Multiple media reports that it was here before we realized, and thus didn't spread as quickly.

The 10+ people I have known who are convinced they had it in Dec and Jan. One worked with a family member who didn'tget it despite working alongside them.

The 2 people I know who have it, have not spread it to family in same house, indicating it isn'tas contagious as espoused.

The fact it is not as deadly as predicted.

A complete breakdown in credibility in those talking as professionals who are so wrong. Repeatedly.

It looks bad when Andrew Cuomo's brother and wife are partying in a diff city approaching people while knowingly having tested positive, while being under self-isolation.

It is like this... science is about credibility. If you lie to me about simple, easily verifiable evidence... I'm not trusting you with more complex science.

I have had 27hrs of college Chem, including 8hrs in Organic, and PChem. 12hrs of Bio, including Micro.

I'm no science dummy, and I ain't some fool, too dumb to verify your mistakes and blindly follow people.

Quote:

---

I have had 27hrs of college Chem, including 8hrs in Organic, and PChem. 12hrs of Bio, including Micro.

---

And stayed at a Holiday Inn last night.

liberalag12 said:

---

the thinking of many on here making a conclusion that the virus is not as bad as we thought using extreme mitigation data? The numbers are low due to these measures. How can an argument be made by using the data against your argument?

---

Give me a single proof point where the Smart People have been correct? That support these draconian measures.

We bent the curve. It was linear, not exponential.

We were fighting an exponential curve... that never materialized.

We were told everyone would get it regardless. And now the think we can eradicate it from the planet?

DallasAg 94 said:

---

The fact it is not as deadly as predicted.

---

A month ago there were some of us pointing out that it's either highly contagious and not as deadly, or not that contagious and a couple times more deadly than the flu.

Now it appears that it's somewhere in between.

What I don't get is the logic based on the facts.

"We better do some drastic things so this doesn't kill millions of people!" --> we do drastic things --> it doesn't kill millions of people --> "Damn, what an overreaction!"

What am I missing here? Besides a lot of anecdotal evidence about people who think they had it January?

OP, I suspect, you (and your fellow libs) want the economy to crater so you can get rid of Trump. You are willing to sacrifice jobs and the economy to do it because you believe it'll be much better with Dementia Joe and your fellow libs in charge. The jobs will return and we'll live in nirvana, like we did under Obama.

You and your fellow false prophets won't quit spreading the gospel of nonsense and fear. But we're not buying it and DA94 pretty much summed up why.

Your virus lost!

DallasAg 94 said:

---

liberalag12 said:

---

the thinking of many on here making a conclusion that the virus is not as bad as we thought using extreme mitigation data? The numbers are low due to these measures. How can an argument be made by using the data against your argument?

---

Give me a single proof point where the Smart People have been correct?

---

Smart people failed. Common sense wasn't allowed to prevail.

The media happily fueled mass hysteria and you had a president who has been under unprecedented scrutiny take an ultra conservative approach nationwide.

The economy is totally ****ed and will be for 5-7 years.

Shutting down the entire economy will be looked at in hindsight as one of the stupidest and most costly blunders of all time.

It's pretty simple.

Fear mongering claim #1: This virus has a 3% kill rate, we have to take drastic measures.

Fear mongering claim #2: We are woefully underprepared with testing, millions could have it without us knowing.

These two claims cannot both be true yet we were willing to give up a ton of freedom based on these claims. Now we have a bunch of idiots saying that we barely made it out of this alive only due to the drastic measures that we took even though every piece of evidence points to the virus being way less deadly than we thought and way more people have been infected than we thought. The kill rate was high because only the extreme cases made it to the hospital.

Oh and the fact that libtards are making any excuse they can to add to CV19 death toll. Explain to me how NY can add 3700 in a day off the assumption that they had CV19 with no confirmation.

Use your head, try some critical thinking, it does wonders.

Millions with what is effectively a cold.

Let's go.

The death stories sell news, but the exponents of recovered that didn't even need hospitalization outweighs the deaths dramatically.

Quit being scared. Open the country.

My response in another thread

Based on all published data, if you are under the age of 55 and have no significant lung issues, your chances of dying from it are almost 0%.

I'm not saying certain people shouldn't be cautious and I think the shelter in place orders were the right course, given what we saw at the time.

But at this point, we need to reopen stuff and tell people to be cautious.

liberalag12 said:

---

Well, for starters Sweden has the highest numbers coming out now with the Norwegian countries.

But the biggest reason they were able to do that was they tested early. They could see the virus and mitigate specific areas and people. If we did early testing we too probably didnt have to push the nuke option of shutting everything down. We were flying blind and alot of blame to go around on that one like CDC. WHO, and Trump but it is what it is and this is where we are at.

That said, how about looking at all data points? We should look at all countries and make a conclusion instead of selecting information like only on what we want to see. Ex. Sweden

---

The reason Sweden is an appropriate example to use is that they are the foremost example of a nation that did not take the "nuclear option" you seem to suggest is the singular factor in mitigating the damage impact of the virus.

Early testing is impossible when you are being told by officials at the point of origin, and by the experts of the international health organization, that there is nothing to worry about regarding human to human transmission. By the time they tell you the truth, it is way too late to stop the spread.

You can say Sweden's numbers are higher. But they themselves expected it.

The point is their numbers are not anywhere close to being as high as the experts in this field stated they would be without the nuclear option.

Is Sweden's rate of infection/death anywhere close to the models predicted by the experts in this field?

You know they are not.

OMG.....please stop. I have three words for you.
Let
It
Go!

Old Army Metal said:

---

What I don't get is the logic based on the facts.

"We better do some drastic things so this doesn't kill millions of people!" --> we do drastic things --> it doesn't kill millions of people --> "Damn, what an overreaction!"

What am I missing here? Besides a lot of anecdotal evidence about people who think they had it January?

---

You can't infer, with no control group, that the actions had any material effect.