Remember when several of us postulated this last March

16,659 Views | 122 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by Old Buffalo
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Carolin_Gallego said:

GAC06 said:

We should have ended "restrictions" last year. That in no way is proof of claiming "covid is over"
I guess that depends on what you mean by "over". In some respects it will never be "over" unless we eradicate the virus and that is an improbable outcome. The more reasonable interpretation of the phrase "covid is over" is a view where the perceived threat is low enough (for instance, equal to the threat of the seasonal flu) that governments will end all their restrictions.


So have you compared results of strict distancing and mask states with lax distancing and mask states?

Thanks
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
GAC06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
According to you arguing against NPI's is claiming covid is over. You are all turned around and should collect yourself.
Carolin_Gallego
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dermdoc said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

GAC06 said:

We should have ended "restrictions" last year. That in no way is proof of claiming "covid is over"
I guess that depends on what you mean by "over". In some respects it will never be "over" unless we eradicate the virus and that is an improbable outcome. The more reasonable interpretation of the phrase "covid is over" is a view where the perceived threat is low enough (for instance, equal to the threat of the seasonal flu) that governments will end all their restrictions.


So have you compared results of strict distancing and mask states with lax distancing and mask states?

Thanks
IMHO that would be an off topic debate about the effectiveness of various types of restrictions.
We believe progress is made through MORE discussion, not LESS, and we believe that to be true even if the topics are uncomfortable and we occasionally disagree with one another. - TexAgs
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Carolin_Gallego said:

dermdoc said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

GAC06 said:

We should have ended "restrictions" last year. That in no way is proof of claiming "covid is over"
I guess that depends on what you mean by "over". In some respects it will never be "over" unless we eradicate the virus and that is an improbable outcome. The more reasonable interpretation of the phrase "covid is over" is a view where the perceived threat is low enough (for instance, equal to the threat of the seasonal flu) that governments will end all their restrictions.


So have you compared results of strict distancing and mask states with lax distancing and mask states?

Thanks
IMHO that would be an off topic debate about the effectiveness of various types of restrictions.


Okay. So if you believe that, how can you logically come to the conclusion that I said Covid was over simply because I believed that masks and social distancing did not help that much so it was time to relax government regs?

How, using logic, does that become "Covid is over"?

That is an almost surreal jump to a conclusion, would you agree?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Carolin_Gallego
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dermdoc said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

dermdoc said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

GAC06 said:

We should have ended "restrictions" last year. That in no way is proof of claiming "covid is over"
I guess that depends on what you mean by "over". In some respects it will never be "over" unless we eradicate the virus and that is an improbable outcome. The more reasonable interpretation of the phrase "covid is over" is a view where the perceived threat is low enough (for instance, equal to the threat of the seasonal flu) that governments will end all their restrictions.


So have you compared results of strict distancing and mask states with lax distancing and mask states?

Thanks
IMHO that would be an off topic debate about the effectiveness of various types of restrictions.


Okay. So if you believe that, how can you logically come to the conclusion that I said Covid was over simply because I believed that masks and social distancing did not help that much so it was time to relax government regs.

How, using logic, does that become "Covid is over"?

That is an almost surreal jump to a conclusion, would you agree?
I never made that argument.
We believe progress is made through MORE discussion, not LESS, and we believe that to be true even if the topics are uncomfortable and we occasionally disagree with one another. - TexAgs
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
GAC06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
"
Allegation 2: at least 3 different times in 2Q/3Q 2020 stated "covid is over"

The second link implies that you had some support for the idea of ending COVID prevention restrictions in September 2020.

Pretty far short? No. I would say they are close to the mark."

Yes, you did. Own it.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
GAC06 said:

"
Allegation 2: at least 3 different times in 2Q/3Q 2020 stated "covid is over"

The second link implies that you had some support for the idea of ending COVID prevention restrictions in September 2020.

Pretty far short? No. I would say they are close to the mark."

Yes, you did. Own it.
Yep.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Carolin_Gallego
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dermdoc said:

GAC06 said:

"
Allegation 2: at least 3 different times in 2Q/3Q 2020 stated "covid is over"

The second link implies that you had some support for the idea of ending COVID prevention restrictions in September 2020.

Pretty far short? No. I would say they are close to the mark."

Yes, you did. Own it.
Yep.
If you honestly believe that (and I'm really not sure how you came to that conclusion) then you should read the letter you linked in your other OP. It goes far beyond simply questioning the effectiveness of masks and social distancing.
We believe progress is made through MORE discussion, not LESS, and we believe that to be true even if the topics are uncomfortable and we occasionally disagree with one another. - TexAgs
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Carolin_Gallego said:

dermdoc said:

GAC06 said:

"
Allegation 2: at least 3 different times in 2Q/3Q 2020 stated "covid is over"

The second link implies that you had some support for the idea of ending COVID prevention restrictions in September 2020.

Pretty far short? No. I would say they are close to the mark."

Yes, you did. Own it.
Yep.
If you honestly believe that (and I'm really not sure how you came to that conclusion) then you should read the letter you linked in your other OP. It goes far beyond simply questioning the effectiveness of masks and social distancing.
Please point out where anywhere in that letter that states or even implies "COVID is over.

You are coming to an unstated conclusion based on your biases.

Thanks.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
etxag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

We call for an end to all measures and ask for an immediate restoration of our normal democratic governance and legal structures and of all our civil liberties.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Here is the letter.


https://www.aier.org/article/open-letter-from-medical-doctors-and-health-professionals-to-all-belgian-authorities-and-all-belgian-media/
My reading says that what is being stated is that there is no evidence any lockdowns, distancing, or mask wearing have any effect on COVID mortality and morbidly.

And may actually have deleterious effects.

You be the judge
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
And looking at the state results these docs were spot on.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
HowdyTexasAggies
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
etxag02 said:

Quote:

We call for an end to all measures and ask for an immediate restoration of our normal democratic governance and legal structures and of all our civil liberties.



That statement holds true all the way back to March last year, and yet still doesn't mean covid wasn't to be addressed.
etxag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Many people never though an epidemic ever began.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The disconnect seems to be if you think lockdowns, masks, distancing, etc. do not work that well and should be ended due to possible deleterious effects, that you are saying COVID is a "nothing burger" and "over".

That is a completely illogical conclusion as belief in one does not mean belief in the other.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
waitwhat?
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Carolin_Gallego said:

dermdoc said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

GAC06 said:

We should have ended "restrictions" last year. That in no way is proof of claiming "covid is over"
I guess that depends on what you mean by "over". In some respects it will never be "over" unless we eradicate the virus and that is an improbable outcome. The more reasonable interpretation of the phrase "covid is over" is a view where the perceived threat is low enough (for instance, equal to the threat of the seasonal flu) that governments will end all their restrictions.


So have you compared results of strict distancing and mask states with lax distancing and mask states?

Thanks
IMHO that would be an off topic debate about the effectiveness of various types of restrictions.


Maybe when folks said "Covid is over" what they meant was "Covid is over as a public health emergency" or even "it's clear that we overreacted and we need to quit acting like this is a plague."

Covid, with regards to lockdowns and mandates, should have been over last summer (never should have started but that's a different discussion).

You cannot unlink Covid from the response to Covid.
" 'People that read with pictures think that it's simply about a mask' - Dana Loesch" - Ban Cow Gas

"Truth is treason in the empire of lies." - Dr. Ron Paul

Big Tech IS the empire of lies

TEXIT
Carolin_Gallego
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dermdoc said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

dermdoc said:

GAC06 said:

"
Allegation 2: at least 3 different times in 2Q/3Q 2020 stated "covid is over"

The second link implies that you had some support for the idea of ending COVID prevention restrictions in September 2020.

Pretty far short? No. I would say they are close to the mark."

Yes, you did. Own it.
Yep.
If you honestly believe that (and I'm really not sure how you came to that conclusion) then you should read the letter you linked in your other OP. It goes far beyond simply questioning the effectiveness of masks and social distancing.
Please point out where anywhere in that letter that states or even implies "COVID is over.

You are coming to an unstated conclusion based on your biases.

Thanks.

Again, I think it depends on what you mean by "over". My interpretation of the phrase "covid is over", and what I believe is the intention of the person that made the accusation, is a view where the perceived threat is low enough (for instance, equal to the threat of the seasonal flu) that governments will end all their restrictions. If you read the letter with that view in mind, it is very clear that the authors believed COVID-19 was no more a threat than the season flu and that all COVID based restrictions were unwarranted.
We believe progress is made through MORE discussion, not LESS, and we believe that to be true even if the topics are uncomfortable and we occasionally disagree with one another. - TexAgs
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
waitwhat? said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

dermdoc said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

GAC06 said:

We should have ended "restrictions" last year. That in no way is proof of claiming "covid is over"
I guess that depends on what you mean by "over". In some respects it will never be "over" unless we eradicate the virus and that is an improbable outcome. The more reasonable interpretation of the phrase "covid is over" is a view where the perceived threat is low enough (for instance, equal to the threat of the seasonal flu) that governments will end all their restrictions.


So have you compared results of strict distancing and mask states with lax distancing and mask states?

Thanks
IMHO that would be an off topic debate about the effectiveness of various types of restrictions.


Maybe when folks said "Covid is over" what they meant was "Covid is over as a public health emergency" or even "it's clear that we overreacted and we need to quit acting like this is a plague."

Covid, with regards to lockdowns and mandates, should have been over last summer (never should have started but that's a different discussion).

You cannot unlink Covid from the response to Covid.
Respectfully disagree.

COVID is a disease and to say it "is over" as a doc means it has been eradicated which it has not. And I might add is far from what these fine docs were saying.

They were saying the government measures were doing little and may actually be harmful.

Would you keep taking a medicine if it wasn't doing any good? And might cause more harm than good?

Just to "feel better" by "doing something"?

People do not like truth when it shows that they or the government have no control over a disease.

Have seen it in medicine since the seventies.

And if you tell them that, they immediately assume you "don't care"(when actually you care more than someone telling them to do something)and their problem is a "nothing burger".

Very predictable.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
waitwhat?
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dermdoc said:

waitwhat? said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

dermdoc said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

GAC06 said:

We should have ended "restrictions" last year. That in no way is proof of claiming "covid is over"
I guess that depends on what you mean by "over". In some respects it will never be "over" unless we eradicate the virus and that is an improbable outcome. The more reasonable interpretation of the phrase "covid is over" is a view where the perceived threat is low enough (for instance, equal to the threat of the seasonal flu) that governments will end all their restrictions.


So have you compared results of strict distancing and mask states with lax distancing and mask states?

Thanks
IMHO that would be an off topic debate about the effectiveness of various types of restrictions.


Maybe when folks said "Covid is over" what they meant was "Covid is over as a public health emergency" or even "it's clear that we overreacted and we need to quit acting like this is a plague."

Covid, with regards to lockdowns and mandates, should have been over last summer (never should have started but that's a different discussion).

You cannot unlink Covid from the response to Covid.
Respectfully disagree.

COVID is a disease and to say it "is over" as a doc means it has been eradicated which it has not. And I might add is far from what these fine docs were saying.

They were saying the government measures were doing little and may actually be harmful.

Would you keep taking a medicine if it wasn't doing any good? And might be more harm than good?

Just to "feel better" by "doing something"?

People do not like truth when it shows that they or the government have no control over a disease.


Fair enough. I'm not a doctor and don't hold that view. I mean that most of us non-doctors view life as pre-Covid, Covid, and post-Covid, but aren't referring to the disease itself, rather the response to it.

I think our disagreement is mostly semantics.
" 'People that read with pictures think that it's simply about a mask' - Dana Loesch" - Ban Cow Gas

"Truth is treason in the empire of lies." - Dr. Ron Paul

Big Tech IS the empire of lies

TEXIT
Carolin_Gallego
How long do you want to ignore this user?
waitwhat? said:

dermdoc said:

waitwhat? said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

dermdoc said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

GAC06 said:

We should have ended "restrictions" last year. That in no way is proof of claiming "covid is over"
I guess that depends on what you mean by "over". In some respects it will never be "over" unless we eradicate the virus and that is an improbable outcome. The more reasonable interpretation of the phrase "covid is over" is a view where the perceived threat is low enough (for instance, equal to the threat of the seasonal flu) that governments will end all their restrictions.


So have you compared results of strict distancing and mask states with lax distancing and mask states?

Thanks
IMHO that would be an off topic debate about the effectiveness of various types of restrictions.


Maybe when folks said "Covid is over" what they meant was "Covid is over as a public health emergency" or even "it's clear that we overreacted and we need to quit acting like this is a plague."

Covid, with regards to lockdowns and mandates, should have been over last summer (never should have started but that's a different discussion).

You cannot unlink Covid from the response to Covid.
Respectfully disagree.

COVID is a disease and to say it "is over" as a doc means it has been eradicated which it has not. And I might add is far from what these fine docs were saying.

They were saying the government measures were doing little and may actually be harmful.

Would you keep taking a medicine if it wasn't doing any good? And might be more harm than good?

Just to "feel better" by "doing something"?

People do not like truth when it shows that they or the government have no control over a disease.


Fair enough. I'm not a doctor and don't hold that view. I mean that most of us non-doctors view life as pre-Covid, Covid, and post-Covid, but aren't referring to the disease itself, rather the response to it.

I think our disagreement is mostly semantics.
I think the person that authored the accusations believes the same but away we go down the illogical path.
We believe progress is made through MORE discussion, not LESS, and we believe that to be true even if the topics are uncomfortable and we occasionally disagree with one another. - TexAgs
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
waitwhat? said:

dermdoc said:

waitwhat? said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

dermdoc said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

GAC06 said:

We should have ended "restrictions" last year. That in no way is proof of claiming "covid is over"
I guess that depends on what you mean by "over". In some respects it will never be "over" unless we eradicate the virus and that is an improbable outcome. The more reasonable interpretation of the phrase "covid is over" is a view where the perceived threat is low enough (for instance, equal to the threat of the seasonal flu) that governments will end all their restrictions.


So have you compared results of strict distancing and mask states with lax distancing and mask states?

Thanks
IMHO that would be an off topic debate about the effectiveness of various types of restrictions.


Maybe when folks said "Covid is over" what they meant was "Covid is over as a public health emergency" or even "it's clear that we overreacted and we need to quit acting like this is a plague."

Covid, with regards to lockdowns and mandates, should have been over last summer (never should have started but that's a different discussion).

You cannot unlink Covid from the response to Covid.
Respectfully disagree.

COVID is a disease and to say it "is over" as a doc means it has been eradicated which it has not. And I might add is far from what these fine docs were saying.

They were saying the government measures were doing little and may actually be harmful.

Would you keep taking a medicine if it wasn't doing any good? And might be more harm than good?

Just to "feel better" by "doing something"?

People do not like truth when it shows that they or the government have no control over a disease.


Fair enough. I'm not a doctor and don't hold that view. I mean that most of us non-doctors view life as pre-Covid, Covid, and post-Covid, but aren't referring to the disease itself, rather the response to it.

I think our disagreement is mostly semantics.
I do not think it is semantics near as much as the inability of non medical folks to digest this stuff and what is actually being said.

Takes years of experience to develop that perspective just like it does in law, business, engineering, etc.

There is no way an experienced doc or health care professional would read that letter and conclude anyone was saying COVID is over. And it is not the lay person's fault, as I can read a legal letter or whatever and completely misinterpret the gist.

And that is why it is so important for docs and leaders to be honest and transparent.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Carolin_Gallego said:

waitwhat? said:

dermdoc said:

waitwhat? said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

dermdoc said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

GAC06 said:

We should have ended "restrictions" last year. That in no way is proof of claiming "covid is over"
I guess that depends on what you mean by "over". In some respects it will never be "over" unless we eradicate the virus and that is an improbable outcome. The more reasonable interpretation of the phrase "covid is over" is a view where the perceived threat is low enough (for instance, equal to the threat of the seasonal flu) that governments will end all their restrictions.


So have you compared results of strict distancing and mask states with lax distancing and mask states?

Thanks
IMHO that would be an off topic debate about the effectiveness of various types of restrictions.


Maybe when folks said "Covid is over" what they meant was "Covid is over as a public health emergency" or even "it's clear that we overreacted and we need to quit acting like this is a plague."

Covid, with regards to lockdowns and mandates, should have been over last summer (never should have started but that's a different discussion).

You cannot unlink Covid from the response to Covid.
Respectfully disagree.

COVID is a disease and to say it "is over" as a doc means it has been eradicated which it has not. And I might add is far from what these fine docs were saying.

They were saying the government measures were doing little and may actually be harmful.

Would you keep taking a medicine if it wasn't doing any good? And might be more harm than good?

Just to "feel better" by "doing something"?

People do not like truth when it shows that they or the government have no control over a disease.


Fair enough. I'm not a doctor and don't hold that view. I mean that most of us non-doctors view life as pre-Covid, Covid, and post-Covid, but aren't referring to the disease itself, rather the response to it.

I think our disagreement is mostly semantics.
I think the person that authored the accusations believes the same but away we go down the illogical path.
Fair enough. But why make the accusations then?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Carolin_Gallego
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dermdoc said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

waitwhat? said:

dermdoc said:

waitwhat? said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

dermdoc said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

GAC06 said:

We should have ended "restrictions" last year. That in no way is proof of claiming "covid is over"
I guess that depends on what you mean by "over". In some respects it will never be "over" unless we eradicate the virus and that is an improbable outcome. The more reasonable interpretation of the phrase "covid is over" is a view where the perceived threat is low enough (for instance, equal to the threat of the seasonal flu) that governments will end all their restrictions.


So have you compared results of strict distancing and mask states with lax distancing and mask states?

Thanks
IMHO that would be an off topic debate about the effectiveness of various types of restrictions.


Maybe when folks said "Covid is over" what they meant was "Covid is over as a public health emergency" or even "it's clear that we overreacted and we need to quit acting like this is a plague."

Covid, with regards to lockdowns and mandates, should have been over last summer (never should have started but that's a different discussion).

You cannot unlink Covid from the response to Covid.
Respectfully disagree.

COVID is a disease and to say it "is over" as a doc means it has been eradicated which it has not. And I might add is far from what these fine docs were saying.

They were saying the government measures were doing little and may actually be harmful.

Would you keep taking a medicine if it wasn't doing any good? And might be more harm than good?

Just to "feel better" by "doing something"?

People do not like truth when it shows that they or the government have no control over a disease.


Fair enough. I'm not a doctor and don't hold that view. I mean that most of us non-doctors view life as pre-Covid, Covid, and post-Covid, but aren't referring to the disease itself, rather the response to it.

I think our disagreement is mostly semantics.
I think the person that authored the accusations believes the same but away we go down the illogical path.
Fair enough. But why make the accusations then?
I didn't make the accusation but think, based on my interpretation of the author's intent and your posting history, it is a reasonable accusation.
We believe progress is made through MORE discussion, not LESS, and we believe that to be true even if the topics are uncomfortable and we occasionally disagree with one another. - TexAgs
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Carolin_Gallego said:

dermdoc said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

waitwhat? said:

dermdoc said:

waitwhat? said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

dermdoc said:

Carolin_Gallego said:

GAC06 said:

We should have ended "restrictions" last year. That in no way is proof of claiming "covid is over"
I guess that depends on what you mean by "over". In some respects it will never be "over" unless we eradicate the virus and that is an improbable outcome. The more reasonable interpretation of the phrase "covid is over" is a view where the perceived threat is low enough (for instance, equal to the threat of the seasonal flu) that governments will end all their restrictions.


So have you compared results of strict distancing and mask states with lax distancing and mask states?

Thanks
IMHO that would be an off topic debate about the effectiveness of various types of restrictions.


Maybe when folks said "Covid is over" what they meant was "Covid is over as a public health emergency" or even "it's clear that we overreacted and we need to quit acting like this is a plague."

Covid, with regards to lockdowns and mandates, should have been over last summer (never should have started but that's a different discussion).

You cannot unlink Covid from the response to Covid.
Respectfully disagree.

COVID is a disease and to say it "is over" as a doc means it has been eradicated which it has not. And I might add is far from what these fine docs were saying.

They were saying the government measures were doing little and may actually be harmful.

Would you keep taking a medicine if it wasn't doing any good? And might be more harm than good?

Just to "feel better" by "doing something"?

People do not like truth when it shows that they or the government have no control over a disease.


Fair enough. I'm not a doctor and don't hold that view. I mean that most of us non-doctors view life as pre-Covid, Covid, and post-Covid, but aren't referring to the disease itself, rather the response to it.

I think our disagreement is mostly semantics.
I think the person that authored the accusations believes the same but away we go down the illogical path.
Fair enough. But why make the accusations then?
I didn't make the accusation but think, based on my interpretation of the author's intent and your posting history, it is a reasonable accusation.
Fair enough.

Read the letter and highlight for me where it is indicated "COVID is over".

Thanks.

And "posting history".

So you are admitting pre conceived biases? And projection.?

Thanks

Because that is really what this is all about.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Nosmo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Dermdoc,

This thread has derailed off the original post, so I'll continue by asking about your death count estimate specifically.

Back then I had quoted a doctor on CNBC that thought it would be a typical flu season. Frankly, I was trying to figure out if this was going to be an apocalypse or the flu (or something in between) at the time.

Yes, I realize this quote below is taken out of context (I don't pay so my searches are limited to one year), but could you address the 50K-100K compared to what you think has actually occurred as of today?

From the 5/27/20 thread referenced above:
Quote:

I believe I said that American hospitals would not be over run. And we would not not run out of vents. And that the death count would be between 50k-100k(still way too many), mortality rate would be between 0.3% and 0.5%, correct? And those quotes can be pulled up unlike your baseless accusations. Please correct me if I am wrong.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
And I am guilty of the same.

But let's just be honest here.

I never posted anything I was accused of.

Everything is projected from a letter where I merely said it was a letter worth reading.

The accusations are about 90% based on "my posting history". And a personal dislike of me.

Sums it up nicely.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Nosmo said:

Dermdoc,

This thread has derailed off the original post, so I'll continue by asking about your death count estimate specifically.

Back then I had quoted a doctor on CNBC that thought it would be a typical flu season. Frankly, I was trying to figure out if this was going to be an apocalypse or the flu (or something in between) at the time.

Yes, I realize this quote below is taken out of context (I don't pay so my searches are limited to one year), but could you address the 50K-100K compared to what you think has actually occurred as of today?

From the 5/27/20 thread referenced above:
Quote:

I believe I said that American hospitals would not be over run. And we would not not run out of vents. And that the death count would be between 50k-100k(still way too many), mortality rate would be between 0.3% and 0.5%, correct? And those quotes can be pulled up unlike your baseless accusations. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Thanks. I already did. I was wrong. I do think that number is inflated but not enough to take away that I was wrong.

I was pretty spot on on everything else though.

To my knowledge, I was more accurate than a lot of others and know of no one who got closer to what ended up happening.

Yet I was accused by a fellow Ag of being more wrong than any other poster. With no link.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Nosmo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I have no problem with opinions / predictions, and value those with expertise.

Thanks
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
And it is a lot easier to wait and see what happens before making statements on what you think will happen.

But not near as much fun.

Just got to be able to admit when you are wrong because you will be if you make predictions.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Carolin_Gallego
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dermdoc said:

And I am guilty of the same.

But let's just be honest here.

I never posted anything I was accused of.

Everything is projected from a letter where I merely said it was a letter worth reading.

The accusations are about 90% based on "my posting history". And a personal dislike of me.

Sums it up nicely.
TBF, I did say that my opinions on the accusations were based on your posting history, and I did say I was making some inferences, but I don't dislike you. I think you would probably be a fun guy to have a beer with.

ETA: And if we have that beer, can you look at this spot on my leg... ;-) jk
We believe progress is made through MORE discussion, not LESS, and we believe that to be true even if the topics are uncomfortable and we occasionally disagree with one another. - TexAgs
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I was talking about the other poster. Your posts did not reveal personal dislike, his did. Which is fine except I would prefer truthful accusations. I am guilty of enough you do not need to lie.

And sure. Then I can write off the beer.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Proposition Joe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dermdoc said:

GAC06 said:

We should have ended "restrictions" last year. That in no way is proof of claiming "covid is over"


How do you reason with views like this?

It is completely illogical.


A 20 second forum search:

[img]https://ibb.co/kxZQtbQ][/img]


[img]https://ibb.co/LNzV03z][/img]

This is usually the part after bringing up the Aggie Code of Honor (or like last time when I said not all men's basketball season ticket holders were paying full listed seat donation and you demanded an apology for such slanderous statements... before you realized whoops you were wrong) that you crawfish with something like "agree to disagree".

It's kind of your schtick.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Proposition Joe said:

dermdoc said:

GAC06 said:

We should have ended "restrictions" last year. That in no way is proof of claiming "covid is over"


How do you reason with views like this?

It is completely illogical.


A 20 second forum search:

[img]https://ibb.co/kxZQtbQ][/img]


[img]https://ibb.co/LNzV03z][/img]

This is usually the part after bringing up the Aggie Code of Honor (or like last time when I said not all men's basketball season ticket holders were paying full listed seat donation and you demanded an apology for such slanderous statements... before you realized whoops you were wrong) that you crawfish with something like "agree to disagree".

It's kind of your schtick.


No. You were talking about faculty. Or I think you were. If you are saying some people get better deals from the 12th Man Foundation, then I disagree. And you never proved I was wrong.

But whatever
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
There are not people who get sweetheart deals like you claim unless the 12th Man is lying to me.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Tell you what, I will meet you at the 12th Man Foundation offices next Thursday and we will research your claims.

Deal?

Do not crawfish.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.