COVID-19: who’s going full doomsday prep on this?

Squidfayce

Eats Squid
Jump over to the climate change thread and its full of calling out conflicts of interest and the shitness of big business in destroying the earth, but somehow this thread escapes any critique.
I'm not sure anyone is disagreeing with the state of the worlds environment or what is being done to it instead of for it. What needs to be critiqued specifically? maybe contribute over there if you have some views to share?

1. Lockdowns and erosion of the tax base are separate issues to selecting treatments and health policy responses.
so you do understand mental gymnastics then.

2. Good question. I don't know. Why would a government not look into any other options, cheap or expensive? Why would the government threaten doctors with deregistration for stating any opinion contrary to the health policy response?
Believe it or not, some doctors, despite holding medical training, are actually stupid. Many hold weird beliefs that have been disproven over and again. Many are easily convinced by various dark arts such as social media. People, as moorey has pointed out, are fallible. This extends to doctors. Hence doctors who are spouting rubbish that has no basis in reality, using their positions of trust and respect in the social heirachy are, in fact, dangerous and bordering on criminal. SO yeah a threat do deregister them is the LEAST a government can do.

Doctors who hold opposing views on some of the actions the government takes that have a real legitimate basis aren't being threatened by anyone.

3. No ill-intent is necessary. People dying in a pandemic is not isolated to the virus itself, there are many interacting factors. These factors are not being investigated.
Im affraid you dont know what you are talking about. Study on study on study exists around complications and contributing factors to people dying when they catch covid. Its why we understand what the comorbidities are and which groups are at higher risk. Its been studied extensively and in sample populations that far exceed any necessary reasonable sample size. But just like AIDS, where people can die because of the flu, those deaths are attributed to AIDS, not the Flu.

If you're somehow inferring that something else is killing people identified as covid victims, then there is nothing else to say here.

4. I don't know. Do you?
Yes, they died from covid or complications as a result of covid because they did not receive the necessary medical treatment. That and poisoning. The underlying reasons for why they didnt get the treatment is another story
 
Last edited:

Daniel Hale

She fid, he fid, I fidn't
Believe it or not, some doctors, despite holding medical training, are actually stupid. Many hold weird beliefs that have been disproven over and again. Many are easily convinced by various dark arts such as social media. People, as moorey has pointed out, are fallible. This extends to doctors. Hence doctors who are spouting rubbish that has no basis in reality, using their positions of trust and respect in the social heirachy are, in fact, dangerous and bordering on criminal. SO yeah a threat do deregister them is the LEAST a government can do.
yes but when u contrasting with politicians, i'll still side with most Dr's, even the quacks

Im affraid you dont know what you are talking about. Study on study on study exists around complications and contributing factors to people dying when they catch covid. Its why we understand what the comorbidities are and which groups are at higher risk. Its been studied extensively and in sample populations that far exceed any necessary reasonable sample size. But just like AIDS, where people can die because of the flu, those deaths are attributed to AIDS, not the Flu.
no in most jurisdictions an AIDS patient often has his death reported as FLU, rather than aids [depends on the illness whether notifiable disease or not - - its not a great system [also routinely saw slightly inaccurate death note sue to family/religious/whatever reasons]
-eg colin powell had leukemia -death notice stated covid related illness -the covid might have topped him off finally but the leukemia is the thing which actually killed him;
though the reporting goes both ways, US over -reports, i think UK was under-reporting..none the less the vast majority died cause they are old and ready to die...from anything caught on the wind
 

Elbo

pesky scooter kids git off ma lawn
Ivermectin is pushed by anti-vaxxers and others with destabilising agenda (Trump, Craig Kelly, troll-bot bad actors etc). Ivermectin has not been proven to be relevant in treating covid19.

Read what actual medical doctors who work in actual ICU have to say:

https://onepagericu.com/blog/debunking-ivermectin-a-complete-guide

There’s no point in dOinG yorE own reSEarCh if you’re not educated in the field of epidemiology/immunology so have the humility to defer to their expertise.
Thanks for the link, I will have a look, but please don't insult me for seeing things differently to you.
 

Squidfayce

Eats Squid
yes but when u contrasting with politicians, i'll still side with most Dr's, even the quacks
point made lol. Most people would to be fair. Thats part of the danger and why doctors spouting rubbish should be threatened with deregistration.

no in most jurisdictions an AIDS patient often has his death reported as FLU, rather than aids [depends on the illness whether notifiable disease or not - - its not a great system [also routinely saw slightly inaccurate death note sue to family/religious/whatever reasons]
-eg colin powell had leukemia -death notice stated covid related illness -the covid might have topped him off finally but the leukemia is the thing which actually killed him;
I think were both oversimplifying here. The WHO has actually created a global standard called ICD-10 for how deaths are reported from AIDS and other diseases etc. You might be talking about whats on a local death certificate, im talking about the taxonomy and how its used at the global level for anlaysis etc.

The ICD-10 sets out rules for using a single underlying cause of death, in order to uniformly identify the cause of death for public health purposes. The single underlying cause of death definition set out by the WHO is "the disease or injury which initiated the train of morbid events leading directly to death, or the circumstances of the accident or violence which produced the fatal injury”. As such, HIV/AIDS will be listed as the underlying cause of death. Id imagine COVID would follow the same classification rules.
 

Tubbsy

Packin' a small bird
Staff member
Thanks for the link, I will have a look, but please don't insult me for seeing things differently to you.
Not sure I insulted you, or anybody with what I wrote. There's no shame in deferring to subject matter experts.

Science is facts borne of evidence from repeatable experiments. There isn't really any 'seeing it differently' here; either repeatable experiments show Ivermectin is effective or they don't. And currently they don't.
 

moorey

call me Mia
Not sure I insulted you, or anybody with what I wrote. There's no shame in deferring to subject matter experts.

Science is facts borne of evidence from repeatable experiments. There isn't really any 'seeing it differently' here; either repeatable experiments show Ivermectin is effective or they don't. And currently they don't.
Also 'alternative facts'
 

link1896

Mr Greenfield
Mods. I vote for this thread to be restricted to linking to peer reviewed medical articles, and actual medical commentary.

E.g bmj.com, lancet, medicalnewstoday.com etc.


We should be a responsible little corner of the internet and not give oxygen to the absolute drivel from nutters.
 

moorey

call me Mia
Mods. I vote for this thread to be restricted to linking to peer reviewed medical articles, and actual medical commentary.

E.g bmj.com, lancet, medicalnewstoday.com etc.


We should be a responsible little corner of the internet and not give oxygen to the absolute drivel from nutters.
Are you trying to push @daniel out?
 

Tubbsy

Packin' a small bird
Staff member
Mods. I vote for this thread to be restricted to linking to peer reviewed medical articles, and actual medical commentary.

E.g bmj.com, lancet, medicalnewstoday.com etc.


We should be a responsible little corner of the internet and not give oxygen to the absolute drivel from nutters.
Part of me is inclined to agree, but then again I can also see value in debunking misinformation as a community.

Anybody actively pushing bullshit on this will get a holiday or ban because there's too much at stake for society as a whole.

Will have a think about it and discuss with the alTErnatiV modZ
 

slowmick

38-39"
Can we have an independent body providing the clinical trial information for the drugs/vaccines rather than the manufacturer's. There are huge amounts of money at stake and our friends at Volkswagen have shown of what can happen when the truth gets in the way of profit.
 

Squidfayce

Eats Squid
Can we have an independent body providing the clinical trial information for the drugs/vaccines rather than the manufacturer's. There are huge amounts of money at stake and our friends at Volkswagen have shown of what can happen when the truth gets in the way of profit.
You mean like the TGA?


edit - oh wait theyr enot responsible for the trials, they asses all the data and information related to how the vaccines are made.
 

pink poodle

気が狂っている男
Have we seen a side rise in positive cases in NSW and Vic now that we are a few weeks into our "let her rip!" approach?
 

Daniel Hale

She fid, he fid, I fidn't
Can we have an independent body providing the clinical trial information for the drugs/vaccines rather than the manufacturer's. There are huge amounts of money at stake and our friends at Volkswagen have shown of what can happen when the truth gets in the way of profit.
so need this, based on infections of vaccinated; comparing against something like flu vacc, the protection is considerable less than the 90 or 90+ % big pharma were claiming

2nd problem is cos its proprietary INFO/DRUGS/WHATEVER they won't give to independent before it is approved by government body...only recently approved vacc which has lived up to claims is the Aus developed HPV vaccine
 

leitch

Feelin' a bit rrranty
This is interesting... (In Vic). Look at the difference in <20 age group (mum and dad make the booking, take them to the GP) vs the 20-30 (I'm fine, won't catch it, plus I'm young and fit so it's basically just a flu anyway, and Joe Rogan said vaccines are bad). Still 80+% in all brackets, but the diff is interesting. Do wonder if the proportionally longer lead time to 2nd dose in 20-30 reflects more AZ coverage though.



382769
 

Elbo

pesky scooter kids git off ma lawn
Part of me is inclined to agree, but then again I can also see value in debunking misinformation as a community.

Anybody actively pushing bullshit on this will get a holiday or ban because there's too much at stake for society as a whole.

Will have a think about it and discuss with the alTErnatiV modZ
Why don't we just close this thread? Clearly anyone below a nurse/epidemiologist/immunologist isn't qualified to comment on or interpret any scientific literature. So what are we all doing here?
 
Top