1504 replies to this topic

[DanCG]

 

 

Looks like DanCG needed to put a "/s" in his post.

Yeah, I thought the sarcasm would be obvious. Same with post 1160.

 

Seriously though, of course the news at the link is “not exactly anti-vax” My point is that anything less than “all vax, all the time, for everyone” is being equated in this forum with irrational “anti-vax”. The FDA committee decision recognizes that questions of vaccine safety and efficacy may have different answers for different types of patients. Notice how this coincides with the first vaccination results we have discussed here starting at post 1123. The vaccines have so far been clearly beneficial for older people, but for the <50 group we had to fish for reasons why the vaccines did not appear to work all that well for protecting people from dying from delta infections.

 

If I had used anything other than a mainstream news site to point people to the quote, “We’re being asked to approve this as a three-dose vaccine for people 16 years of age and older, without any clear evidence if the third dose for a younger person when compared to an elderly person is of value,”  I would be accused of spreading anti-vax misinformation. If the person who made that quote had been someone other than an FDA committee member, the opinion would be dismissed as if he were some “fringe MD”, as if the FDA has a monopoly on expertise.

 

These matters are complicated. Serious, credentialed experts disagree strongly on every aspect of how the pandemic has been handled. A fringe MD from Idaho knows what he is seeing regardless of whether or not his interpretation of what it means is correct.

 

If the truth is going to win, all evidence should be weighed. The answer to “misinformation” is “information”, not censorship.

[Hip]

Whilst everyone is arguing about whether or not ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine works for COVID, and going around in circles doing so, a new, reasonably inexpensive, very easy to use, over the counter treatment is now available for COVID which in clinical trials was shown to reduce the blood viral load by 20 times after just 24 hours of treatment, and after 72 hours reduced viral load by 100 times, compared to the placebo treatment.

 

 

[DanCG]

Whilst everyone is arguing about whether or not ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine works for COVID, and going around in circles doing so, a new, reasonably inexpensive, very easy to use, over the counter treatment is now available for COVID which in clinical trials was shown to reduce the blood viral load by 20 times after just 24 hours of treatment, and after 72 hours reduced viral load by 100 times, compared to the placebo treatment.

Making this assertion without references is a tease. It looks like you are just testing to see what reaction you get.  But let's suppose it is true. The next question is whether the FDA, CDC, etc (and equivalent bodies in all countries) publicize it and encourage people to use it. Based on history, the answer is probably, "no".

[Hip]

Making this assertion without references is a tease. It looks like you are just testing to see what reaction you get.  But let's suppose it is true. The next question is whether the FDA, CDC, etc (and equivalent bodies in all countries) publicize it and encourage people to use it. Based on history, the answer is probably, "no".

 

Oops, seems like the weblink to the antiviral product I placed in that post did not appear.

 

However, seeing that everyone has rudely marked my above post as time-wasting, perhaps I should not waste any more of my time or yours by posting the link. 

[Dorian Grey]

Oops, seems like the weblink to the antiviral product I placed in that post did not appear.

 

However, seeing that everyone has rudely marked my above post as time-wasting, perhaps I should not waste any more of my time or yours by posting the link. 

 

The older I get, the more I tend to prefer old drugs.  Quinine an excellent cure all, but I'm willing to entertain pondering some of the newfangled potions.  

 

Let me guess...  Is it Chloroquine?  or perhaps the newer version, hydroxychloroquine?  

[pamojja]

Quinine an excellent cure all, but I'm willing to entertain pondering some of the newfangled potions.

Interestingly, after going through all versions of available anti-malarials against 3 plasmodium falciparum infections within a year (1994), a Dutch doc at a small hospital in Malawi gave me only quinine for my 4th infection (along with antibiotic-IV against co-infections). Alledgedly all the newer didn't work there anymore.

[Advocatus Diaboli]

This article is about CODIVIR a twice daily injectable.

 

"A team of Israeli scientists say that a drug previously used in an uncontrolled fashion to treat HIV has a direct antiviral effect against coronavirus, sending patients home virus-free within only a few days."

 

“Codivir has a very good safety profile and a very impressive antiviral effect, both in laboratory conditions and in a phase I clinical trial in humans,” he said. “We eagerly await the results of the double-blind studies using Codivir. It may be a breakthrough in the field of antiviral therapy for early COVID-19 patients.”

[Gal220]

You got it!

 

Yes, I posted about this COVID nitric oxide nasal spray here. 

 

The product is called Enovid, made by SaNOtize. One spray bottle costs $45.

 

Nitric oxide (which is a gas) is a broad-spectrum potent antiviral and antibacterial substance secreted by the immune system in order to fight pathogens. In the body, NO is particularly important for fighting pathogens in the nasal and sinus mucous membranes. So this nasal spray augments in the natural NO levels in your nose.

 

The spray resulted in a 20-fold reduction viral RNA after just 24 hours.

 

Thanks Hip

[Hip]

Article about how the anti-vax stance of Tucker Carlson likely played a role in the death of a 45 year old father. The grieving daughter says her father listened to Tucker Carlson videos, and this she felt led to his vaccine hesitancy. Then he caught COVID, and it was too late.

 

Grieving daughter who says Tucker Carlson ‘played a role’ in dad’s vaccine hesitancy before Covid death

 

In the US alone, 15,000 mostly unvaccinated people are dying each month. However, such figures often do not evoke any emotions. But a single story like that does.

 

[Daniel Cooper]

Article about how the anti-vax stance of Tucker Carlson likely played a role in the death of a 45 year old father. The grieving daughter says her father listened to Tucker Carlson videos, and this she felt led to his vaccine hesitancy. Then he caught COVID, and it was too late.

 

Grieving daughter who says Tucker Carlson ‘played a role’ in dad’s vaccine hesitancy before Covid death

 

In the US alone, 15,000 mostly unvaccinated people are dying each month. However, such figures often do not evoke any emotions. But a single story like that does.

 

 

So are you saying that anyone that voices any sort of opinion that is not in line with official government sources are "scum" (your word) and therefore culpable for some percentage of covid deaths?

[Hip]

So are you saying that anyone that voices any sort of opinion that is not in line with official government sources are "scum" (your word) and therefore culpable for some percentage of covid deaths?

 

If you are a major media figure and able to influence millions, and you knowingly promote misinformation or propaganda that brainwashes thousands of susceptible people into doing something which leads to their death, and you do this purely to increase your TV ratings, then you are the most contemptible scum.

 

 

Fox News is run by Australian Rupert Murdoch, who as a result of his global media empire of newspapers and TV, is one of the most powerful men in the world, and has been for the last 50 years. 

 

Murdoch’s cynical formula for Fox News is based on promoting sensationalistic journalism, and fueling aggressive divisions in society, in order to bring in the audiences. He makes tons of money, while society becomes less civilized and roused up to fury. 

 

Fox News viewers probably have no idea that their thoughts and emotions are being toyed and played with by an Australian who is just manipulating people by a cynical money-making media formula that he's used for decades in multiple countries.   

 

Carlson knows that promoting anti-vax propaganda brings in the audiences, and that’s all he cares about. If people die as a result, he is not really concerned, as long as his TV rating remain high.

 

 

 

 

See this article: Fox News Could Be Sued if Its Anti-Vax Statements Caused People to Die

Edited by Hip, 21 September 2021 - 07:17 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

What precisely are his anti-vax statements? Opposing vaccine mandates? Pointing out that vaccines sometimes have side effects? Noting that vaccines aren't 100% effective? Stating that people should be able to choose for themselves whether to get vaccinated?

 

I have no idea what his anti-vax statements are.  Do you?  Primary sources would be useful, i.e. not "Slate says that Tucker Carlson said blah blah blah".

 

And you didn't answer my question - is a person allowed to make statements that are not in agreement with the official government line? 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 21 September 2021 - 07:31 PM.

[DanCG]

What precisely are his anti-vax statements? Opposing vaccine mandates? Pointing out that vaccines sometimes have side effects? Noting that vaccines aren't 100% effective? Stating that people should be able to choose for themselves whether to get vaccinated?

 

I have no idea what his anti-vax statements are.  Do you?  Primary sources would be useful, i.e. not "Slate says that Tucker Carlson said blah blah blah".

 

 

To this I would add,  Did he actually say anything that wasn't true? Did he interview experts who have pointed out the potential downsides of the vaccines over the long hall, like ADE? I too have not idea what his ant-vax statements are.

[Hip]

And you didn't answer my question - is a person allowed to make statements that are not in agreement with the official government line? 

 

The question is rhetorical, as you know very well that people make statements all the time that disagree with or criticize the government, including members of the government themselves.   

 

 

However, if a person or corporate body advises someone and the information or suggestions they give them leads to their death, I am no legal expert, but I think you would be liable for prosecution.

 

Free speech does not mean you can you can do something illegal. If you use your free speech to do something illegal, you can get prosecuted. If you sexually harass someone by your messages on Facebook, for example, you can be prosecuted. You cannot claim free speech allows you to harass people.

 

 

If you were the charismatic leader of a religious cult, and you brainwashed everyone to commit suicide (as happened in the Heaven's Gate cult), then you would also be liable for prosecution.

 

Carlson and the Fox News crew are like charismatic leaders, who brainwash their followers into risky behavior, namely avoiding the COVID vaccine.

 

 

Carlson may be clever enough not make specific statements which can be proven false, but it's his allusions which are the most damaging. He alludes to individual freedoms, and juxtaposes the COVID vaccine in that context.

 

Carlson and Murdoch know that Americans have an obsession with personal freedom, and get paranoid and angry about anything which even hints at taking any form of freedom away. That focus on personal freedom a well-known part of the American DNA, and Murdoch exploits that national characteristic, basically winding up his American viewers, and playing on their paranoias. He's a master manipulator. This is how Murdoch makes money, by finding the raw nerve in any country or society, and then prodding that raw nerve.

 

So by juxtaposing vaccine issues with the issues of personal freedom, Carlson is implicitly saying: "if you get the vaccine, you are surrendering your person freedom". 

 

Of course no intelligent person would believe that, but we know Fox News is not a TV channel for intellects.

 

 

Remember that propaganda works by its emotional impact, not its factual impact. The strong anti-vax propaganda of Fox News works on people's emotions, not their intellect. If you have a good intellect, you will see through the propaganda bullshit.

 

If you don't have much of an intellect, and you are mainly an emotional person, then you are going to be a sucker for the anti-vax propaganda of Fox News. And most of the Fox News audience are these more emotional people.

 

 

It's true that Fox News recently did an about turn, and now they are supporting the vaccine. But I suspect that was just because Fox were worried about the legal repercussions of being so anti-vax. Murdoch is a cynical person, that never does anything for the good of humanity, but only for the good of his media empire.

 

Here is a compilation video of some of the anti-vax propaganda aired on Fox News, including Tucker Carlon's stuff. See from around timecode 1:30.

Edited by Hip, 21 September 2021 - 11:41 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

So once again, opposing vaccine mandates, saying the government has no right to force a person to take a certain medication (what happened to "my body my choice" btw?) those are off limits and only the sort of thing certain "scum" say?  And, it should probably be illegal as well. Or maybe it already is, who knows these days.

 

Lastly, I'll leave you with a thought. Of all the people that covid deaths are being blamed on - Donald Trump, Tucker Carlson, other MAGA hat wearing deplorables, et. al. does it occur to you that one entity is conspicuously absent in the blame game?  Yes ..... China.  Who at best delayed informing the world about the new and deadly virus they had on their hands for a month or two.  At worst, there is a pretty good case to be made that this virus did escape the Wuhan Institute of Virology where they were doing dangerous experiments with modifying bat viruses and running them through humanized mice - exactly the sort of thing that would make a virus like covid-19.

 

But, it's all Tucker Carlson's fault.

 

You know, we in the West used to prize free and open debate.  It was sort of our thing.  Something we were known for. Those days seem long behind us now.  Now we have half of us that want to outright censor any discussion with which they are not in complete agreement.

 

 

 

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 22 September 2021 - 02:03 PM.

[geo12the]

So once again, opposing vaccine mandates, saying the government has no right to force a person to take a certain medication (what happened to "my body my choice" btw?) those are off limits and only the sort of thing certain "scum" say?  And, it should probably be illegal as well. Or maybe it already is, who knows these days.

 

Lastly, I'll leave you with a thought. Of all the people that covid deaths are being blamed on - Donald Trump, Tucker Carlson, other MAGA hat wearing deplorables, et. al. does it occur to you that one entity is conspicuously absent in the blame game?  Yes ..... China.  Who at best delayed informing the world about the new and deadly virus they had on their hands for a month or two.  At worst, there is a pretty good case to be made that this virus did escape the Wuhan Institute of Virology where they were doing dangerous experiments with modifying bat viruses and running them through humanized mice - exactly the sort of thing that would make a virus like covid-19.

 

But, it's all Tucker Carlson's fault.

 

You know, we in the West used to prize free and open debate.  It was sort of our thing.  Something we were known for. Those days seem long behind us now.  Now we have half of us that want to outright censor any discussion with which they are not in complete agreement.

 

Here is the reality: If 100% of people were vaccinated COVID would be much less of a problem: fewer people would get sick, fewer would fill ICUs and fewer would die. I fully believe in free speech and fully believe people can do what they want and fully support peoples rights to contribute positively to Darwinian evolution of the human race. BUT FREE SPEECH WORKS BOTH WAYS. Calling a douchebag like Tucker out, for his douchebagery that encourages people to get sick and die, is free speech too. 

 

Vaccine mandates: They are not actually mandates. If you read them there is a clear exemption for the vast majority of businesses: If you are unvaxed you must be tested once a week. I don't think it's asking too much for people to be tested. That ensures businesses don't spread COVID. 

 

Taken from here:

 

"The expansive rules mandate that all employers with more than 100 workers require them to be vaccinated or test for the virus weekly, affecting about 80 million Americans. And the roughly 17 million workers at health facilities that receive federal Medicare or Medicaid also will have to be fully vaccinated.

 

Biden is also requiring vaccination for employees of the executive branch and contractors who do business with the federal government — with no option to test out. That covers several million more workers."

Edited by geo12the, 22 September 2021 - 02:57 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

Re: Vaccine Mandates - Yes, they really are mandates. I know, technically a company can do weekly testing for workers that don't get vaccinated. But weekly testing is expensive. I know people that have refused to be vaccinated that have been let go before this mandate. Faced with the prospect of doing weekly testing, many companies will simply let these workers go. The weekly testing clause was always a fig leaf to cover the mandate, and a very thin one at that.  I suppose you can say this isn't a mandate, but if you're a worker laid off because you won't get vaccinated and your company isn't interested in the expense of weekly testing this is a distinction without a difference.

 

 

Re: Free speech - I have no issue with anyone "calling out" anyone on either side. That's to be expected in any free and open debate.  What I do have an issue with is comments like Hip's below:

 

If we had closed down the anti-vax movements, curtailing their freedom of speech, 50,000 people would be alive today. Is the death of 50,000 people the price we are happy to pay for the right of charlatan anti-vaxers to have their freedom of expression? 

 

 

I'd like to see the chief anti-vaxers prosecuted for murder at some point. They need to be treated in the same way we treated Nazi war criminals who killed all those people in concentration camps.

 

 

Clearly Hip wants anyone expressing an "anti-vax" position banned from the public square (which is to say all social media) and prosecuted.  He really don't have much respect for his fellow man, or at least his fellow man that makes a decision different than the one he has made.  If someone has decided to reject the vaccine, it can only be because they are stupid or "tricked" by dastardly people like Mr. Carlson.  It can never be because they looked at the facts and came to a conclusion other than his.  

 

Hip's position isn't terribly uncommon in the West these days.  Many of us simply don't have much tolerance for opposing views anymore.

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 22 September 2021 - 04:33 PM.

[Hip]

Lastly, I'll leave you with a thought. Of all the people that covid deaths are being blamed on - Donald Trump, Tucker Carlson, other MAGA hat wearing deplorables, et. al. does it occur to you that one entity is conspicuously absent in the blame game?  Yes ..... China.  Who at best delayed informing the world about the new and deadly virus they had on their hands for a month or two.  At worst, there is a pretty good case to be made that this virus did escape the Wuhan Institute of Virology where they were doing dangerous experiments with modifying bat viruses and running them through humanized mice - exactly the sort of thing that would make a virus like covid-19.
 
But, it's all Tucker Carlson's fault.

 
That train of thought lacks analytical focus. China might be to blame for the pandemic, but the pandemic is with us now, so we have to focus on the present, and on the best way to deal with the present circumstances. 

 

 

 

You know, we in the West used to prize free and open debate.  It was sort of our thing.  Something we were known for. Those days seem long behind us now.  Now we have half of us that want to outright censor any discussion with which they are not in complete agreement.

 

I agree with you that certain aspects of censorship is one factor destroying the quality of debate. But far more toxic to the quality of debate in society is the massive increase in misinformation, fake news and semi-fake news, and conspiracy theories that are constantly injected into the noosphere (noosphere = the sphere of human consciousness and mental activity). And this is why the censorship is occurring: it is a blunt tool that tries to counter the injection of misinformation into the noosphere.

 

Over the last 10 or 20 years, liberal establishment politics is has gone a bit too far to shut down debate on human issues that affect us all. I am also old enough to remember the world back in the 1970s, when the establishment was conservative, and the ruling conservatives of the time also tried to shut down liberate thinking. So both sides are guilty.

 

 

But anyway, there is a difference between human issues of general interest that affect us all, such as, globalization, feminism, transgender issues, wealth inequality, etc, and highly technical subjects such as medicine, or global warming for that matter.

 

The general public are often not able to make good decisions on highly technical subjects, because they do not have the background understanding. And when the general public (especially those with a more limited education or intellect) do try to debate these subjects, they often poison and pervert the debate, due to all the misinformation and conspiracy theories they bring up. 

 

I am all for debate, it is a good thing. But people need to understand the subjects they are debating, otherwise they will pervert the discourse by injecting misinformation, flawed interpretations, and fake news.

 

 

 

Worse still is the problem of people or organizations like Carson, Facebook, and Rupert Murdock (and thousands of minor players with blogs or run websites) who make money by serving up sensationalized news articles, semi-fake news and conspiracy theories. 

 

These people distort sober debate with sensationalism, and they pervert the whole course of debate.

 

It is sad and very unfortunately that sensationalism, semi-fake news and conspiracy theories sell newspaper and get people reading blogs. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Hip, 22 September 2021 - 05:10 PM.

[Hip]

Clearly Hip wants anyone expressing an "anti-vax" position banned from the public square (which is to say all social media) and prosecuted.  He really don't have much respect for his fellow man, or at least his fellow man that makes a decision different than the one he has made.  If someone has decided to reject the vaccine, it can only be because they are stupid or "tricked" by dastardly people like Mr. Carlson.  It can never be because they looked at the facts and came to a conclusion other than his.  

 

I do not want to see a shut down critical debate on the COVID vaccine, or any other medical issues, but want to stop the poisoning and perversion of the debate by extremists who promote conspiracy theories, misinformation and fake news. We need to maintain a high level of quality in the debate; we should not allow into the noosphere people who sensationalize the debate just in order to sell newspapers.

 

 

I have chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), and I know several ME/CFS patients have found their ME/CFS became worse after the COVID vaccine. Many ME/CFS patients are very ill, and some are highly sensitive to things like vaccines, or chemicals in the environment. 

 

So when ME/CFS patients decide whether to get vaccinated or not, it is not an easy decision. I got vaccinated, and had no problem. As did thousands of other ME/CFS patients. But a have seen a few cases where the vaccine caused a few adverse effects.

 

Interestingly, the ME/CFS patients reporting these adverse effects on ME/CFS forums were keen to make it clear that they are not against the COVID vaccine, and that they generally think the vaccine is a good thing. But they are just reporting that they were unlucky, and got adverse effects.

Edited by Hip, 22 September 2021 - 05:11 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

I do not want to see a shut down critical debate on the COVID vaccine, or any other medical issues, but want to stop the poisoning and perversion of the debate by extremists who promote conspiracy theories, misinformation and fake news. We need to maintain a high level of quality in the debate; we should not allow into the noosphere people who sensationalize the debate just in order to sell newspapers.

 

 

The only way you can do what you propose is to put someone in the role of gatekeeper, who's job is to decide what is legitimate debate and what is illegitimate.  And that role will always fall to the powerful and/or the government. 

 

Frankly, I don't want either of those august bodies having the final word on what anyone can and can not say, as they will invariably tilt the table in their favor.

 

You really can't have freedom and "well intentioned censorship". They are just mutually exclusive, no matter how well intentioned.

[Hip]

The only way you can do what you propose is to put someone in the role of gatekeeper, who's job is to decide what is legitimate debate and what is illegitimate.  And that role will always fall to the powerful and/or the government. 

 

In Western liberal democracies, the gatekeeper role tends to fall to newspaper and media owners, rather than the government. And the many journalists who work for the newspaper or TV channel.

 

Ever since the printing press was invented, in the West it has been mainly the owners of newspapers, writers, journalists, book publishers and other media who decide what is legitimate or not. 

 

And with the media, you have newspapers and TV channels of different political persuasion, who are often in opposition to each other, which is good thing, since it distributes power.

 

That's why media moguls like Rupert Murdoch are really more powerful and influential than governments. His power is waning a little bit now, because he is getting older (he is 90), but for the last 50 years, Murdoch has basically chosen which government he wants to see in power in the UK. 

 

Murdoch owns a number of UK newspapers, and used to own the Sky News TV channel, and when he decides to give support to a political party in his newspapers and TV channel, that party usually wins the election. 

 

In the US, Rupert Murdoch supported Trump, and that via Murdoch's media assets, greatly helped build the whole Trump political movement, and was instrumental in Trump winning the election. Murdoch turned against Trump though when Trump went for re-election, which almost certainly caused Trump to lose that election. 

 

 

 

The trouble with Murdoch is that he does not seem to care much for society. His sensationalist news formula was strongly criticized in the UK 50 years ago, because it was dumbing down debate, and making society less civilized. 

 

And Murdoch is a climate change denier, who supports polluting industry.

 

His son James Murdoch however seems like a more responsible person, and more of an idealist. James has criticized media practices, and has criticized his father's approach: James Murdoch criticizes 'media property owners' who have 'unleashed insidious' forces with election denialism claims

 

 

 

The media has been going downhill for years now, because modern media moguls seem to just want to make money and build their audiences, more than they want to promote truthful debate. 

 

The freedom of speech you are supporting, Daniel, are just these modern media moguls who make money from their cynical sensationalist journalism, which prefers fake news over truth, because the former sells more newspapers and brings in the TV audiences.

 

The media moguls are happy for your support, because they are making money out of your desire to maintain what you erroneously believe is freedom of speech. You call it freedom of speech, but the media moguls peddling this stuff know it's really just fake news and sensationalism.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Hip, 22 September 2021 - 07:26 PM.

[Mind]

Not many people are willing to look at the current or historical data, or willfully ignore it. Alex Berenson has followed the data closely and summarizes some of the contradictions in perception and reality.

 

https://alexberenson...rus-gonna-virus

 

Remember when it was predicted that Sweden (and Florida) were going to descend into enormous chaos, death, and misery, because they didn't go into lockdowns, didn't require masks, didn't follow the conventional ("Fauci") advice on stopping COVID?

 

It didn't happen.

 

It just didn't.

 

Florida is gaining population while New York is losing population. If Florida was a "death camp", as was predicted, no one would be moving there.

 

Interesting that China (if you believe their data - I don't), has done an awesome job stopping COVID, even without the mRNA gene therapies.

 

 

[Hip]

Remember when it was predicted that Sweden (and Florida) were going to descend into enormous chaos, death, and misery, because they didn't go into lockdowns, didn't require masks, didn't follow the conventional ("Fauci") advice on stopping COVID?

 

It didn't happen.

 

It did happen. There are a lot more deaths per capita in Sweden which avoided lockdowns, compared to neighbors Norway and Finland which embraced lockdowns.

 

The deaths per million in Sweden are currently 1457, whereas deaths per million in Finland and Norway are 206 and 167 respectively. Ref: here.  

[pamojja]

It did happen. There are a lot more deaths per capita in Sweden which avoided lockdowns, compared to neighbors Norway and Finland which embraced lockdowns.

The deaths per million in Sweden are currently 1457, whereas deaths per million in Finland and Norway are 206 and 167 respectively. Ref: here.

You're still cherry-pickning to fit your narrative? Why you didn't choose to compare to other nordic countries like the UK, even with some Wiking's blood too?

UK wordwide rank: 26 - 2042 deaths per million
Sweden rank: 53 - 1469 deahts per million

https://www.worldome...fo/coronavirus/

Also not to forget Sweden was one of the 10 worst hit countries. I don't think there is any other country which could improve that much its rank. Which to most of us was to be expected: faring much worse in the beginning, but then much better than anyone else in the long-term. Which is what really counts, since quarterly yearly booster shots are simply not sustainable in the long run.

Also recent 7-day average deaths for Sweden is only 1. For the UK its 136 deaths! So Sweden is on its way to improve even further than any who relied on unscientific anti-corona meassures.

But keep on airing your fairy tales..

Edited by pamojja, 25 October 2021 - 09:08 PM.

[geo12the]

Not many people are willing to look at the current or historical data, or willfully ignore it. Alex Berenson has followed the data closely and summarizes some of the contradictions in perception and reality.

 

https://alexberenson...rus-gonna-virus

 

Remember when it was predicted that Sweden (and Florida) 

 

Sweden is a country with a very large area and small population. You can't really use it as proof vaccines don't work. 

[geo12the]

You're still cherry-pickning to fit your narrative? Why you didn't choose to compare to other nordic countries like the UK, even with some Wiking's blood too?

UK wordwide rank: 26 - 2042 deaths per million
Sweden rank: 53 - 1469 deahts per million

https://www.worldome...fo/coronavirus/

Also not to forget Sweden was one of the 10 worst hit countries. I don't think there is any other country which could improve that much its rank. Which to most of us was to be expected: faring much worse in the beginning, but then much better than anyone else in the long-term. Which is what really counts, since quarterly yearly booster shots are simply not sustainable in the long run.

Also recent 7-day average deaths for Sweden is only 1. For the UK its 136 deaths! So Sweden is on its way to improve even further than any who relied on unscientific anti-corona meassures.

But keep on airing your fairy tales..

 

Population of Sweden is 10.4 million. population of UK is 67.2 million. The surface area of Sweden is 173,860 mi². Surface area of UK is 93,628 mi². Human bodies are more concentrated in the UK which means more close contact and more opportunities for infection. The vaccination rates of the two countries are actually quite similar: Sweden 66.1 % fully vaxed, UK 67.8 fully vaxed. So forgive me if I am missing something, what point exactly are you folks trying to make in the UK Sweden comparison? And are you factoring the fact that human bodies are more concentrated in the UK?  

[Hip]

Why you didn't choose to compare to other nordic countries like the UK

 

It is best to compare like with like. That means a similar climate, similar population density, etc. 

 

The UK is one of the most densely populated countries in the world, with 717 people per square mile, whereas the population density in Sweden, Norway and Finland is 57, 43 and 42 people per square mile respectively.

 

When the population is sparse, the virus spreads more slowly, for obvious reasons. 

 

Climate may also affect the pandemic, so it is best to compare to neighboring countries which share the same climate. Sweden, Norway and Finland are much further north than the UK, and have much colder temperatures than the UK.

 

 

 

The UK is not a nordic country by the way.

 

 

Edited by Hip, 25 October 2021 - 11:49 PM.

[Mind]

There is plenty of data and responsible analysis from around the world pointing to the fact that the "deaths from COVID" are wildly over-estimated.

 

Here is more: Big mess in the report on deaths. For the ISS most of the deaths were not caused by Covid – Il Tempo

 

Deaths from COVID in Italy, reduced by 97% when counted accurately.

 

What has happened (as I noted very early in this thread) is that a lot of very old and frail people with co-morbities and near the end of their life, tested positive for COVID, and were erroneously listed as dying of COVID. A perfect example was my uncle. He was 87 and on his death bed in a nursing home. He tested positive for COVID and then was listed as a COVID death - even though the illness was just incidental to his death. When the average age of a victim of COVID from around the world is greater than the average life expectancy, you know it is mostly people who were close to the end of their natural lives and likely had multiple age-related co-morbidities.

 

Why is there such stonewalling on getting an accurate mortality rate?

 

The point about Sweden and Florida IS THE PREDICTIONS. These places were supposed to descend into anarchy, chaos, and mass death - according to "conventional wisdom". IT DIDN"T HAPPEN. These places are functioning just fine. Life goes on in Sweden and Florida. I am tired of people in this forum intentionally mis-representing the argument. I know you are smart enough to understand the point.

[Dorian Grey]

Agree Mind.  The inverse of Florida/Sweden should also be obvious to all.  I'm in San Diego, & during the Winter surge we were locked up tight as a drum.  

 

Restaurants closed...  No indoor or outdoor dining.  Mask mandates everywhere indoors and in San Diego, outdoors.  Stay at home order in effect.  Holiday gatherings strongly discouraged.  We were told two different households could meet outdoors (with masks) to exchange presents, with one person at a time allowed indoors only to use the toilet, which should be disinfected after each use.  

 

What followed in Southern California was the biggest surge of the entire pandemic.  It truly seemed like the end of the world.  Empty streets, sirens blaring, & the numbers just kept getting worse.  

 

All around the world it seems surges come & surges go, and measures to avoid them or even flatten the curve have had little effect.  Wise men will learn from this, fools will continue to believe they can change the course of pandemics at will.  

Edited by Dorian Grey, 04 November 2021 - 03:34 PM.

[Hip]

The point about Sweden and Florida IS THE PREDICTIONS. These places were supposed to descend into anarchy, chaos, and mass death - according to "conventional wisdom". IT DIDN"T HAPPEN. These places are functioning just fine. Life goes on in Sweden and Florida. I am tired of people in this forum intentionally mis-representing the argument. I know you are smart enough to understand the point.

 
I don't think Mind actually reads these threads, or responds to what other people post. But for the benefit of others reading, the predictions about more death in Sweden did manifest. As I pointed out in a post just above, Sweden, which shunned lockdowns, lost 7 to 8 times as many people to COVID (on a per capita basis), compared to its neighbors Norway and Finland, which applied lockdowns.

 
Sweden made a decision to allow life to continue, but there was a cost to that decision. It resulted in more deaths. Even the King of Sweden said that Sweden this. But these are all very hard calls for the government to make. The general public like to play Captain Hindsight, but the reality is these are difficult decisions.