forums

OT:NBA regular season suspended

Advertisement
supersaiyanshel said:
How do you know the other experts weren't paid big money to say otherwise? Are you positive they weren't?

If this is the rabbit hole we're going to go down, then society is more royally f*cked than anyone realizes.

Jonas Salk in the age of twitter and FB wouldn't last a day.

"Everybody knows Salk is in bed with big pharma. Polio isn't even that deadly."
Click to expand...
Exactly it goes both ways.
 
jhtheking said:
Just done with you haha. Still avoiding how you were wrong as **** earlier, and now grasping at straws because you can’t admit a mistake which is what smart people generally do.
Click to expand...

I've answered every single one of your questions explicitly. Please show all an example where I did not.

You have answered none. Want me to show them all???

Anything else?
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
Absolutely true. Spanish Flu circulated for about 6 months, and (unless we later learn otherwise), we seem to have had a quicker response to Coronavirus.

Again, it is not so much a disagreement with the factual comparisons of stats/history/impact. It is more about the ongoing battle of human nature. The concept of "overreaction" happens in nearly every context of life, including preparation for a hurricane or a virus.

But this "look at me" phenomenon of some people acting like they are "smarter" and "above it all" by criticizing the media and the overreaction just minimizes the problem.

That's all. Like you, I hope for a more targeted (and less hyped) approach. But that is hard to do on the front end of a problem.

I've stated my position. I tend to prefer some mild "overreaction" (on a macro level, not a personal level) to "inaction".

We may never get the balance quite right. We may never know what might have happened if the person who delivered the "Osama Bin Laden determined to strike targets within the United States" memo to George W. Bush had used some extra "hysteria" while presenting those conclusions to Bush.

But I do know that flus and viruses can be passed from one person to another. Even if it takes us a year to get an innoculation developed, we can still stop the spread by taking other precautions.

So let's NOT compare the mortality rates of "Coronavirus" and "Bird Flu" if that comparison will lull people into NOT taking precautions.

Be best.
Click to expand...
Very well said post.

"I've stated my position. I tend to prefer some mild "overreaction" (on a macro level, not a personal level) to "inaction"

My only remark to it would be to encourage you to consider that there is an entire spectrum between "overreaction" (you can remove the world "mild" from your sentence there, as there has been nothing even remotely mild about the response) and "inaction". Personally, I advocate for neither of those polar ends. The key is finding the proper actions to take in response, which obviously is not an exact science and, yes, arguments for erroring on the side of caution trump most arguments to the contrary. But there's a cut off level there, and pumping widespread hysteria is not helpful in finding that ideal result.

Not saying YOU are one pumping widespread hysteria, by the way. But, boy, a whole lot of people sure are!
 
JD08 said:
I may be down, but I'm not out.
Click to expand...

Stay down man.

Stay down.

With tears in my eyes, just loke Shawn Michaels sending the Nature Boy into retirement.

It doesnt have to be this way...


hahahahaha

que dramatic music...
 
For_The_U said:
...For example, I don't believe Empirical Cane is advocating for people to ignore this all, be fools, and take no precautionary measures at all. That's now how his posts came across to me at all. Yet, numerous people on this thread are painting him as exactly that.
Click to expand...

Muppets tend to do that.

It's one of their super powers.
 
Advertisement
jhtheking said:
That is not literally a red herring.. how ****** dumb is this board. SARS is a good example of how we contained a virus. Spanish Flu is an example of how we did not. It is not intentionally misleading. Jesus learn the words you’re using
Click to expand...
red her·ring
/ˈˌred ˈheriNG/
noun
something that is or is intended to be misleading or distracting.

Like comparing how Spanish Flu decimated millions in 1918 as a means of projecting the potential devastation of coronavirus in 2020.
 
Advertisement
Empirical Cane said:
I've answered every single one of your questions explicitly. Please show all an example where I did not.

You have answered none. Want me to show them all???

Anything else?
Click to expand...
5 minutes ago I pasted a link to the fact that your data showed that .9% of healthy people died from Coronavirus. Are you blind?
Empirical Cane said:
I've answered every single one of your questions explicitly. Please show all an example where I did not.

You have answered none. Want me to show them all???

Anything else?
Click to expand...
I posted this 17 mins ago. You didn’t reply again.
www.canesinsight.com

OT:NBA regular season suspended

You can't find the bottom of a mud puddle with your examples. Happy to have a reasonable and credible discussion when you can bring it. You already stopped replying to me because you know you’re wrong.
www.canesinsight.com www.canesinsight.com

Your data that you linked shows that 0.9% of healthy people die from Coronavirus. Which is 9x worse than the flu, and not even taking into account that most people that die from the flu have pre-existing conditions, just like coronavirus. There is literally no data showing that the flu is worse. Done replying to an absolute ******
 
Last edited:
For_The_U said:
red her·ring
/ˈˌred ˈheriNG/
noun
something that is or is intended to be misleading or distracting.

Like comparing how Spanish Flu decimated millions in 1918 as a means of projecting the potential devastation of coronavirus in 2020.
Click to expand...
It is not intended to be misleading or distracted. Go look up the word intended. It shows how lack of containment can result in the death of millions. Just because you disagree with how people are using it as an example doesn’t mean it’s a red herring. Red herring implies intention to mislead or distract, which it is not, you retarded human being.
 
Advertisement
For_The_U said:
You make some very good points. But you too, unfortunately, succumb to absolutism. For example...

"This kind of crap has happened over and over and over again. Virus/flu outbreak begins. Nobody does anything. Impact is greater than it should have been. Why don't we just TRY once to take precautions and minimize the problem?"

"Nobody does anything", huh? How about H2N2, MERS, SARS, Ebola? All were packaged by the media in similar hysteria of how they would devastate the global population. None ultimately did. So why in your view is it "nobody does anything" and "why can't we just TRY for once to take precautions"? Seems to me you're presenting a distorted reality.

And then you state:
"If the trade-off is "let's have 2 crappy weeks of no sports" for "coronavirus never reached the projected impact numbers", then all sides should view it as a victory."

Sure, if that was the entirety of this in a vacuum I can't imagine there is anyone who would disagree with that statement. But what about this slightly modified and in my opinion more accurate statement:

"If the trade-off is "let's have 2 crappy weeks of no sports" and our economy absolutely devastated for "coronavirus never reached the projected impact numbers", then all sides should view it as a victory."

I'm not sure one would view that as the same level of "victory", especially if that person feels the response to coronavirus has been grossly disproportionate to the threat.
Click to expand...



Look, there is no "absolutism" there.

First, it is uncontroverted that we have cut the funding for the CDC, and that we were not (previously) using WHO-approved testing kits, etc. There is a difference between some of the diseases you cite (Ebola), which was LARGELY contained on one continent. We were not seeing thousands of cases breaking out across the globe.

Here's just one Ebola stat: "Between 1976 and 2013, the World Health Organization reports 24 outbreaks involving 2,387 cases with 1,590 deaths. "

Compare that to Coronavirus: "As of 12 March 2020, over 129,000 cases have been confirmed in more than 120 countries and territories, with major outbreaks in mainland China, Italy, South Korea, and Iran. More than 4,700 have died from the disease and 68,000 have recovered."

So even though Ebola has a horrific impact, it has not infected and/or killed as many people IN THIRTY-SEVEN YEARS as we are seeing with Coronavirus.

Now, that comparison alone is not the end-all/be-all on which disease is "better" or "worse" or "deserving of hype/overreaction".

Ebola has long been feared because of the horrible way in which infected people die. But not because of its overall statistical impact. ****, shark attacks are rare too, but people are still fearful of sharks and cautious around sharks.

As for the "economic impact" argument, sorry, but we also have a long history of "well, let's not do anything, because it's bad for the economy". Particularly on environmental/pollution problems. But time and time again, it has been shown that the "cleanup" of, say, toxic waste sites, is far more expensive than what it would have cost to have prevented the problem in the first place.

Will the economic impact of Coronavirus suck? Sure. But maybe in the future, politicians of BOTH parties will not be so quick to cut the CDC funding. Maybe this will impact awareness and our standards of what we tolerate and choose not to tolerate.

Remember when someone poisoned Tylenol bottles and a couple of people died? We have since instituted safety-sealed medicine bottles, and we never went back to the old container methods.

What is YOUR alternative? Continue to stage all of the athletic competitions, continue to live life as normal (because, you know, "the economy") and then allow whatever number of people to die as are going to die? Because they are old and/or immunocompromised?

Yeah, this one is going to sting. It could have been handled much better. But it's silly to blame "the media" for (belated) reporting.

If the economy tanks, will it help us to take "precautions" warnings more seriously in the future? Will it cut down on the "breast cancer kills more people than Coronavirus" crowd lulling people into inaction? Because those could be two positive future developments.
 
Awsi Dooger said:
The only remaining value of this site is to behold the overpowering stupidity of the Simplistic Angry Male.

Imagine going through life like that. That's what never fails to amaze me. Oh the hilarity. Imagine waking up every day of your life and being a SAM. Every thought, every conclusion as raw torture. It's like bricks floating through the sky and being absorbed from every angle, being sucked into that skull. The vital replenishment to maintain the level of stupidity that otherwise should not be attainable.

Wherever this virus leads, to not understand that it would explode exponentially in terms of impacting daily society was beyond idiotic. It is the difference between situational clarity and going through life as a blockhead SAM, someone who needs to run to the latest right wing website to be told how to react, to be told what meaningless deflections to use.
Click to expand...

It's more than that. What people fail to realize is the slow incubation period and the large % of asymptomatic cases, combined with insufficient testing measures. For all we know this thing is all over North America right now and in 1-2 weeks we're in full-fledged Italy mode where everything is shut down, patients are being treated in the hallways of hospitals, equipment and medical care are scarce, medical personnel are getting sick themselves or collapsing from dehydration and exhaustion, and patients are living and dying based on who gets access to limited oxygen.

The Simplistic Angry Male is suffering from an even worse condition - Ostrich Neck Syndrome. And no one has it worse than Great Leader Trump who's too chicken**** to call for social distancing (which I've been practicing for weeks already) and risk his precious economy tanking even harder, costing him the 1 political tool he can exploit for personal gain in the upcoming election.

And no I'm not American and in Canada we're being fed the same prevarications - "the risk is LOW" they say. So if you want a conspiracy how about the conspiracy of wiping out the elderly population to remove their pensions and burden on the health care system? There's something for Empirouette Cane to twirl about.
 
JD08 said:
But it was almost 30 years before the CDC was even started. Medicine was not even close to what we have now. Comparing anything pre-WW2 to now just isn't a valid comparison.
Click to expand...


Again, not comparing medicine.

Comparing the "let's go forward with a parade involving 200,000 people, regardless of this 1918 outbreak" to "we should continue to have the NCAA Tournament, regardless of this 2020 outbreak".

The human thought process is similar. The medicine is completely different.

Hey, if you want to argue that we have SO MUCH MORE MEDICAL KNOWLEDGE in 2020, that's fair. But, if that is the case, then how is it even a close call? The very fact that in 2020, SOME PEOPLE are still arguing for "business as usual", when we know SO MUCH MORE in 2020 than we knew in 1918 is...very compelling evidence that while we've had scientific advances, we are still stuck with some slow-moving logical/thought process developments.

That's all.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top