NomadicMedic
I know a guy who knows a guy.
- 12,205
- 6,967
- 113
Test the social media “experts” continue to whine about “fake numbers” and social restrictions.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I suppose the blame can be laid square on the piss poor basic education systems both in the US and some locations in Europe. There is a vast gap between day to day lives and the academic world. Mr or Ms Average has no idea how science works and how difficult it is to fudge the numbers. More yet, they are completely clueless as to what happens to a reputable institute if they publish fake numbers. Reputation irredeemably shot to hell and you can kiss your funding, present and future good bye.the social media “experts” continue to whine about “fake numbers” and social restrictions.
Sure it did. Compared to the science project I scraped off the bottom shelf of the fridge. But that festering glop probably had a year head start.This didn’t age well.
Well, I guess my terminology was a bit brash and rushed.This didn’t age well.
“iF ewE guiZz hAd betTeR SKoolZ, u wuLd kNot be skePtiCull of aNyTHing end yOo wULd aLwaYzz jesT doo aS eWe r tolled. R lEEdurz wud nEVUR maniPooLate uS orE misLeeD uS.”I suppose the blame can be laid square on the piss poor basic education systems both in the US and some locations in Europe. There is a vast gap between day to day lives and the academic world. Mr or Ms Average has no idea how science works and how difficult it is to fudge the numbers. More yet, they are completely clueless as to what happens to a reputable institute if they publish fake numbers. Reputation irredeemably shot to hell and you can kiss your funding, present and future good bye.
I agree. I think one reason the shutdown didn't achieve better results -- medical, not economic -- is that it was compromised by mixed messaging from the feds. Who knows how much infection could have been prevented by staying the course, but I'm not discounting the financial consequences.I still struggle with the whole “shut down didn’t work,” thing. I think we all knew it wouldn’t eliminate the virus. It did however give us some time to get capacity together and time to better figure out how to care for patients.
I am not sure how you prove that it was unnecessary, there really isn’t another comparable event here. You might feel it was overdone, and you might be right. But it seems difficult to state this empirically which is why I am just not going to take a position.
it is true that it is impossible to say with certainty how much the lockdowns did or did not help. What we do know as that in addition to whatever effect that those measures did or did not have on the spread of the virus, they had countless negative effects which I do not believe are given the consideration that they should. Millions of kids missed most of a year of school, an entire class of seniors were forced to forgo graduation, and many younger ones have endured social isolation and the school resources that they rely on for safety and security. A million small businesses have closed for good and countless people are unemployed or underemployed. The federal debt was increased by a staggering amount in just a few months. Alcohol abuse, drug abuse, domestic violence, and suicide have all likely increased. Trust in the government is at an all time low. None of this was caused by the virus, but by our response to it.I still struggle with the whole “shut down didn’t work,” thing. I think we all knew it wouldn’t eliminate the virus. It did however give us some time to get capacity together and time to better figure out how to care for patients.
I am not sure how you prove that it was unnecessary, there really isn’t another comparable event here. You might feel it was overdone, and you might be right. But it seems difficult to state this empirically which is why I am just not going to take a position.
Nor is COVID-related disability, which isn't publicized nearly as often as death, but has compromised many young and old COVID survivors indefinitely.it is true that it is impossible to say with certainty how much the lockdowns did or did not help. What we do know as that in addition to whatever effect that those measures did or did not have on the spread of the virus, they had countless negative effects which I do not believe are given the consideration that they should...
I'm of a similar mind at the moment. If we'd done MUCH more to protect the vulnerable (and we knew basically who was most at risk early-on), and kept protecting them throughout the entire time, we'd probably be in an overall better place now.considering that nearly 50% of all COVID deaths have been among LTC residents and that most of the rest of the severe illnesses and deaths occurred within similarly well-defined populations, I think it is rather apparent that we could have very likely achieved at least similar and quite possibly much better results by focusing on protecting those populations much better than we did
long term effects? it hasn't even been a year...I personally know several previously health ICU RNs and other HCWs younger than I (and I'm not that old) with long-term effects of COVID ranging from unpleasant to debilitating.
True, but I think even a few months of debilitating symptoms, without knowing if or when there's an endpoint, is enough to dispel the notion that COVID outcomes are binary, and that getting infected is no big deal for 98% of the population.long term effects? it hasn't even been a year...