancellations (closures of shops, restaurants, gatherings of 50 persons or fewer, mandatory home working and so on) and closure of educational institutions.”

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0

IMO lockdowns do work, but only till lockdowns end. Given it's not politically possible in western countries to continue lockdowns indefinitely, IMO the waves will continue till herd immunity is reached, one way or another.

  • Like 1
Posted

A misleading post has been reported and has now been removed

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...