The Folly of Pandemic Censorship (1 Viewer)

[Joe Mammy]

 All I've asked for all along is full disclosure of all Covid information - whether vax or non-vax, prophylactic or therapeutic. That's what this thread is all about.

Wow. Learn something new everyday.

 

[James Daulton]

This is disingenuous fear-mongering. Yeah, less extrapolate the first year of the disease (before vaccines and therapeutics) into perpetuity. 

And before you go there, I'm not anti-vax. I've said many times, those who are very old, have comorbidities, weight issues and/or simply feel the risk/reward for their own personal situation is tilted toward getting jabbed should absolutely do so. All I've asked for all along is full disclosure of all Covid information - whether vax or non-vax, prophylactic or therapeutic. That's what this thread is all about.

Your continued personal attacks against me and others reveals not only your character, but also your lack of ability to make a fully-compelling argument. You are one of many on this board who do that. But it's all good. Keep doing it. Keep showing us who you are and how you operate. I can tell you my interactions with the many versions of you on this board have been reciprocally annoying, but they've also been a fantastic lens into how your side thinks and how to address the fallacies and tactics you guys repeatedly utilize when engaging about these topics. It's helped me TREMENDOUSLY when dealing with real-life versions of you the last 12+ months. For that I thank you and (much) moreso @Joe Bryant and Football Guys for providing this open platform for debate.

Long live discussion, discourse and debate in our beautiful, if sometimes ugly, country. #### censorship.

Um, we've had 500k extra folks die for two years straight.  The second year with vaccines.  The facts are that if our country was 100% vaxxed, a small percentage of those folks would have died from Covid in 2021.

And I'm not personally attacking you.  You site terrible science and you glom onto any anti-vax talking point you can to push your agenda.  I work for a major hospital system.  We have seen ZERO negative effects attributable to the vaccine.  I'm not saying none have been harmed by the vaxx but it's far closer to zero than tens of thousands. 

 

[2Squirrels1Nut]

Yeah this thread reminds me of a meme going around facebook where it says the following: 

Speaker: 2000 miles isn't that much honestly, I could drive that in a day. 

Math guy: If you drove a steady 75 mph all day without stopping or slowing it would take you more than 26 hours or more than a day. 

Speaker: Well let's assuming you're correct let's suppose I didn't sleep giving me more time in the day, then I could make it. What are your sources for your data points? 

Math guy: 2000/75 = 26.666667.  It's called math. 

Speaker: well i'm not sure I agree but okay. 

__________________________________

Sigh. Yes, this is very clearly not a First Amendment issue. That's legal fact. But, sure, let's use big words like oligopoly, esoteric, spirit of, etc. to just simply ignore this fact.  

"Walter, this is not a First Amendment thing, man." 

I admit that I was tricked into thinking this was a legitimate discussion. I wish there was a way to delete my posts so it wasn't starred any longer. 

 

[LawFitz]

Um, we've had 500k extra folks die for two years straight.  The second year with vaccines.  The facts are that if our country was 100% vaxxed, a small percentage of those folks would have died from Covid in 2021.

And I'm not personally attacking you.  You site terrible science and you glom onto any anti-vax talking point you can to push your agenda.  I work for a major hospital system.  We have seen ZERO negative effects attributable to the vaccine.  I'm not saying none have been harmed by the vaxx but it's far closer to zero than tens of thousands. 

My agenda? My agenda is open and honest dialogue and full information. My agenda is allowing people informed consent. 

ZERO negative effects is easy to say when doctors are either brainwashed into or in many reported cases explicitly told not to attribute the negative effects to the vaccines. The fact that you are making that claim shows your bias.

And please tell me, what % of the 1 MM deaths were people who were either A. >75 yrs old and/or B. obese? How many would've died anyway within 12-36 mos. of their unfortunate Covid-related (but not necessarily caused) demise? BY FAR, the vast majority are pull-forward deaths. You know this, but conveniently exclude it from your analysis. 

And then tell me how many of the above were vitamin D deficient at time of death. And how many received early treatment protocols including Zinc, Zinc ionophores, D, C, Ivermectin and anti-bacterials? How many were told IVM is harmful? How many were told to go home and not come back until they were ready for the ventilator?!?

Do whatever you want and think, until you start to threaten the freedoms that made Western society great. That is what you are doing and you are using fear-mongering and selective statistics to do it. Do you know how much it costs to run a statistically significant double-blind study? Only govts and financially motivated institutions have the capacity to fund those studies. What could go wrong there? How about all the pre-Covid examples of what did go wrong?

How many times has your vax-worshipping side lied to use already?!? Hydroxychloroquine is dangerous. Bull####. Ivermectin is dangerous. Bull####. Vaccines prevent the spread. Bull####. Unvaxxed cause mutations. Bull####. The list goes on and on in just the last 18 months alone!

Thankfully, we still live in a society where voices that counter-balance your authoritarian, fear-mongering bull#### are allowed to exist - even if not on YouTube, Twitter, Facebook.

 

[James Daulton]

My agenda? My agenda is open and honest dialogue and full information. My agenda is allowing people informed consent. 

ZERO negative effects is easy to say when doctors are either brainwashed into or in many reported cases explicitly told not to attribute the negative effects to the vaccines. The fact that you are making that claim shows your bias.

And please tell me, what % of the 1 MM deaths were people who were either A. >75 yrs old and/or B. obese? How many would've died anyway within 12-36 mos. of their unfortunate Covid-related (but not necessarily caused) demise? BY FAR, the vast majority are pull-forward deaths. You know this, but conveniently exclude it from your analysis. 

And then tell me how many of the above were vitamin D deficient at time of death. And how many received early treatment protocols including Zinc, Zinc ionophores, D, C, Ivermectin and anti-bacterials? How many were told IVM is harmful? How many were told to go home and not come back until they were ready for the ventilator?!?

Do whatever you want and think, until you start to threaten the freedoms that made Western society great. That is what you are doing and you are using fear-mongering and selective statistics to do it. Do you know how much it costs to run a statistically significant double-blind study? Only govts and financially motivated institutions have the capacity to fund those studies. What could go wrong there? How about all the pre-Covid examples of what did go wrong?

How many times has your vax-worshipping side lied to use already?!? Hydroxychloroquine is dangerous. Bull####. Ivermectin is dangerous. Bull####. Vaccines prevent the spread. Bull####. Unvaxxed cause mutations. Bull####. The list goes on and on in just the last 18 months alone!

Thankfully, we still live in a society where voices that counter-balance your authoritarian, fear-mongering bull#### are allowed to exist - even if not on YouTube, Twitter, Facebook.

What you don't seem to understand is that all of your points fall apart unless you believe in some massive conspiracy with doctors, the government, experts all lying for some reason.

And if those folks would have died anyway, which you casually don't seem to mind, why exactly are the deaths 500k higher each year?  Are you ok if we sacrifice old folks so you can walk into a store without a mask?

 

[LawFitz]

I admit that I was tricked into thinking this was a legitimate discussion. I wish there was a way to delete my posts so it wasn't starred any longer. 

Are you unable to resist clicking the thread due to a star? Just go away if you don't want to participate. Simple.

In the meantime, the rest of us will continue discussing the Folly of Pandemic (and otherwise) Censorship without your pollution.

 

[LawFitz]

What you don't seem to understand is that all of your points fall apart unless you believe in some massive conspiracy with doctors, the government, experts all lying for some reason.

And if those folks would have died anyway, which you casually don't seem to mind, why exactly are the deaths 500k higher each year?  Are you ok if we sacrifice old folks so you can walk into a store without a mask?

I've explained before how you don't need a massive conspiracy for this to unravel in such a way - I'm not going into that again for you. 

We have vaccines to protect old folks. And/or anyone else who is at high risk. I've encouraged those peoples to get jabbed many times on this board and elsewhere. My parents and in-laws are jabbed and boosted and I encouraged them both to do so.

And even though the 'science' keeps changing and masks suddenly are proving not to do squat, I've been wearing them all along and would happily do so to protect others. What I won't do is permanently risk my family's health with an injection of a yet-to-be-proven safe *long-term*, still-experimental novel biotechnology into our bodies. Especially when these 'vaccines' are now proven to not stop or even slow transmission!

 

[tymarsas]

And please tell me, what % of the 1 MM deaths were people who were either A. >75 yrs old and/or B. obese? How many would've died anyway within 12-36 mos. of their unfortunate Covid-related (but not necessarily caused) demise? BY FAR, the vast majority are pull-forward deaths. You know this, but conveniently exclude it from your analysis. 

Please provide data on the claim that most covid deaths are people that were going to die in 12-36 months. I'd be very interested to see your supporting evidence for that.

Also, aren't all unnatural deaths "pull-forward deaths"? What does that even mean?

 

[LawFitz]

And if those folks would have died anyway, which you casually don't seem to mind, why exactly are the deaths 500k higher each year?

I do mind. But I'm not willing to overthrow the fabric of our society (censorship, mandates, etc.) over their last few years when they can be protected with the vaxxes!

You keep saying 500k each year as if that is a number to be pulled fwd into perpetuity. I've already explained why that is a dubious assertion.

 

[LawFitz]

Please provide data on the claim that most covid deaths are people that were going to die in 12-36 months. I'd be very interested to see your supporting evidence for that.

Also, aren't all unnatural deaths "pull-forward deaths"? What does that even mean?

Look at the statistics for age. Then look at the statistics for comorbidities. It's not that hard to see the pattern.

 

[tymarsas]

Look at the statistics for age. Then look at the statistics for comorbidities. It's not that hard to see the pattern.

That's some solid data analysis.

 

[James Daulton]

Look at the statistics for age. Then look at the statistics for comorbidities. It's not that hard to see the pattern.

Dude, the vast majority of our country is overweight and has multiple comorbidities.

The unvaccinated are clogging up our hospitals, tying up our resources, and materially impacting healthcare for those who need it for reasons other than covid.  Even if no one died from covid it would still be a national emergency simply due to the strain it puts on our healthcare system.  

And there are tens and tens of millions of people who are > 50 and have multiple comorbidities.  Unchecked, covid would run through this population and devastate our hospital system.  I live it every day.  Do you think all the news you see about hospitals being stretched, healthcare workers tired and quitting, etc are made up?

It's 100% due to covid in 2020 and like 80% due to the unvaxxed in 2021.  And I have to tell you, if you or someone you loved couldn't get the healthcare they needed, or they got substandard care due to nursing shortages, you'd feel completely different about the vaccines and their usefulness. 

 

[LawFitz]

Dude, the vast majority of our country is overweight and has multiple comorbidities.

The unvaccinated are clogging up our hospitals, tying up our resources, and materially impacting healthcare for those who need it for reasons other than covid.  Even if no one died from covid it would still be a national emergency simply due to the strain it puts on our healthcare system.  

And there are tens and tens of millions of people who are > 50 and have multiple comorbidities.  Unchecked, covid would run through this population and devastate our hospital system.  I live it every day.  Do you think all the news you see about hospitals being stretched, healthcare workers tired and quitting, etc are made up?

It's 100% due to covid in 2020 and like 80% due to the unvaxxed in 2021.  And I have to tell you, if you or someone you loved couldn't get the healthcare they needed, or they got substandard care due to nursing shortages, you'd feel completely different about the vaccines and their usefulness. 

I like and appreciate this response, thank you. I get that the strain is real, tho I do not agree that it's 80% due to the unvaxxed in 2021 when >50% of hospitalizations recently were not due to Covid.

I've asked before about the heightened rate of non-Covid hospital visits and that we need some institutional studies for the cause - after attacking me, the vax-obsessed on this board concluded that the heightened hospitalization rates are simply due to deferred elective procedures. I am hoping that is the case, but actual data/explanation is still TBD. It could be some combo of deferred procedures, Long Covid AND drumroll... Post-vax effects. All speculative, but the rise in rates is alarming.

 

[James Daulton]

I like and appreciate this response, thank you. I get that the strain is real, tho I do not agree that it's 80% due to the unvaxxed in 2021 when >50% of hospitalizations recently were not due to Covid.

I've asked before about the heightened rate of non-Covid hospital visits and that we need some institutional studies for the cause - after attacking me, the vax-obsessed on this board concluded that the heightened hospitalization rates are simply due to deferred elective procedures. I am hoping that is the case, but actual data/explanation is still TBD. It could be some combo of deferred procedures, Long Covid AND drumroll... Post-vax effects. All speculative, but the rise in rates is alarming.

I've seen nothing about post-vax effects.  And the only heightened rate of non-covid hospitalizations has been for ER visits, births, and postponed elective procedures.

And for real, I apologize if I came off/come off like a jerk.  Obviously I'm very passionate about this and I want the crush on my hospitals and the country to end.  You are good natured and not a jerk even if we don't agree about stuff.

I will try to "be better" in my exchanges with you.  And I really hope you and all who you love are healthy and I hope the country gets back to normal, no vaxx mandates, etc.

 

[dkp993]

My agenda? My agenda is open and honest dialogue and full information. My agenda is allowing people informed consent. 

You absolutely have an agenda and clear bias. That is absolutely undeniable, but it’s certainly not unique to you.  It’s totally fine and absolutely your right, but where your posts come across as disingenuous, imo, is in your Insistence that you don’t and your just seeking answers.  You already have a narrative you fully believe and you are looking for the answers to support that narrative. Again that’s your right.  But just own it. 

 

[LawFitz]

You absolutely have an agenda and clear bias. That is absolutely undeniable, but it’s certainly not unique to you.  It’s totally fine and absolutely your right, but where your posts come across as disingenuous, imo, is in your Insistence that you don’t and your just seeking answers.  You already have a narrative you fully believe and you are looking for the answers to support that narrative. Again that’s your right.  But just own it. 

I'm looking for truth. I've said all along that I hope the supposed dangers posed by the vaccines are BS. That's it. Believe whatever else you want about me. 

 

[moleculo]

IMO, it's all a problem of messaging.  Here is the truth (as I understand it): vaccines are incredibly effective for populations to survive the virus but that same effectiveness may not be readily apparent at the individual level.  That difference between population and individual has led to some well-intentioned mixed messaging, which has diluted it's effectiveness.

Consider this: hypothetically speaking, assume treatment X reduced severity of COVID by 10%.  Would an individual even notice that? Would anyone ever notice if they were 10% less sick then if they didn't have that treatment? How would one even quantify that?  But for a population, that means 10% fewer patients in the hospital and 10% fewer deaths.  that would be a pretty significant treatment for a population, but an individual would have no idea.

Another hypothetical: assume treatment Y decreased transmission of COVID by 10%.  Again - how would one know that? How would you possibly know that your probability was 10% less than before?  you can still get sick, you can still transmit.  All the anecdotal evidence you have would indicate Y made no difference whatsoever.  Yet, when you look at the macro data, you see those same trends - 10% fewer people in the hospital, 10% fewer deaths.

So, people dealing with the macro numbers - studying entire populations - they push forward treatments that can help everyone.  But, because they may not be notable for individuals, it all gets tossed out as lies.  And sometimes, maybe they do stretch the truth.  Concepts like this are hard to grasp, especially in our world of quick sound bites. 

The messaging has been about the vaccine has for a person.  I wonder if it could have been more effective if it was centered around society?  "Everyone do their part".  Harder to understand and comprehend but more honest.  Somehow I doubt it though - we have evolved into an extremely selfish people, only concerned with ourselves.

 

[moleculo]

That doesn't mean silencing dissent is ok.  We must have an open exchange of ideas.  That's extremely important for our society to function.  However - there is one other inescapable truth: not all ideas are equal.  The problem with social media and the internet is bad ideas can be made to appear equally as valid as good ideas.  Peer review no longer exists (in Social Media) because when the population is all peers, experts are shouted out.  

Good ideas are supposed to bubble to the top and bad ideas are supposed to sink.  That's how it is supposed to work, but that's not what happens.  Bad ideas, presented well (i.e. pod casts and youtube videos), bubble to the top but good ideas presented poorly (i.e. medical journals, per reviewed academic studies), sink.  Further, bad ideas align with our basal impulses which make them "feel" right, whereas good ideas can be painful.  We, as a society, are addicted to eating sugar and skipping broccoli.

I don't know how to fix it.

 

[LawFitz]

The messaging has been about the vaccine has for a person.  I wonder if it could have been more effective if it was centered around society?  "Everyone do their part".  Harder to understand and comprehend but more honest.  Somehow I doubt it though - we have evolved into an extremely selfish people, only concerned with ourselves.

This is an unfortunate and unfair generalization. I don't think it's your intent, but it implies that the unvaxxed are the bolded.

What you also don't account for:

a. The vax doesn't stop (or even slow - and arguably increases due to asymptomatic carriers) the spread.

b. Early treatment protocols have been unfairly demonized and/or not studied - this was a GIGANTIC misstep on so many levels. To this day there aren't any official early treatment (or prophylactic) protocols.

c. Vax injuries are real and are being dismissed by officialdom. To what degree I cannot say, but this too, is another HUGE misstep because it breeds mistrust and dissention. We must stop denying injuries and instead properly account for and treat them, if we have any hope of getting remaining unvaxxed to consider the jab.

 

[LawFitz]

I don't know how to fix it.

Hard to fix when you have dubious individuals like Fauci with so much power and never being held to account.

But censorship is not the solution and will only create much bigger problems. That much I feel 100% confident about.

 

[sho nuff]

That doesn't mean silencing dissent is ok.  We must have an open exchange of ideas.  That's extremely important for our society to function.  However - there is one other inescapable truth: not all ideas are equal.  The problem with social media and the internet is bad ideas can be made to appear equally as valid as good ideas.  Peer review no longer exists (in Social Media) because when the population is all peers, experts are shouted out.  

Good ideas are supposed to bubble to the top and bad ideas are supposed to sink.  That's how it is supposed to work, but that's not what happens.  Bad ideas, presented well (i.e. pod casts and youtube videos), bubble to the top but good ideas presented poorly (i.e. medical journals, per reviewed academic studies), sink.  Further, bad ideas align with our basal impulses which make them "feel" right, whereas good ideas can be painful.  We, as a society, are addicted to eating sugar and skipping broccoli.

I don't know how to fix it.

If they were honest ideas…I agree.  But I don’t believe much of what we are seeing is honest dialogue from some places.  It’s pushing baseless theories to fit an agenda.  Evidence and truth be damned.

 

[LawFitz]

I don’t believe much of what we are seeing is honest dialogue from some places. 

I respect your right to feel this way - and generally I don't disagree. I just wholeheartedly believe that silencing people is the wrong approach.

 

[sho nuff]

I respect your right to feel this way - and generally I don't disagree. I just wholeheartedly believe that silencing people is the wrong approach.

And I think continually chasing theories that get proven wrong over and over does nothing for us as a society.  One gets proven wrong…move on to the next.  Its never ending.

 

[LawFitz]

And I think continually chasing theories that get proven wrong over and over does nothing for us as a society.  One gets proven wrong…move on to the next.  Its never ending.

Some have been proven wrong. Others have been proven right. Many are still TBD. That's the whole point of why we can't censor, but rather discuss, explore, debate, and accumulate knowledge together. Even if we don't agree right away (or ever).

 

[2Squirrels1Nut]

I admit that I was tricked into thinking this was a legitimate discussion. I wish there was a way to delete my posts so it wasn't starred any longer. 

I'll say this though, there are some people here arguing that it should be your constitutional right to knowingly spread false information, often for financial benefit, that will cost people their lives.   It literally makes me sick to my stomach. 

 

[LawFitz]

I'll say this though, there are some people here arguing that it should be your constitutional right to knowingly spread false information, often for financial benefit, that will cost people their lives.   It literally makes me sick to my stomach. 

Glad you got this off your chest. Everyone else should hear your opinion and consider it. 

 

[greenmountaingoat]

Ex in laws were Y2K ers. They blew a bunch of their savings on prepping for it. Sad to see. 
 

I see both sides of this thread pretty well I think. I’m pretty sure both sides are 90% right in the big picture. Maybe I’m just a sucker but I’m giving the public health infrastructure a little wiggle room with recommendations that have proved to be over cautious. Nobody knew. It was the best information available. 

Believe me, over cautious has cost me dearly. 

Still, dissent is key to freedom, just sucks that it’s 90% on this issue very likely stupidity and profiting off dividing folks. Freedom isn’t free I always associated with military. But here it means that you are free to gamble with your health and maybe others. 
 

Lots of people paying that price on this issue. Democracy is messy. Better a big free mess than the alternative.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Ex in laws were Y2K ers. They blew a bunch of their savings on prepping for it. Sad to see. 
 

I see both sides of this thread pretty well I think. I’m pretty sure both sides are 90% right in the big picture. Maybe I’m just a sucker but I’m giving the public health infrastructure a little wiggle room with recommendations that have proved to be over cautious. Nobody knew. It was the best information available. 

Believe me, over cautious has cost me dearly. 

Still, dissent is key to freedom, just sucks that it’s 90% on this issue very likely stupidity and profiting off dividing folks. Freedom isn’t free I always associated with military. But here it means that you are free to gamble with your health and maybe others. 
 

Lots of people paying that price on this issue. Democracy is messy. Better a big free mess than the alternative.

Public health didn't make mistakes that were over-cautious. They made, and continue to make, mistakes that are based on perception and what they think people will react to. They are engaging in psychological guesswork and are really bad at it.