Coronavirus Hoax

Discussion of the recent unfolding of history.

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby MagsJ » Fri Apr 10, 2020 1:20 pm

1800 US deaths in 24 hours, the Nation with the highest death rate.. though check-ins to hospitals have drastically declined.

The EU have put together a half-a-trillion Euro care package, for businesses and workers, but have refused requests from the poorer European countries to share debts incurred equally across the countries.
Last edited by MagsJ on Fri Apr 10, 2020 1:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ

I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Wait, What! - MagsJ


Nobilis Est Ira Leonis | Om Surya Devaay namah | Manus justa nardus
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 19645
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …Surya.. the sun

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Gloominary » Fri Apr 10, 2020 1:22 pm

promethean75 wrote:if any of that is true, i applaud based on how old a particular conspiracy 'plan' is and how well its going. so the question is, is this:

The soft kill is already here, the soft metals and toxins in the air, food, water and vax are here, the 4 and 5G, chemtrails, fluoride, aluminum and mercury in the vax.
2nd and 3rd wave feminism, planned parenthood and the promotion of transsexualism.
Autism rates are skyrocketing, cancer, diabetes, infertility and obesity rates are soaring.


... something that was seen coming by the conspirers long on advance? if so, they get my applause if they planned to do all these things to slow the reproduction rates of human populations. lol i remember reading online somewhere a note or letter supposedly written by an illuminati 'official' that goes on to explain how we should be thankful for what we have because without their control, shit would be far worse. stuff about earth's population being unchecked and left to reproduce disproportionately in favor of more primitive people, bringing up the third world populations. now you either gotta utilze these people and make them productive, or you gotta get rid of them because they become an economic burden. as it stands, and has for hundreds of years, the kind of disparity a global free market creates between the potential productive capacities of a particular population and their actual productive capacities is what puts the full potential of modernization in jeopardy... not only a slowing down of the overall technological advancement of the planet (resources aren't allocated and organized properly because people are in competition for them), but also generating a very exploitative relationship between the underdeveloped countries and the capitalist imperialists that guide their development. in a sense the modernization of those countires is what the capitalist wants to avoid, because with an increase in economic power comes the power to negotiate your prices and demands.

now the illuminati guys see this coming... the knew long in advance the idustrial revolution - the unique way it was - would lead to possible outcome x, and they had to have a plan to resolve outcome x when it happened. late stage capitalism and the systemic conflicts it produces worldwide is this outcome. they see the population explosions and the asymmetrical rates of industrialization all over the world and these niggas know they gotta stop it with the new world order. see they thinking four hundred years at a time, bro. that's what i'm talkin bout... that's impressive, not reprehensible. i applaud that shit.

anyway the illuminati dude went on and on about the great things they've done behind the scenes that if we knew about, we'd by like 'right on, bruh'. i doubt the credibility of the document, but the meaning is not lost on its inauthenticity, be that as it may. we can imagine there being a secret society that the public is mistakenly afraid of... when in fact the secret society is responsible for everything society so appreciates.

you gotta think like one of nietzsche's masters. your business is not always what is 'good' in the marketplace, but what must be done to create a 'good'... in the same way an artist creates a work just because it's difficult, just to see if they can do it. we're looking more at the audacity and nerve before such difficult questions as 'what to do with man', and how amoral one can remain when answering that question.

here masters play with 'ideals' not because they are totally concerned with what is 'the better for man', but because they would be beautiful works of art if realized in practice. the visions alone of socialism and nationalism are two such stimuli for these artist-masters who want to design societies. but whatever the case may be, none of these 'ideals' involve a danger for man the species. there may be some drastic population reduction and radically rearranged governments with new laws and shit, but man will continue to be protected and improved on his way to merging with AI. yeah i said it. man is about to become gah'd.

The deep state cares little for the environment, by far and away they're the biggest consumers and polluters.
They're willing to sacrifice our lives for themselves and maybe, for the environment, but not their own extravagant lives.
If they gave back most of the wealth they stole, if the cost of living was where it should be, we wouldn't have to produce, consume and pollute nearly as much as we do, and many of us wouldn't.

I'm not sure it was necessary to reduce population growth under the guise of progressivism, but even if it was, it's surely unnecessary to reduce the population after its stopped growing or its growth has slowed to a crawl.
Whites and yellows aren't replacing themselves and browns, just barely.
The only population that's exploding right now is African blacks.
But they continue to amplify their depopulation measures all over the world.
They want to get it down to something like a 10th of what it is.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Gloominary » Fri Apr 10, 2020 1:55 pm

"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of."—Edward Bernays, the "father of public relations", writing in his influential 1928 book Propaganda.

Call it what you want, call it the cryptocracy, the deep state, the shadow government, the NWO, the illuminati, whatever's fashionable.
They exist, they've already admitted they exist.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Gloominary » Fri Apr 10, 2020 2:07 pm

This society has been known at various times as Milner's Kindergarten, as the Round Table Group, as the Rhodes crowd, as The Times crowd, as the All Souls group, and as the Cliveden set. ... I have chosen to call it the Milner group. Those persons who have used the other terms, or heard them used, have not generally been aware that all these various terms referred to the same Group...this Group is, as I shall show, one of the most important historical facts of the twentieth century.

This radical Right fairy tale, which is now an accepted folk myth in many groups in America, pictured the recent history of the United States, in regard to domestic reform and in foreign affairs, as a well-organized plot by extreme Left-wing elements ... This myth, like all fables, does in fact have a modicum of truth. There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the Radical right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other group, and frequently does so. I know of the operation of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies... but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known.

Carroll Quigley from Tragedy and Hope.
Last edited by Gloominary on Fri Apr 10, 2020 2:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Gloominary » Fri Apr 10, 2020 2:18 pm

Historian Carroll Quigley affirmed the existence of an Anglo-American deep state, his only objection was they're not exactly communists, altho they'll work with communists and anyone for that matter to achieve, whatever their ends are.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby promethean75 » Fri Apr 10, 2020 2:36 pm

The deep state cares little for the environment, by far and away they're the biggest consumers and polluters.
They're willing to sacrifice our lives for themselves and maybe, for the environment, but not their own extravagant lives.
If they gave back most of the wealth they stole, if the cost of living was where it should be, we wouldn't have to produce, consume and pollute nearly as much as we do, and many of us wouldn't.


i agree with all that but it's overly apologetic and a bit exaggerated. whatever kind of system exists in five hundred years, none of them will include a population of less than five or six billion people... however they are arranged economically. capitalism could expand forever, creating monopolies that are so extensive they look like socialism in a political form. corporatism, essentially, but on much larger scales. governments run like companies... or rather only a few companies that are so powerful they become part of government or all of government. to us this would look like a socialist revolution and in a sense would be. it would mean the superpowers became so powerful that they were able to democratize the means of production and create a socialist state without losing any power. that is to say an abundance of material wealth was able to be 're-distributed' more evenly without it jeopardizing the wealth of the very few corporations responsible for organizing the economy. the system became so rich that it could afford to produce a socialist like government and still profit from it.... a privatized socialist government, as oxymoronic as that sounds.

anyway my point is that however the future will be, there's no real necessity to assume it would have to involve intentional mass exterminations. measures put into place to control populations, yes, but not any deliberate targeting of a population with germ warfare to quickly an succinctly dispose of them. that's really not necessary... and the deepstatists know that. they prefer to not have to do that. they don't wanna do that. they don't have to do that.

you know what it comes down to? real estate. instead of depopulating your planet, you do the simpler thing and expand territory to disperse those populations throughout and make them productive in their respective place.

world government is like a sims game, dude. any kid with a computer could run a country. it's that easy.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2733
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Gloominary » Fri Apr 10, 2020 4:20 pm

promethean75 wrote:
The deep state cares little for the environment, by far and away they're the biggest consumers and polluters.
They're willing to sacrifice our lives for themselves and maybe, for the environment, but not their own extravagant lives.
If they gave back most of the wealth they stole, if the cost of living was where it should be, we wouldn't have to produce, consume and pollute nearly as much as we do, and many of us wouldn't.


i agree with all that but it's overly apologetic and a bit exaggerated. whatever kind of system exists in five hundred years, none of them will include a population of less than five or six billion people... however they are arranged economically. capitalism could expand forever, creating monopolies that are so extensive they look like socialism in a political form. corporatism, essentially, but on much larger scales. governments run like companies... or rather only a few companies that are so powerful they become part of government or all of government. to us this would look like a socialist revolution and in a sense would be.

Corporatism and state capitalism is not socialism, they don't benefit the proletariat.
Corporatist and state capitalist monopolies aren't better than private monopolies, they're worse, for you can't monopolize the economy as effectively without government as you can with it.

It sounds like for you, all government is benign.
It's not.
Just because government gets involved in business, doesn't mean it's looking out for our interests, or even that our interests will be taken care of as a by-product of it looking out for its own.

I'm in favor of a mixed economy.
I think big businesses should be partly or fully nationalized, and socialized, and/or syndicated and/or cooperativized and/or taxed to prop up small businesses and the poor.
But just because government gets involved in the economy, doesn't mean that's what's occurring, instead it can get involved in the economy solely to further its own interests and/or the interests of private corporations.

it would mean the superpowers became so powerful that they were able to democratize the means of production and create a socialist state without losing any power.

For the most part we live in an oligopolic oligarchy, not a democracy.
Nothing's being democratized.

that is to say an abundance of material wealth was able to be 're-distributed' more evenly without it jeopardizing the wealth of the very few corporations responsible for organizing the economy. the system became so rich that it could afford to produce a socialist like government and still profit from it.... a privatized socialist government, as oxymoronic as that sounds.

Yup, an oligarchic government together with a handful of corporations will own most or all things.
We'll be helpless, hapless and dependent on them.
But what's the point of monopolizing the means of production if you're just going to spread the goods around?
No they're only going to give us just enough to pacify us, in exchange for our liberty.
They'll continue replacing as many of us with Ai and machines as they possibly can.
They want a world populated by themselves and machines they have absolute control over, not with us.

anyway my point is that however the future will be, there's no real necessity to assume it would have to involve intentional mass exterminations. measures put into place to control populations, yes, but not any deliberate targeting of a population with germ warfare to quickly an succinctly dispose of them. that's really not necessary... and the deepstatists know that. they prefer to not have to do that. they don't wanna do that. they don't have to do that.

you know what it comes down to? real estate. instead of depopulating your planet, you do the simpler thing and expand territory to disperse those populations throughout and make them productive in their respective place.

world government is like a sims game, dude. any kid with a computer could run a country. it's that easy.

Yup, easy peasy.
Just give government a complete monopoly, and uncle Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and Kim Jong Un will take care of us.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Chakra Superstar » Fri Apr 10, 2020 4:29 pm

Carleas wrote:
Chakra Superstar wrote:I think we can safely assume that this is how coronavirus tests work

If only there were a way to check, we wouldn't have to assume at all!

Ummmm… saying ‘I assume’ in the post above was rhetorical. It's like saying "One can expect...". You've taken my quote out of context to make it appear as something it was not.

Of course, coronavirus tests have threshold and/or additional criteria specifically designed so they only pick up significant amounts of coronavirus DNA. That was my point. Other tests have ways of ignoring insignificant data so I ‘assumed’ (i.e.I expected) coronavirus tests must do the same and your link confirms it.

Rather than waste your time trying to find fault in unimportant minutia, why don’t you find a link that shows us how many deaths the CDC ‘presumed’ to have COVID-19 without even testing (see below). Is it 10% fake? 50% fake? 80% fake? This is not just important; this is fraud and the mockingbird media just parrot these made-up numbers without questioning.

Chakra Superstar wrote:This image below comes from the U.S. CDC website. Look at the asterisk. The asterisk signifies the number of deaths which INCLUDES PEOPLE WHO ARE 'PRESUMED' OF HAVING COVID-19. This is not science; it's a farce.

https://i.ibb.co/JR47Sck/covid-presumed-deaths.jpg
.
User avatar
Chakra Superstar
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1117
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 10:42 am

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Chakra Superstar » Fri Apr 10, 2020 5:15 pm

Utah ICU Nurse of thirty years blows the whistle "COVID-19 is manufactured crisis"


.
User avatar
Chakra Superstar
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1117
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 10:42 am

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Meno_ » Fri Apr 10, 2020 5:34 pm

Chakra Superstar wrote:Utah ICU Nurse of thirty years blows the whistle "COVID-19 is manufactured crisis"


.




The biowarfare angle rather convincing and it is beginning to feel like a cover-up, .

The other angle is that a nuclear war would have been much less preferred for it would have totally destroyed all of humanity .

This hypothesis is more likely then any other, at this point.

The psycho-social angle of viral predominance may be part of the cover.

But why? Perhaps population-control became a necessity, at this critical phase of our evolution.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6435
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Fri Apr 10, 2020 6:52 pm

Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2430
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Gloominary » Fri Apr 10, 2020 10:37 pm

Roman Republic (Latin: Rēs pūblica Rōmāna, Classical Latin: [ˈreːs ˈpuːblɪka roːˈmaːna]) was the era of classical Roman civilization beginning with the overthrow of the Roman Kingdom, traditionally dated to 509 BC, and ending in 27 BC with the establishment of the Roman Empire. It was during this period that Rome's control expanded from the city's immediate surroundings to hegemony over the entire Mediterranean world.
Roman society under the Republic was a cultural mix of Latin, Etruscan, and Greek elements, which is especially visible in the Roman Pantheon. Its political organisation was strongly influenced by the Greek city states of Magna Graecia, with collective and annual magistracies, overseen by a senate.[4] The top magistrates were the two consuls, who had an extensive range of executive, legislative, judicial, military, and religious powers. While there were elections each year, the Republic was not a democracy, but an oligarchy, as a small number of powerful families (called gentes) monopolised the main magistracies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Republic

Gee, where've I heard that before?
Kind of like how a tiny % of powerful families and corporations monopolized our main politicians?
Last edited by Gloominary on Sat Apr 11, 2020 1:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby promethean75 » Fri Apr 10, 2020 11:10 pm

Everything relevant we need to know about all that was already written by your boy Engels. If political participation is determined by your level of wealth, law making in general is going to trend toward the preservation of the wealth in the wealthy families... who are coincidentally the only ones who have a vote. Once private property laws are passed, the next thing to be privatized is industry. Now the wealthy become even more wealthy by buying labor power, and they have an interest in keeping things that way so they can continue to do so.

Yeah oligarchy is as old as the hills and one of the first political systems to have ever existed for groups of people larger than fifteen. It's a quite natural kind of order, though. What makes it obscene nowdays is it's scale. when dudes like bezos are legally amassing all that money while others are struggling with three jobs... that's market oligarchy. It is glaring in a way it never before has. This kind of wealth disparity was unheard of until the medieval era, and even then probably not comparable still.

But oligarchy isn't unnatural or 'wrong' and I've seen strong arguments in its favor. It's just one of the many ways systems can be governed. It's got its own checks and balances like any other.
promethean75
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2733
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:10 pm

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Gloominary » Sat Apr 11, 2020 1:33 am

User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Gloominary » Sat Apr 11, 2020 1:54 am

MagsJ wrote:
Gloominary wrote:
promethean75 wrote:See how the fatalities are disproportionately higher for black folks in three states now? Told ja. This is the next phase. First they drop an indiscriminate virus that kills er'body... then a month later they plant the one that targets black folks. Code name 'negronomicon', and it will bring the end of the negroleolithic era. Blacks folks is fixin to be erased. I hate if for ya, though. Real shit.

Pretty sure African Americans, for whatever reasons, I'm sure it's more than just one, are less healthy and more susceptible to viruses in general.
If the deep state is anti any race in particular, it's anti-white, it's demonstrated that time after time with its anti-white, open borders, pro-diversity policies in white countries, but moreover, the deep state is anti-people in general, well with the exception of the chosen people of course.

I don’t know about Africans, but African-Americans and Caribbeans tend to develop hypertension and diabetes etc., due to poor diet and lifestyle choices. The medication that they’re on to help control their conditions isn’t helping their situation either, and so their weakened systems more easily succumb to toxins and viruses.

Just the internal physiological stress going on inside their bodies is enough to kill them, without the presence of a virus.

Right, I was thinking something along those lines.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Gloominary » Sat Apr 11, 2020 2:27 am



Things are looking grim for Italy.

How much longer will they be made to hold on, and how much longer will they be able and willing to?
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Gloominary » Sat Apr 11, 2020 1:25 pm

Carleas

Urwrong wrote:
Are people dying from Covid-19? yes.

Are people dying from Alcoholism, Accidental Driving, Suicides, Drug Overdoes? Yes.

So what's the difference?

The difference is that an individual can do a lot more on their own to avoid dying of alcoholism, drug overdose, or suicide, and even driving. To avoid dying of a pandemic takes broader cooperation.

Really?
For the most part, Covid can only affect vulnerable populations (old people with one or more morbidities), but vehicular accidents can affect us all.
If you want to avoid contracting Covid, either stay home alone, or wear a mask, hell wear a gas mask and gloves when venturing out in public.
It may not be socially acceptable, but so what?
Only shop for essentials and sanitize anything you take home with you.
That way you have next to no chance of contracting it until a vaccine becomes available, if you believe in vaccines.
But there's nothing you can equip your vehicle with or wear that'll fully protect you from an accident, not even close.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Gloominary » Sat Apr 11, 2020 3:26 pm

It's funny how libs seem more likely to believe in authoritarian and mainstream science than conservatives, but was it always like that?
Back in the day, a lot of hippies and new agers were into whole foods, supplements, herbalism, crystals and so on.
It seems like conservatives have become more libertarian and antiestablishment in general these days than libs.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby phyllo » Sat Apr 11, 2020 3:32 pm

Gloominary wrote:It's funny how libs seem more likely to believe in authoritarian and mainstream science than conservatives, but was it always like that?
Back in the day, a lot of hippies and new agers were into whole foods, supplements, herbalism, crystals and so on.
It seems like conservatives have become more libertarian and antiestablishment in general these days than libs.
How does "authoritarian and mainstream" map to "correct/incorrect" or "true/false"?
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 11864
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Sat Apr 11, 2020 3:36 pm

Gloominary wrote:It's funny how libs seem more likely to believe in authoritarian and mainstream science than conservatives, but was it always like that?
Back in the day, a lot of hippies and new agers were into whole foods, supplements, herbalism, crystals and so on.
It seems like conservatives have become more libertarian and antiestablishment in general these days than libs.
This is very hard for me to judge, but I think it depends on the issue to some degree. IOW the Left as a whole, I think, is much more comfortable seeing conspiracies and abuse in the private sector. The Right with government. I can't remember what the issue was...something to do with government restricting alternative health products, herbal, etc. And this wonderful collaboration developed between people from both sides and some from extremely distant positions on the political spectrum. I noticed a bit of this around Trump/Sanders followers, where there was some grudging respect for what were being treated as the other teams out of the box candidate.

I still see rebellious and critical factions on both sides, but it seems like the possibilities for odd bedfellow coalitions is disappearing. Everything is so binary these days.

I don't think the Left wants to notice just how influencable he products of research are, because then, for them, everything becomes religion and we can't count on experts.

Well, that's where we are. Just because it is science doesnt' mean that the technology is a good one. Just because the data seems to indicate X, this doesn't mean that there wasn't undue influence by power brokers.

I've come from the left into a place where I can't really tell anyone what I believe, the range of beliefs, or I'll be seen as evil/mad by everyone,

OH, as an aside, a lot of the new agers were de facto right wing and still are.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Carleas » Sat Apr 11, 2020 3:55 pm

Karpel Tunnel wrote:No, this is incorrect. A fever is part of the body's attack on the infection/virus. Even a well educated person like you is under this misconception. Viruses and bacteria do not like the higher temperaures. Of course this is not enough, it is just part of the bodies response to the intrusion.

I have some nits here, but I basically concede this point. I thought fever was more harmful than it is. In my defense, it does seem to be more harmful in children, and that's the context of every fever I've seen in the last 4 years, and I let that influence my thoughts about fever more generally. Thanks for letting me know.

Nits:
- I think you are right that I overestimate the harmfulness of fever, but I still think the cost of fever is not zero. If we're using an evolutionary approach, we should expect fever to be sub-optimal, otherwise why not always run hotter? Why not vary temperatures more frequently, as other organisms do? Partly I'm sure it's that warmer temperatures are more expensive metabolically, but varying temperatures would be an efficient way to do that if a higher temperature had no other costs, and in some cases it might be metabolically cheaper to run hot, e.g. less need to sweat. Maintaining a narrow band of temperature as we do is itself fairly metabolically expensive, from which I conclude that leaving the normal temperature range is costly in some way that it's been disfavored by evolution.

- That fevers helped in the evolutionary context might not mean much to their usefulness against modern diseases. For example, SARS-CoV-19 appears to have come from bats, who regularly have 100-105 degree body temperatures. A virus evolved to survive in that organism might actually prefer a feverish human to a non-feverish human. That's speculation, but the point is this: an immune response evolved in an African ape might not be well-suited to a disease evolved in Asian bats.

- It doesn't appear that fever reducers have a significant negative effect on health or recovery either, which may support the second point above (if modern diseases aren't affected by fever), or may support the first (if there are costs that sometimes outweigh the benefits).

- Fevers do get dangerous around 104+, and COVID fevers can be in that range. If you have COVID, you may still be well-served to take fever reducers.

Karpel Tunnel wrote:Amazon? What is it up to 17 newly unemployed in the US so far. Thousands of businesses going down. I am not saying the whole shabang collapsed instantly, but the changes made early will have unfolding causes that are a breakdown.

I do think this is what I've been calling "an inflection point in history", and I think the world will be permanently changed by this. But I think it's easy to overestimate the extent of that change. I can't endorse a picture of total breakdown when I can have almost anything delivered to my house in a few days. That takes a huge supply chain that is still functioning, relying on laws and labor and institutions that all roughly equate to 'society'.

There are definitely many areas where things aren't functioning so well, but I still think those are marginal. Restaurants and local shops have very high turnover in good times, those industries will rebound once lockdown ends, even if none of the current businesses survive.

Karpel Tunnel wrote:They will change the way governments have a role in society on the economic side and probably in terms of law enforcement, monitoring the public.

Definitely, but government has been changing so fast the past few years I have trouble separating some of the darker trends into COVID-related and right-nationalism-related.

But I think the biggest thing that COVID will do for government is increase uncertainty. The probability of an authoritarian turn as a result of the crisis has increased, but so has the probability of a significant safety-net socialist turn. Even in the Trump era, prior to the pandemic the space of future possibility was pretty tightly contained. Now it is much less so. Social inertia matters a lot, and lockdown will break a lot of inertia and free/force a lot of people to pick a new direction.

Karpel Tunnel wrote:I have been repeatedly stunned by what well educated people think 'and knew' thorugh the media. And then stunned by holes in the information and presentation of information by governments and agencies.

I think uncertainty explains this too. Decision-makers often have less uncertainty than the general public (although increasingly less so as information proliferates), but even where they do, there is still substantial uncertainty. We don't know what will work. If COVID regularly produces a 105+ degree fever, then acetaminophen is a good recommendation; if the risk of mask shortages is greater than the risk posed by people not wearing masks, then telling people not to buy and wear masks is a good call; if 3 million people will die otherwise, then a lockdown that causes a depression might be a good idea. But all of those are based on future projections that can't be certain, and as facts are revealed previous decisions can look stunningly foolish.

Urwrongx1000 wrote:No, Carleas, the death rate is very LOW.

Citation needed. What death rate are you talking about, CFR or estimated fatality per infection? And when you say it's very low, is that relative to seasonal flu, or to ebola?

MagsJ wrote:I don’t know about Africans, but African-Americans and Caribbeans tend to develop hypertension and diabetes etc., due to poor diet and lifestyle choices.

It has been suggested that those diseases can be partly explained by the evolutionary bottleneck of slave ships: the arduous journey tended to select for people who retain salt, which in their descendants looks like hypertension. I think we could tell a similar story about diabetes, which from my limited understanding involves a decrease in sugar metabolization, which might help ration energy during starvation.

Chakra Superstar wrote:Is it 10% fake?

So your "assume" is about expectation, while CDC's "presume" is just fake? It sounds like maybe you've taken [their] quote out of context to make it appear as something it was not.

Gloominary wrote:Really?

First, note that you're giving up 2/3s of your objection here. You implicitly acknowledge that alcoholism and suicide are bad comparisons.

Gloominary wrote:For the most part, Covid can only affect vulnerable populations

Again, this isn't true. COVID presents serious symptoms in all age groups and has a mortality rate as high or higher than flu for the least affected demographics, and orders of magnitude for those in mid-life on. Mid-life, not moribund.

Gloominary wrote:But there's nothing you can equip your vehicle with or wear that'll fully protect you from an accident, not even close.

The word "fully" is doing all the work here. You can pick a safer car, you can drive slower, you can wear your seatbelt, you can buy a white car or other high-visibility color, etc. All those individual choices will decrease individual risks.

But it's true that there is a large residue of risk that can only be addressed through collective action. We could restrict driving to those who can prove that they are capable of driving safely, require registration of every car on the road, and have police patrol the roads to make sure that cars are registered and drivers are driving safely. We can forbid driving in lots of places, and limit it to certain speeds or directions in others. We can and do take a lot of steps that significantly reduce the danger posed by driving. Indeed, we've continuously improved vehicle safety and regulations to reduce the death rate, and the rate has fallen dramatically in terms of population and miles traveled. The current death total is about 40k/year, lower than expected deaths from COVID. (Also, speculative, but I still think driving is going to be functionally illegal in a generation once automated alternatives mature)

On the other side, eliminating all driving would be much worse for the economy than the current lockdown is.

To sum up, driving an example of an activity that produces fewer deaths, would cost more to ban, and that we're already taking significant collective action to make safer. What is your point?
User Control Panel > Board preference > Edit display options > Display signatures: No.
Carleas
Magister Ludi
 
Posts: 6084
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 8:10 pm
Location: Washington DC, USA

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Sat Apr 11, 2020 4:16 pm

Carleas wrote:I have some nits here, but I basically concede this point. I thought fever was more harmful than it is. In my defense, it does seem to be more harmful in children, and that's the context of every fever I've seen in the last 4 years, and I let that influence my thoughts about fever more generally. Thanks for letting me know.
Kids are still ok up to 103, 104. F. IOW immediately reducing fevers and muscle discomfort in children is still bad treatment. It comes from kindness, but it is actually wrong.

Nits:
- I think you are right that I overestimate the harmfulness of fever, but I still think the cost of fever is not zero. If we're using an evolutionary approach, we should expect fever to be sub-optimal, otherwise why not always run hotter? Why not vary temperatures more frequently, as other organisms do? Partly I'm sure it's that warmer temperatures are more expensive metabolically, but varying temperatures would be an efficient way to do that if a higher temperature had no other costs, and in some cases it might be metabolically cheaper to run hot, e.g. less need to sweat. Maintaining a narrow band of temperature as we do is itself fairly metabolically expensive, from which I conclude that leaving the normal temperature range is costly in some way that it's been disfavored by evolution.
Which is why we lie around. I am not suggesting that fevers are a good strategy in general. And if we had a higher body temperature than viruses and bacteria would have likely evolved to thrive at slightly higher temperatures. We are tired, usually when sick, and even more often when there is a fever, because our bodies are engaged in an activity. Fighting an intruder. It's not good to fill your stomach with stomach acids all the time, but it is good to do it when you have food there. This no doubt creates energetic and nutritional costs, but it's what we do when we have food in there. I suppose what I am saying is that while I don't think I have denied there is a cost, we spend that 'money' for a reason. And inhibiting that reason needs good justification. And while eating and stomach acids are everyday, and diseases are more exceptional, the immune system is running all the time and it has a cost, all the time. We'd probably need less nutrition and could use energy for other things if we had no immune system running at all. So, there's always cost and benefits. I can't think of a reason not to spend or consider something is negive if you are fighting a virus and it fights the virus. If it gets too high, fine. Though I would recommend lowering fevers in other ways. A doctor actually made a house call when I had a fever over 106 as a kid. He rubbed me with alcohol. My fever dropped and I felt better. And while this may have made me a safer environment for the virus, it did not, like those medicines inhibit other parts of my immune response.

Having a big brain has a cost. Having children that have less built in knowledge, more plastic brains and greater dependence than other animal babies also has a cost.

In this case we have a cost that has survived natural selection culling.

Of course in individual cases and reactions we may be quite right to override what is a generalized benefit of evolution. But as a rule, no. And it looked lke the public had a rule. There was no general warning the corona was killing people with fevers. Those people were ready to make themselves feel better.

- That fevers helped in the evolutionary context might not mean much to their usefulness against modern diseases. For example, SARS-CoV-19 appears to have come from bats, who regularly have 100-105 degree body temperatures. A virus evolved to survive in that organism might actually prefer a feverish human to a non-feverish human. That's speculation, but the point is this: an immune response evolved in an African ape might not be well-suited to a disease evolved in Asian bats.
Bats get higher body temperatures when they fly, and when they fly the body temperature goes up into our fever range. I don't know what that would mean in terms of what an effective virus would be. Me, I wouldn't wanna fly if I had the flu. I certainly don't want to run.

https://www.livescience.com/44870-bats- ... light.html

So, we'd have to know a lot more. While it is possible that a disease is not helped by a fever or even the fever helps the disease, this is generally not the case. And again, better ways to lower body temperature exist. You can start just with how you dress, the temperature of the liquids you drink, to luke warm washes, to cool washes and more. And then there's things like Yarrow tea which is antiviral and lowers fevers. But that's getting into a whole nother ball of wax.

If it's true that recent viruses have origins in bats and we do better without fevers, it is weird that NO one has said this to us. And while the only study I read during the Covid period said that young men did worse if they took these over the counter drugs, older viruses, given the amount of people taking them, should have produced enough data to at least mention this. I feel like this is stretching.

- It doesn't appear that fever reducers have a significant negative effect on health or recovery either, which may support the second point above (if modern diseases aren't affected by fever), or may support the first (if there are costs that sometimes outweigh the benefits).
I am not sure how you know this. I also can't see how something that inhibits immune response, such as in the creation of antibodies, would be a good idea. And the WHO seems to share this concern.

- Fevers do get dangerous around 104+, and COVID fevers can be in that range. If you have COVID, you may still be well-served to take fever reducers.
[/quote]Carelas, come on. They could have told us: take a fever reducer when your fever hits ________. I did not get a fever that high. I was around 102. There would be no good reason for me to take a fever reducer. People will take them for muscle aches. Covid has caused pretty much every level of fever from nearly nothing to danger levels. I never said no one should break their fevers. I am pretty sure from the beginning I have been saying do it when the fever is dangerous.

The current policy was primarily, by governments, to be silent on the issue, despite all sorts of evidence that these pills were not helpful in cases of non-dangerous fevers, and likely negatively affecting the immune system. Alternative treatments, including ones that have no negative side effects, like garlic pills, they did take a moment to criticize. Even though there is evidence that the latter might help and there is absolutely no evidence despite decades of widespread use that the former fight viruses.
Last edited by Karpel Tunnel on Sat Apr 11, 2020 8:39 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Urwrongx1000 » Sat Apr 11, 2020 6:32 pm

Carleas wrote:Citation needed. What death rate are you talking about, CFR or estimated fatality per infection? And when you say it's very low, is that relative to seasonal flu, or to ebola?

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CH ... ent=psy-ab

19,602 US deaths as of April 11th.

That's nothing, a drop in the bucket. Go ahead and compare it to seasonal flu, car accidents, alcoholism, lung cancer.


Now, this is the point that you should admit you're wrong, and admit to the hoax, scam, lie, that has and is destroying 4 years of economic growth. THAT is the real damage and crime here. THAT is what we should be "panicking" about. We should also be "panicking" about how this fakeness and hysteria, has cost people their jobs, cost the credibility of Mass Media Mob (liars), and will further handicap the next generation of US citizens.
Urwrongx1000
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2430
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 5:10 pm

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby Gloominary » Sat Apr 11, 2020 6:34 pm

The Pagan world was about dignity, honor and virtue.
The Christian world was about goodness, holiness and righteousness.
The old world was about spiritual, supernatural religion and ethics, morality, whereas the new world is about material, natural religion and, health.
Incrementally we partly got away from ethics and morality, first with libertarianism (don't tread on me), then with progressivism (don't hate), along with absurdism, existentialism and nihilism.
We no longer measure people by how good they are, so much as by how sick they are.

What's the difference between goodness and health?
Goodness is more intangible, it's about how we treat others and ourselves, whereas health is more tangible, it's about the condition or state of our bodies, minds and the environment.

I foresee a new authoritarianism emerging, where the sick are forcibly quarantined, treated or terminated, either for their own sake, or for the sake of keeping their sickness and its deleterious effects from spreading.
Where doctors and psychiatrists are the new priests.
Where they're given the power to forcibly test, quarantine and treat us for an increasingly long list of illnesses both real, and imagined.
Where the world becomes one big clinic, hospital and insane asylum.
The asylum, clinic and hospital won't be something you visit in an emergency or on occasion.
It'll be all around you, inescapable, varying degrees of it everywhere.
The beginning of a brand new society, not based on traditional religion, or an ideology, but on psychiatry and science itself.
Psychiatric and scientific medicine will be the new ideology.
They will force us to be hygienic, sanitary, to take our antibiotics, drugs and vaccines, to only think sane, rational thoughts, to only feel sane, rational feelings.

And along with medical tyranny, environmental tyranny will accelerate, and the nanny state; no guns, wear your seatbelt, etcetera.
There will be new environmental hoaxes in addition to climate change.
There'll be geological change, oceanic change, all manner of manmade changes.
Earthquakes are our fault, we need to reduce inessential driving, walking, hopping, skipping and jumping to stop the earth from shaking.
Tornadoes are our fault, we need to eliminate inessential flapping, fluttering and flying.
Tsunamis are our fault, we need to eliminate inessential boating and swimming.
They'll get involved in every detail of our physical, mental and environmental health and safety.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: Coronavirus Hoax

Postby MagsJ » Sat Apr 11, 2020 7:47 pm

Carleas wrote:
MagsJ wrote:I don’t know about Africans, but African-Americans and Caribbeans tend to develop hypertension and diabetes etc., due to poor diet and lifestyle choices.

It has been suggested that those diseases can be partly explained by the evolutionary bottleneck of slave ships: the arduous journey tended to select for people who retain salt, which in their descendants looks like hypertension. I think we could tell a similar story about diabetes, which from my limited understanding involves a decrease in sugar metabolization, which might help ration energy during starvation.

Suggested by whom?

How does this.. suggestion, account for many more numerous cases of diabetes and hypertension within Caucasian peoples? as well as a rise in cancer and so many more other ‘modern’ illnesses..
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ

I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Wait, What! - MagsJ


Nobilis Est Ira Leonis | Om Surya Devaay namah | Manus justa nardus
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 19645
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …Surya.. the sun

PreviousNext

Return to Current Events



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users