Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

(12-01-2020, 09:05 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]You're awful smug for a person that's still wrong. You made me waste 20 minutes of my life trying to find the study. It was heart disease, not pneumonia. That's what I get from going by memory. Not sorry. 

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1509

Quote:In this population-based study of adults hospitalized with influenza, almost 12% of patients had an acute cardiovascular event. Clinicians should ensure high rates of influenza vaccination, especially in those with underlying chronic conditions, to protect against acute cardiovascular events associated with influenza.

Here's another:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NE...tured_home

Quote:It is important to confirm the association between influenza and acute myocardial infarction because cardiovascular events triggered by influenza are potentially preventable by vaccination. Better evidence that influenza triggers cardiovascular events may lead to a change in practice that would improve the currently suboptimal vaccine coverage among persons who are at high risk for acute myocardial infarction.

Thanks for posting that link, btw. Just proves that these super smart experts a) don't actually know how many flu deaths there are because it's not regularly tested, b) only use pneumonia and influenza estimates, c) don't look for any other complications that might have been related. You know where they do look? Covid. You can respond to the rest of my post now.

I already proved you wrong.  The issue wasn't whether or not they read your one obscure article on the topic; the issue was whether or not they recognize that influenza is under-reported on death certificates and take steps in their statistical model to remedy it.  And they do. Of course they can't pinpoint exact numbers... its too complex.  Hence, the statistical model to improve the precision of the estimate; and that algorithm will be continuously be updated with new data and AI.  If you don't understand that basic concept, I can't help you.  But one thing I am sure of is they have a good handle on it without your help.

Listen... I think you're a smart guy. You have demonstrated you are well-read and you are a continuous learner. And I can respect your maverick ideals that attempt to go against the establishment or authority. But that maverick mindset, combined with your overwhelming political bias, absolutely blinds your logic in such basic ways that it really hurts your credibility on very simple issues where the data is overwhelmingly against you. Moderately so regarding COVID; but SIGNIFICANTLY on election fraud.

How did you prove me wrong except that I said pneumonia instead of heart disease? The points I made are exactly the same:

1. We are testing for Covid better than we do for the flu
2. Because it's the center of attention, we are quicker to properly correlate deaths, whereas we don't with the flu
3. Your link proves that they only use P and I to approximate flu deaths
4. Covid is at the onset of its effectiveness and will taper once we hit herd immunity

If those things are taken into consideration, I think it's a similar death rate. Covid may be slightly higher for people over 70, but it's not going to be anything crazy, not in a significant enough amount to justify the lockdowns, which was my original point. The "experts" at the WHO agree that lockdowns cause more harm than good, currently.

You use "bias" like a shield. My points on election fraud are fine. There is more than enough evidence to deduce there was fraud in the cities I mentioned, but not enough to overturn the election. The only way they overturn the election is with hard evidence, which has to come via machines. I don't have an opinion on the machines except that it's plausible. It was on the Trump team to win that argument, and it doesn't look like it's going to. If the DOJ and national cybersecurity isn't going to confirm it, they probably aren't getting it. What's with you henpecking that? Everything I said there is reasonable. What's worse? My probabilities or your certainties? You don't KNOW anything you've posted here. How about you check your bias?

(12-01-2020, 11:03 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]How did you prove me wrong except that I said pneumonia instead of heart disease? The points I made are exactly the same:

1. We are testing for Covid better than we do for the flu
2. Because it's the center of attention, we are quicker to properly correlate deaths, whereas we don't with the flu
3. Your link proves that they only use P and I to approximate flu deaths
4. Covid is at the onset of its effectiveness and will taper once we hit herd immunity

If those things are taken into consideration, I think it's a similar death rate. Covid may be slightly higher for people over 70, but it's not going to be anything crazy, not in a significant enough amount to justify the lockdowns, which was my original point. The "experts" at the WHO agree that lockdowns cause more harm than good, currently.

You use "bias" like a shield. My points on election fraud are fine. There is more than enough evidence to deduce there was fraud in the cities I mentioned, but not enough to overturn the election. The only way they overturn the election is with hard evidence, which has to come via machines. I don't have an opinion on the machines except that it's plausible. It was on the Trump team to win that argument, and it doesn't look like it's going to. If the DOJ and national cybersecurity isn't going to confirm it, they probably aren't getting it. What's with you henpecking that? Everything I said there is reasonable. What's worse? My probabilities or your certainties? You don't KNOW anything you've posted here. How about you check your bias?

You asked for evidence of the awareness of epidemiologists that death certificates were under-reporting influenza and that it was taken into account with their statistical models.  I gave that to you and proved you wrong.  Again.

1.  No evidence of that.  Citation? We have been testing for the flu much longer and efficiently than COVID.
2.  Again, no evidence.  We have decades of data on the flu and understand it to a deeper degree.  The fact influenza is under-reported in general suggests a much lower morbidity rate than COVID at this moment.  You fail to recognize that; you can't have it both ways.
3.  False. They emphasized those concepts but did not provide the algorithm.  That is a simple-minded assumption and you should know better.
4.  Obviously. That goes without saying.

Its clearly not a similar death rate, right now.  It may be by next year, but CLEARLY it is not now.  No epidemiologist will make that statement, and it just shows your ignorance.

Your points on election fraud are equivalent to Flat-earthers.  There is a big difference between "probable" and "possible"; and all your positions choose the latter over the former. That is your bias. And you did not "deduce" anything.  Clearly, you do not understand the difference between inductive and deductive logic.  Actually, I do not see any evidence you understand logic in any capacity; your bias keeps it beyond your grasp.

Follow the money. Hospitals were being reimbursed up to 4 times as much by Medicare for listing Covid as the cause of death on the certificate, and doctors were pressured to do this by management to recoup those bucks. This is not speculation, it is fact. How do I know this? Because 2 members of my family specifically work in ICU in a very famous medical facility between the Southside of town and the beach. Another family member works in a well known hospital just north of downtown. Another works with a doctor at a primary care practice that does rounds at an assisted living/long term care facility in the Regency area.  And as recently as August, they were all still doing this, and may still be doing it, i havent asked them lately.  Why were they being  offered this incentive by our own US Gov? That's for others to speculate, but as Seinfeld once stated, "It seems a tad askew".

(12-01-2020, 11:45 PM)NeptuneBeachBum Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-01-2020, 11:03 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]How did you prove me wrong except that I said pneumonia instead of heart disease? The points I made are exactly the same:

1. We are testing for Covid better than we do for the flu
2. Because it's the center of attention, we are quicker to properly correlate deaths, whereas we don't with the flu
3. Your link proves that they only use P and I to approximate flu deaths
4. Covid is at the onset of its effectiveness and will taper once we hit herd immunity

If those things are taken into consideration, I think it's a similar death rate. Covid may be slightly higher for people over 70, but it's not going to be anything crazy, not in a significant enough amount to justify the lockdowns, which was my original point. The "experts" at the WHO agree that lockdowns cause more harm than good, currently.

You use "bias" like a shield. My points on election fraud are fine. There is more than enough evidence to deduce there was fraud in the cities I mentioned, but not enough to overturn the election. The only way they overturn the election is with hard evidence, which has to come via machines. I don't have an opinion on the machines except that it's plausible. It was on the Trump team to win that argument, and it doesn't look like it's going to. If the DOJ and national cybersecurity isn't going to confirm it, they probably aren't getting it. What's with you henpecking that? Everything I said there is reasonable. What's worse? My probabilities or your certainties? You don't KNOW anything you've posted here. How about you check your bias?

You asked for evidence of the awareness of epidemiologists that death certificates were under-reporting influenza and that it was taken into account with their statistical models.  I gave that to you and proved you wrong.  Again.

1.  No evidence of that.  Citation?  We have been testing  for the flu much longer and efficiently than COVID.
2.  Again, no evidence.  We have decades of data on the flu and understand it to a deeper degree.  The fact influenza is under-reported in general suggests a much lower morbidity rate than COVID at this moment.  You fail to recognize that; you can't have it both ways.
3.  False. They emphasized those concepts but did not provide the algorithm.  That is a simple-minded assumption and you should know better.
4.  Obviously. That goes without saying.

Its clearly not a similar death rate, right now.  It may be by next year, but CLEARLY it is not now.  No epidemiologist will make that statement, and it just shows your ignorance.

Your points on election fraud are equivalent to Flat-earthers.  There is a big difference between "probable" and "possible"; and all your positions choose the latter over the former.  That is your bias.  And you did not "deduce" anything.  Clearly, you do not understand the difference between inductive and deductive logic.  Actually, I do not see any evidence you understand logic in any capacity; your bias keeps it beyond your grasp.

I could easily justify the use of deduce, but that'd be just the rabbit trail you need to dig yourself out of this mess. I'll focus on the argument we're having. So let's go.

1. Why am I arguing with a person that thinks we test more for the flu than for Covid. That's nonsensical. But, since you need data for something that is obvious here you go:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article...20specimen.

Quote:The number of specimens tested varies with the severity of the season. Since 2010, an average of 77,000 specimens has been tested annually. Multiple tests may be performed on a single specimen. Most tests have been PCR.

I want to believe that number is incorrect, so please, go find me something that shows I am missing the mark there. It's like pulling teeth to find out how many flu tests are performed each year. Even the numbers for this year, with increased testing, are only cumulatively at 120k. So, yeah, I don't think we test for the flu at any rate close to how often we test for Covid, considering we've tested for Covid over 200,000,000 times this year. USA! USA!

2. The studies I cited are evidence. I'm beginning to think you don't understand what evidence is. This is not to say they didn't know the flu could contribute it to other deaths, but that it is very commonplace to do this with Covid.

3. Fair point. I retract the statement. I don't think it's necessary to defend my original point: that Covid is not deadly enough to justify lockdowns. Neither is point 2.  

4. Thanks, pal. Just want to take this time to point out that while my original statement didn't mention that modifier, I cleared it up in a follow-up post. 

The whole reason we are having this discussion is because I compared Covid to the flu, which includes the condition of herd immunity. This, of course, assumes the virus doesn't mutate into something more deadly like we saw with the Spanish Flu. If the elderly want to lockdown, more power to them, but we have handled this thing terribly, and it didn't take an epidemiologist to realize that maybe just at risk persons and their immediate families are the only ones that should have been locking down while the rest of us treated this thing like the flu. Because, to the 95% of the population that isn't elderly, diabetic, etc... the numbers are similar to the flu right now... while Covid is at it's strongest. 

P.S. Please stop using bias as a shield. You use it to dismiss anyone who disagrees with you. You want them to account for theirs without you having to account for yours. It's tiresome. Facts is facts, bruh.

(12-02-2020, 12:58 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-01-2020, 11:45 PM)NeptuneBeachBum Wrote: [ -> ]You asked for evidence of the awareness of epidemiologists that death certificates were under-reporting influenza and that it was taken into account with their statistical models.  I gave that to you and proved you wrong.  Again.

1.  No evidence of that.  Citation?  We have been testing  for the flu much longer and efficiently than COVID.
2.  Again, no evidence.  We have decades of data on the flu and understand it to a deeper degree.  The fact influenza is under-reported in general suggests a much lower morbidity rate than COVID at this moment.  You fail to recognize that; you can't have it both ways.
3.  False. They emphasized those concepts but did not provide the algorithm.  That is a simple-minded assumption and you should know better.
4.  Obviously. That goes without saying.

Its clearly not a similar death rate, right now.  It may be by next year, but CLEARLY it is not now.  No epidemiologist will make that statement, and it just shows your ignorance.

Your points on election fraud are equivalent to Flat-earthers.  There is a big difference between "probable" and "possible"; and all your positions choose the latter over the former.  That is your bias.  And you did not "deduce" anything.  Clearly, you do not understand the difference between inductive and deductive logic.  Actually, I do not see any evidence you understand logic in any capacity; your bias keeps it beyond your grasp.

I could easily justify the use of deduce, but that'd be just the rabbit trail you need to dig yourself out of this mess. I'll focus on the argument we're having. So let's go.

1. Why am I arguing with a person that thinks we test more for the flu than for Covid. That's nonsensical. But, since you need data for something that is obvious here you go:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article...20specimen.

Quote:The number of specimens tested varies with the severity of the season. Since 2010, an average of 77,000 specimens has been tested annually. Multiple tests may be performed on a single specimen. Most tests have been PCR.

I want to believe that number is incorrect, so please, go find me something that shows I am missing the mark there. It's like pulling teeth to find out how many flu tests are performed each year. Even the numbers for this year, with increased testing, are only cumulatively at 120k. So, yeah, I don't think we test for the flu at any rate close to how often we test for Covid, considering we've tested for Covid over 200,000,000 times this year. USA! USA!

2. The studies I cited are evidence. I'm beginning to think you don't understand what evidence is. This is not to say they didn't know the flu could contribute it to other deaths, but that it is very commonplace to do this with Covid.

3. Fair point. I retract the statement. I don't think it's necessary to defend my original point: that Covid is not deadly enough to justify lockdowns. Neither is point 2.  

4. Thanks, pal. Just want to take this time to point out that while my original statement didn't mention that modifier, I cleared it up in a follow-up post. 

The whole reason we are having this discussion is because I compared Covid to the flu, which includes the condition of herd immunity. This, of course, assumes the virus doesn't mutate into something more deadly like we saw with the Spanish Flu. If the elderly want to lockdown, more power to them, but we have handled this thing terribly, and it didn't take an epidemiologist to realize that maybe just at risk persons and their immediate families are the only ones that should have been locking down while the rest of us treated this thing like the flu. Because, to the 95% of the population that isn't elderly, diabetic, etc... the numbers are similar to the flu right now... while Covid is at it's strongest. 

P.S. Please stop using bias as a shield. You use it to dismiss anyone who disagrees with you. You want them to account for theirs without you having to account for yours. It's tiresome. Facts is facts, bruh.

Just block him. I've done it, the only person I haven't even blocked Mike, and it's better not seeing his trolling. There is no discussion with him and he does it on purpose.

Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk

I am Covid positive. I am fine for the most part ... as long as I don't exert myself. I took a shower earlier, and felt like a just finished wrestling a Bear.

(12-03-2020, 10:32 PM)Sammy Wrote: [ -> ]I am Covid positive. I am fine for the most part ... as long as I don't exert myself.  I took a shower earlier, and felt like a just finished wrestling a Bear.

Take care of yourself Mister!

(12-03-2020, 10:32 PM)Sammy Wrote: [ -> ]I am Covid positive. I am fine for the most part ... as long as I don't exert myself. I took a shower earlier, and felt like a just finished wrestling a Bear.

Lower back pain and general soreness in the chest were my first symptoms. I tested the next day and was positive. If you start getting shortness of breath, wheezing or low pulse-ox readings (92 or lower), then go immediately to the ER and get a chest xray. I would recommend investing in a pulse ox monitor If you can, it's a good measure of how well your lungs are oxygenating your body. If you have what might be the beginnings of pneumonia, then the earlier you get treated, the better. I was just starting to get short of breath, so I went to Memorial ER, got a steroid shot and was put on a zpac series, and my shortness of breath and soreness was gone within a couple of hours. Fever you will just have to deal with until your body fights it off; take the recommended dose of tylenol (or Advil if you don't have high blood pressure). Walk around every hour or so just so any congestion doesnt take up residence in the lungs. My fever lasted about 8 days, with 2 of the days being high (over 102). Good luck and get plenty of rest and hydration, and sleep when your body says sleep. Good luck brother.

(12-03-2020, 10:32 PM)Sammy Wrote: [ -> ]I am Covid positive. I am fine for the most part ... as long as I don't exert myself.  I took a shower earlier, and felt like a just finished wrestling a Bear.

That sucks man.  Brace yourself it might get worse.  Praying for you!

(12-03-2020, 10:32 PM)Sammy Wrote: [ -> ]I am Covid positive. I am fine for the most part ... as long as I don't exert myself.  I took a shower earlier, and felt like a just finished wrestling a Bear.

Be well, Sammy. 

Btw, are we talking a black bear or a brown bear? 

Wait, you capitalized it. Does that mean a big hairy guy who is unparticular about who he cuddles with? Then maybe a shower is a good thing. No, after.

(12-04-2020, 09:41 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-03-2020, 10:32 PM)Sammy Wrote: [ -> ]I am Covid positive. I am fine for the most part ... as long as I don't exert myself.  I took a shower earlier, and felt like a just finished wrestling a Bear.

Be well, Sammy. 

Btw, are we talking a black bear or a brown bear? 

Wait, you capitalized it. Does that mean a big hairy guy who is unparticular about who he cuddles with? Then maybe a shower is a good thing. No, after.

It’s Sammy, he probably meant “bare”

(12-04-2020, 10:12 AM)Bchbunnie4 Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-04-2020, 09:41 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Be well, Sammy. 

Btw, are we talking a black bear or a brown bear? 

Wait, you capitalized it. Does that mean a big hairy guy who is unparticular about who he cuddles with? Then maybe a shower is a good thing. No, after.

It’s Sammy, he probably meant “bare”

Or ‘in the bare’.

(12-04-2020, 12:24 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-04-2020, 10:12 AM)Bchbunnie4 Wrote: [ -> ]It’s Sammy, he probably meant “bare”

Or ‘in the bare’.

That’s a given!

(12-04-2020, 02:10 PM)Bchbunnie4 Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-04-2020, 12:24 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Or ‘in the bare’.

That’s a given!

Not always...

(11-28-2020, 09:32 PM)NeptuneBeachBum Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-28-2020, 07:50 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]Surely one like you with such high intellect should be able to comprehend that the mortality rate in 2019 being the same as 2020 with the worst ever deadly pandemic in the history of the world is subject to inquisition, no?

I will type slower so you can understand what I said...

What would be the fatality rate for a disease need to be for you to support lockdowns?

5% but that is not the issue here.  Allow me to type equally as slow for you, IF the death rate in 2019 is equal to that of 2020 how many deaths from other causes are being attributed to Covid-19 to inflate the mortality rate of Covid-19?

Ponder this.

A study was put out by none other than the CDC a few days ago that indicates that the China virus was present in the U.S. as early as early December.  China virus antibodies were detected in blood samples taken in early December.  Antibodies don't appear until after a length of time that a person had been infected and recovered.  This didn't get much if any attention from the MSM.

Were hospitals overwhelmed with patients in need of a ventilator or some kind of other apparatus back in November/December 2019?  Was there an unusual amount of people dying from "flu-like" symptoms then?  (Remember, we weren't even aware of the China virus back then).

The first "lock-downs" didn't happen until March.  Did the virus not spread BIG TIME for the 3-5 months that it had been present in the country?  Especially when people weren't "social distancing" or wearing masks at the time?

Remember "field hospitals" being set up for the "overwhelming numbers" that were supposedly expected?  Even to the point that a Navy hospital ship was moved into New York to handle the "overflow"?  Manufacturing lines being re-tooled and set up to produce the supposed shortage of ventilators?

In my opinion the "lock-down/shut-down" orders as well as the "mask mandates" are nothing more than a power thing.  It's all about government controlling the people.  I can count on one hand (two) the exact number of times that I have worn a mask, and that is because I had to.  Other than those two times I have lived my life normally (shaking hands with people, been in large gatherings with no masks, etc.) and I'm still here.

Hope you feel better sammyKins
Kick that stuff in the [BLEEP]. Grab it by the lapels and give it a quick, swift kick in the the taters. We want you healthy and explaining to us how to give ourselves a home colonoscopy with the pool noodle thing.

(12-04-2020, 07:20 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]In my opinion the "lock-down/shut-down" orders as well as the "mask mandates" are nothing more than a power thing.  It's all about government controlling the people.  I can count on one hand (two) the exact number of times that I have worn a mask, and that is because I had to.  Other than those two times I have lived my life normally (shaking hands with people, been in large gatherings with no masks, etc.) and I'm still here.

Do you understand the science involved in the transmission of the Covid virus?  

Are you saying the government of the United States, as well as those of France, Spain, Italy, Germany and so many other countries around the world, all spontaneously seized upon the Covid virus as an excuse to "control" their people?  For what purpose?  How do they benefit?

How much worse must the outbreak become before you feel a social responsibility to take reasonable precautions for the benefit of others?

(12-04-2020, 07:20 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]Ponder this.

A study was put out by none other than the CDC a few days ago that indicates that the China virus was present in the U.S. as early as early December.  China virus antibodies were detected in blood samples taken in early December.  Antibodies don't appear until after a length of time that a person had been infected and recovered.  This didn't get much if any attention from the MSM.

Were hospitals overwhelmed with patients in need of a ventilator or some kind of other apparatus back in November/December 2019?  Was there an unusual amount of people dying from "flu-like" symptoms then?  (Remember, we weren't even aware of the China virus back then).

The first "lock-downs" didn't happen until March.  Did the virus not spread BIG TIME for the 3-5 months that it had been present in the country?  Especially when people weren't "social distancing" or wearing masks at the time?

Remember "field hospitals" being set up for the "overwhelming numbers" that were supposedly expected?  Even to the point that a Navy hospital ship was moved into New York to handle the "overflow"?  Manufacturing lines being re-tooled and set up to produce the supposed shortage of ventilators?

In my opinion the "lock-down/shut-down" orders as well as the "mask mandates" are nothing more than a power thing.  It's all about government controlling the people.  I can count on one hand (two) the exact number of times that I have worn a mask, and that is because I had to.  Other than those two times I have lived my life normally (shaking hands with people, been in large gatherings with no masks, etc.) and I'm still here.

It's just pathetic that you think COVID is being exploited by the Government want to control its citizens. I've read some dumb conspiracy theories, but this close to tops the list.

The virus is showing a distinct pattern of being more virulent during the winter months.  We dodged a bullet going into summer when the virus hit.  Now, however, we will reap what we sow.  Winter isn't coming, it's here. Over 200,000 new infections in a single day because there are too many idiots who still think COVID is fake news.