Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..psychojoe said..
I was really going to stay out of this thread.
But now that it's on the path to deletion anyway, I'll go ahead and say, there's been no apology.
Lockdown modelling was sketchy at best. Empirical evidence shows for the most part they did more harm than good.
Yes, there are studies that "prove" otherwise, but they're crap and missing vast volumes of detail.
That's it, that's enough reason for every CT Nutter to believe their theory has merit.
At least some of the scientist that got it wrong have conceded, but no, none of ours. None that caused untold undue misery
Like you I'm against arrogant CT nutters, but can I ask what empirical evidence you're talking about?
We were less than three months into the big Melbourne lockdown when I ran the maths. It took less than two months for Melbourne's losses to surpass Swedens. Seven million lockdown versus ten million no lockdown made the math very easy.
I didn't save my transcript from that time as I hadn't imagined this ****show a year later.
The spike in suicides was an early concern, with the epidemiological value of an average suicide being 80 times greater than the average Covid death but as a polish Jewish epidemiologist shared at the time, humans are a resilient lot, and he was right as the suicide rate dropped off as those with severe mental health issues died, however the loss of valuable life years (YLL) due to lockdown (missed medical appointments etc.) had already eclipsed the 5,000YLL seen in Sweden. This is before we account for the societal stressors of financial precarity and domestic violence and the thing referred to as mental health which largely is a cognitive non acceptance of mitigation measures brought without verifiable reasoning. The task written in law as the responsibility of the CHO who months later admitted he'd had no involvement in nor had he reviewed (as law requires he do) the decisions made on his behalf. At the time I presented my findings to an international group of epidemiologists who largely agreed that lockdowns, if done properly, should not last more than two weeks, and would question the value of a lockdown that exceeded two weeks.
The "crap" studies that claim lockdown successful have omitted the 400% increase in domestic violence shown in other studies and omitted calls to kids help line more than doubling and omitted mental health services being pushed beyond capacity and omitted lasting financial detriment and the accompanying stressors.
It should be noted that studies which omitted all these facts and decided that children are largely unaffected psychologically academically emotionally etc. by lockdown still only found lockdown to be of slight benefit.
Select to expand quoteKamikuza said..Chris 249 said..
No, it's easy to make a logical and factual rebuttal of many CT claims.
You are stating as a fact that the experts are blatantly lying, without making any logical and factual statement to that effect.
No, I'm stating the fact that those in positions of power and authority have engaged in blatant lying. Perhaps some of those are experts in a field...
... but are you honestly unaware of any time in recent history that "experts" (putting aside politicians, news makers etc) have blatantly lied for their or someone else's benefit?
If we're discussing conspiracy theories about Covid, as I assume we are, I can't recall a particular time when such experts have blatantly lied.
Other experts in other situations have lied, yes. That's always gone on. I haven't claimed that no expert in history has ever lied. Many such "lies" can turn out to be simply situations where the observer has a different opinion. In the fast-moving world of pandemics, a reasonable expert's opinions will change as the available information changes.
But as far as recent claims about Covid, I'm not aware of a situation where conspiracy theorists have been right and the experts you mention have blatantly lied.
Select to expand quotepsychojoe said..Chris 249 said..psychojoe said..
I was really going to stay out of this thread.
But now that it's on the path to deletion anyway, I'll go ahead and say, there's been no apology.
Lockdown modelling was sketchy at best. Empirical evidence shows for the most part they did more harm than good.
Yes, there are studies that "prove" otherwise, but they're crap and missing vast volumes of detail.
That's it, that's enough reason for every CT Nutter to believe their theory has merit.
At least some of the scientist that got it wrong have conceded, but no, none of ours. None that caused untold undue misery
Like you I'm against arrogant CT nutters, but can I ask what empirical evidence you're talking about?
We were less than three months into the big Melbourne lockdown when I ran the maths. It took less than two months for Melbourne's losses to surpass Swedens. Seven million lockdown versus ten million no lockdown made the math very easy.
I didn't save my transcript from that time as I hadn't imagined this ****show a year later.
The spike in suicides was an early concern, with the epidemiological value of an average suicide being 80 times greater than the average Covid death but as a polish Jewish epidemiologist shared at the time, humans are a resilient lot, and he was right as the suicide rate dropped off as those with severe mental health issues died, however the loss of valuable life years (YLL) due to lockdown (missed medical appointments etc.) had already eclipsed the 5,000YLL seen in Sweden. This is before we account for the societal stressors of financial precarity and domestic violence and the thing referred to as mental health which largely is a cognitive non acceptance of mitigation measures brought without verifiable reasoning. The task written in law as the responsibility of the CHO who months later admitted he'd had no involvement in nor had he reviewed (as law requires he do) the decisions made on his behalf. At the time I presented my findings to an international group of epidemiologists who largely agreed that lockdowns, if done properly, should not last more than two weeks, and would question the value of a lockdown that exceeded two weeks.
The "crap" studies that claim lockdown successful have omitted the 400% increase in domestic violence shown in other studies and omitted calls to kids help line more than doubling and omitted mental health services being pushed beyond capacity and omitted lasting financial detriment and the accompanying stressors.
It should be noted that studies which omitted all these facts and decided that children are largely unaffected psychologically academically emotionally etc. by lockdown still only found lockdown to be of slight benefit.
Okay, that's interesting. Without actually seeing your detail and analysis that's all I can say. Many of us are aware of the downsides of lockdowns and that it's possible that in some ways they may have done more harm than good.
It would be interesting to see how you calculated the incidence of suicide, domestic violence, economic loss etc if there had only been very short lockdowns and Covid had spread more widely as a result. For one example, how did you capture the financial losses from the people who would have stayed at home even without lockdowns, just to reduce their risk? Yes, I know from a very good source that there has been a domestic violence increase, but how did you work out what the incidence would have been had the alternative course of action been taken? It would also be interesting to see what variables you accounted for in the comparison of Melbourne versus Sweden.
But sure, we both seem to agree that these issues can be approached in a logical, evidence-based way. A reasoned analysis like the one you did would be fascinating and perhaps extremely valuable. But as we seem to agree, CT fans raving on and unable to answer event the simplest questions are a very different thing.
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..
If we're discussing conspiracy theories about Covid, as I assume we are, I can't recall a particular time when such experts have blatantly lied.
Other experts in other situations have lied, yes. That's always gone on. I haven't claimed that no expert in history has ever lied. Many such "lies" can turn out to be simply situations where the observer has a different opinion. In the fast-moving world of pandemics, a reasonable expert's opinions will change as the available information changes.
But as far as recent claims about Covid, I'm not aware of a situation where conspiracy theorists have been right and the experts you mention have blatantly lied.
Proves the adage about making assumptions. No, I haven't mentioned COVID at all, and I'm definitely not talking about conspiracy theories -- I'm specifically talking about blatant lies handed to the people. This is after all a thread not about COVID (or was), and I intentionally kept my comment as broad as possible.
But since you brought it up: Fauci has dropped some zingers, ie. regarding the funding of the WIV, use of masks, origin of the virus... I'll grant that his comments on the origin of the virus may yet be proven correct; but I'm going to side with Occam's Razor on that one until there's contrary evidence.
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..
Okay, that's interesting. Without actually seeing your detail and analysis that's all I can say.
There are papers out there already. But depending on the source you look at, they're either written by sensible experts and data-analysists or ... CT tin foil hat wearers.
Cancer screening rates and treatment are an easy one to look at, if you're looking for the unintended consequences.
Select to expand quoteKamikuza said..Chris 249 said..
Okay, that's interesting. Without actually seeing your detail and analysis that's all I can say.
There are papers out there already. But depending on the source you look at, they're either written by sensible experts and data-analysists or ... CT tin foil hat wearers.
Cancer screening rates and treatment are an easy one to look at, if you're looking for the unintended consequences.
That seems to prove the adage about making assumptions. My post was to psyschojoe; I quoted his post and used the words "you" and "your" five times, which I thought would have made it pretty clear that when I wrote to him "YOUR detail and analysis" I meant HIS detail and analysis.
My post wasn't referring to "papers already out there" that are against lockdowns. However, I've read some of the articles written by experts arguing that lockdowns are not worth it (ie Cameron Murray's pieces, which seem to utterly ignore many vital factors; IMHO the assumptions that they make appear don't appear to be any more reliable than the assumptions that go into pro-lockdown research.
It's hard to find actual evidence that those who are pro-lockdown are saying that all those who are against lockdown are "CT tin foil hat wearers". If you look at the responses to the anti-lockdown articles by Cameron Murray, Ramesh Thakur or Adam Creighton one sees no evidence of them being called "CT tin foil hat wearers".
As far as cancer treatment goes, this August 4 study showed that there was NO evidence of a significant drop in cancer treatment via drugs during Australia's lockdowns; to quote the summary "The effective control of COVID-19 in Australia appears to have mitigated the initial impact of COVID-19 on systemic cancer therapy. We observed only small and temporary changes in the use of some cancer medicines early in the pandemic."
www.thelancet.com/journals/lanwpc/article/PIIS2666-6065(21)00135-8/fulltext
And as far as cancer screening rates, this major study appears to show no real drop since Covid;
www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/397a22ef-eb50-4337-a576-928db5cdbcb7/aihw-can-137.pdf.aspx?inline=true
So where are these unintended consequences on cancer screening rates and treatment? And what would have happened to cancer patients if different strategies had been followed?
Select to expand quoteKamikuza said..Chris 249 said..
If we're discussing conspiracy theories about Covid, as I assume we are, I can't recall a particular time when such experts have blatantly lied.
Other experts in other situations have lied, yes. That's always gone on. I haven't claimed that no expert in history has ever lied. Many such "lies" can turn out to be simply situations where the observer has a different opinion. In the fast-moving world of pandemics, a reasonable expert's opinions will change as the available information changes.
But as far as recent claims about Covid, I'm not aware of a situation where conspiracy theorists have been right and the experts you mention have blatantly lied.
Proves the adage about making assumptions. No, I haven't mentioned COVID at all, and I'm definitely not talking about conspiracy theories -- I'm specifically talking about blatant lies handed to the people. This is after all a thread not about COVID (or was), and I intentionally kept my comment as broad as possible.
But since you brought it up: Fauci has dropped some zingers, ie. regarding the funding of the WIV, use of masks, origin of the virus... I'll grant that his comments on the origin of the virus may yet be proven correct; but I'm going to side with Occam's Razor on that one until there's contrary evidence.
Okay, so let's use Fauci's statements about Covid's origin as an example. If we apply Occam's Razor, we must say that he made those statement because he believed them. Therefore by your method, which is quite a good one, you have shown that Fauci did NOT lie.
If you are going to say that Fauci had certain beliefs about the origins AND THEN DECIDED TO LIE you are actually going against Occam's Razor, because you have introduced another factor.
To move away from Covid, let me state again that no one has pretended that there is no time in history when experts have not lied. However, many CT whackos and fellow travellers seem to assume that experts lie far more often than they do, and their "explanations" for that are often just stupid.
Looks like this is going the same way as the vaccination thread. It is now also locked like the vaccination thread.
Select to expand quoteHarrow said..
Just getting in while I can.... uhh, I have nothing to say.
I take offense at what you have just said and I have a youtube video somewhere that will show you you are so wrong!
I just wanted to come in and say how proud I am of all of you.
This was a thread started about the theft of our liberites, but you have all spoken about the true topic that everyone wants to discuss.
Even the pro-thread lock censors want to discuss covid and the government experiment.
Why would they make the effort to get a thread locked, only to keep the topic open elswhere? Who knows, they don't work on logic obviously.
Good work, get a topic locked, then start it all again. Love it.
You government created drone, kool-aid drinkers are the best.
I absolutely love how much you are trying to justify (to yourselves) getting yourselves injected with an experimental treatment, that you have developed forum posts into a bludgeoning weapon to subdue those you don't agree with.
It's quite clear that you are coming to the realisation that you have made a grave error in judgement, and are crapping your daks while you wait for the negative impact to your health kick in.
Those of you with justifiable questions on the experiment underway, keep asking the questions. These pro-experimenters can lie to themselves, but one day they'll wake up. Probably when getting their 10th booster, you know, the boosters that will then required to keep them alive from the damage the 'vaccinations' did to their immune systems.
All hail subscription healthcare! Pay or die!
(what, you thought the government would keep paying for you from our taxes?)
And BTW, to those who think things will go back to normal with 'vaccinations' on the rise...guess what? BA-BOW! (I told you so)
www.news.com.au/world/coronavirus/global/this-is-our-life-from-now-on-top-israel-doctor-warns-population-to-get-ready-for-fourth-vaccine-shot/news-story/1d09d6eb71caa387fa48f802efd011d9
After reopening society following a successful vaccination campaign, the country is now being forced to reintroduce caps on public gatherings and bump up hospital staff in preparation for another uncontrollable wave of Covid patients.
Did I forget anyone? Maybe someone's mum?
Select to expand quoteGreenPat said..
Looks like this is going the same way as the vaccination thread. It is now also locked like the vaccination thread.
Locked? Does that mean I can't post this? 
Select to expand quotechrispy said..
Oh the wall of text 
I built a wall, so you can get over it 
Select to expand quoteUncleBob said..GreenPat said..
Looks like this is going the same way as the vaccination thread. It is now also locked like the vaccination thread.
Locked? Does that mean I can't post this?
Yes. Or at least, that was the plan. Damn flux capacitor must be broken. 
Locking. Again. For the first time.
