All these factors may indeed play a part in a given epidemic, but I don’t know how we could possibly have amassed enough solid data yet in this one to assess the contribution of each. I still think the 80% figure is someone’s estimate; I don’t believe it’s actually been demonstrated. If that percentage were to be verified, that would indeed be good news. The BMJ article and the Oxford article posted up-thread have some illuminating comments to make.
It's over - Ivor Cummins discusses the data (Let's stick with COVID) - this title got UNfiddled
gabe
(Gabe “No Dogma, Only Science Please!” )
#143
Right, it’s not a given outcome, but it looks likely. If we find ourselves disappointed after a couple of the early hopefuls report soon, then I think that may change policy. In the meantime, it seems clear that the authorities in NZ, Australia, China, Taiwan and a handful of other countries that have controlled the virus are waiting for at least some vaccines to get through Phase 3 trials.
That’s exactly what is being argued here by the covid deniers! Unless there is some other way to read their arguments.
FrankoBear
#144
Gabe, Just checking in. Am I classified in the Covid denier group? Or is it a self association option (like the unAustralia movement)?
I have to agree with @Madeleine, you appear to have large leaps in thinking. Maybe, you enjoy the role as provocateur? That’s fine as well, as you get us thinking and replying.
There are (grey) areas in between those dichotomous determined leaps of thought that could be examined. So, I think the exactitude of what is being argued may have more breath and breadth, for the beauty and opportunity to enable more points of view in the discussion.
Madeleine
#145
There are many ways, but one must be willing to listen. (Though if you’re referring to anyone on this thread as COVID denier, then I’m not sure what we’re talking about anymore. I haven’t seen any deniers on here.)
Madeleine
#146
oh dear - I think I was half expecting a response like this. No, I don’t need to look up TB deaths in the first world countries but I would urge anyone who has a similar response to question their use of “global” and “worldwide” and the accompanying righteous indignation about the scale of COVID’s death toll.
MG1
(Mg )
#147
Read it all… I prefer kindness. 
Shrug
Great points you make. I’m more afraid of dying from the flu. 99.8 percent.
CDC is now even finally posting facts.
It’ll ALL disappear after the first Tuesday in November. Wink wink
petert
(Peter)
#148
“Denier” is a stupidly emotive term phrased deliberately unhelpfully/emotionally, but anyway…
barns
(John)
#149
Sorry Paul but yes there are some people that think its a hoax but I think its unfair to put most conservatives in that pool. I am from the central valley cali that is mostly conservative. That being said most people i am around that are conservative agree that the climate is changing. The question is why and thats where the difference comes in. Didn’t want to change topics but I see these kinds of claims alot and its just not a fair statement.
anon81060937
#151
There’s some but yes it’s more like covid rip the band-aid fast and overwhelm the hospitals or covid rip the band-aid slow so the hospitals aren’t overwhelmed. @SomeGuy said something along these lines a while ago.
SomeGuy
(Joey)
#152
I kinda’ recall saying something like that. All things in due course… but nothing mixes pain and pleasure quite like ripping off a band-aid, eh? 
PaulL
(Bacon is a many-splendoured thing)
#153
I’m relieved to know that not everyone in the party thinks so; this may mean there’s hope yet. I was beginning to fear for the future of the nation, given the way my relatives all think.
gabe
(Gabe “No Dogma, Only Science Please!” )
#154
Yes it’s hard to deny the climate is changing when your whole state is on fire, and fire season now lasts about 11 and a half months a year, and the firemen are petrified at what each new year will bring.
Huge coincidence that global average temperatures are asymptomatic, trending higher than they’ve been since before civilization, right at the peak of human-induced GHG emissions — must be natural causes! Nothing to see here, we should keep burning fossilized dinosaurs and dumping it in the atmosphere!
It’s interesting hearing how the discourse changes when certain facts become undeniable. The carbon mafia has practiced this art of obfuscation for decades. They learned well from the tobacco industry.
anon81060937
#156
@gabe
More like animals are enslaved and can’t do what they’re meant to do.
Excellent film. Highly recommend it.
gabe
(Gabe “No Dogma, Only Science Please!” )
#157
Look, I respect your right to hold this view, but I want to make clear that I do regard the view that COVID is definitely a so-called “casedemic” and that restrictions have been exaggerated to be on a par with:
- climate denial (which means denying the overwhelming scientific consensus, that the planet is heating up and it’s due to human GHG emissions)
- 9/11 truthers
- other forms of historical denial
I am genuinely sorry if this offends people, just as I was genuinely sorry to try to disabuse people of their notion that fat calories can’t make you fat and that calories don’t count. People were so convinced of their belief that calories don’t count that they were prepared to ignore video from Dr Eric Westman himself saying precisely the opposite.
In the same way, no matter what anyone says, people will deny that Covid remains a serious pandemic. That’s fine, but I regard it as denial, and I am rather certain I speak for many people around here who care about, you know, science and facts. Not just paying lip service to science and facts.
Totally worth it. The Institute of Public Affairs is an ultraconservative outlet that lacks much credibility in Australia. Moreover, the argument is problematic; you can’t compare Australia’s GDP in 2020 with govt restrictions to a hypothetical Australia without Covid and without govt restrictions.
The correct comparison is between Australia 2020 with Covid with govt restrictions and Australia 2020 with Covid running rampant.
As we see in Sweden, when Covid runs rampant, it doesn’t matter how light the restrictions are. Your GDP will suffer. People don’t want to go out, they don’t want to go to restaurants, they don’t buy stuff. They stay home.
Turns out, the governments that have best protected their population from the virus have also tended to fare the least worst in 2020. Look at Taiwan, for instance.
I expect that, when there is a reckoning, Australia’s and New Zealand’s responses will be regarded as world’s best practice, after Taiwan’s superb gold standard response of course.
I don’t think this thread has drifted off topic, nor has it descended into acrimony. I think this is a worthwhile and reasonable and polite (if contentious) discussion. I think the moderators have done a great job, and I’ve never seen a thread locked just because a few comments have been made about relevant adjacent subjects.
KetoRocks
#159
Thanks Gabe.
Personally I am horrified at the blase dismissal of the need to address the infectivity and rapid transmission of this virus, which has killed so many people, many of whom are doctors and nurses treating those who are sick.
Reading this thread I find horrifying. Metabolically unhealthy people are at risk…diabetes 2 is a comorbidity…this is a forum for people to be informed about a way to address that problem but we are alright because we are metabolically healthy now seems to be the underlying attitude of some. Otherwise I cant make sense of the blase claims that Ivor is right…
I live next door on one side to an 85yo and an 88yo who are both incredibly vulnerable and adorable. They have a great life and don’t want to die sooner than necessary, like everyone else I know. On the other side a male gay couple, one Irish one English, both of whom have impaired immunity. And I am diabetic, whilst having a healthy HbA1c I have underlying metabolic problems, which is why I am here. We all have co-morbidities. Listening to Ivor’s broadcasts gives me the impression that we are all dispensible in the way he is interpreting “data”…why is that okay?
Indeed.
gabe
(Gabe “No Dogma, Only Science Please!” )
#160
We are on topic. We are talking about so-called keto “experts” who are spreading misinformation about Covid. Very much on topic!
barns
(John)
#163
Yes there are a few things going on for sure. Is the climate changing? There isn’t much doubt about it. The question is what do we do about it? The answer is the hard part because just like you can’t deny that the climate is changing you also can’t deny that the fires in California are not impacted by the lack of forest management on top of the climate change. We have always had fires in California most of them are created by man. The difference is the intensity of the fire. One of the things I have noticed having been in the mountains all over California and not just hearing things on the news is that there are places that 30 years ago you could hike around and now they are so overgrown that it really doesn’t surprise me that when there is a fire it gets as bad as it does. I also know that drought isn’t a stranger to California so the fires can’t be fully blamed on climate change either. Unfortunately everyone is just picking a side and not willing to agree that both sides are right to some degree. Work with each other and not against