Coronavirus (Nice: dentists, house, restaurants)

[goodheathen]

Originally Posted by joosoon

Yes. That's what makes it that much more ironic.
It goes like this: We just don't know much about yadda-yadda.... but here are three more links about yadda-yadda I found that validates my belief.


Also, in two of those links alone, it's mentioned that post-viral effects of viruses are indeed well known which leads one to conclude that the refrain in question ("we don't know enough...") isn't actually true. Even Fauci is quoted in the first one saying something to that effect. I mentioned that already.


The other thing worth noting here is that this is the same refrain being used by people to rationalize their resistance to getting vaccinated: We don't know the long term side-effects of the vaccine yadda-yadda.

That is not a fair comparison at all. As far as I know, vaccines without live virus have never caused problems that didn't arise very quickly. Post-viral effects of COVID-19 simply haven't been studied long enough to know, for example, what percentage of organ damage (which rarely is screened for) is gone in 2 years and what percentage of people still have any damage or symptoms from the virus at that point and also what are risk factors for that (some known now, like female and young, are much too broad to help anything). Researchers sure as heck didn't know everything polio could do in less than 2 years. The position of people like me is reasonable unless we're talking 5-10 years to be safe.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by joosoon

Yes. That's what makes it that much more ironic.
It goes like this: We just don't know much about yadda-yadda.... but here are three more links about yadda-yadda I found that validates my belief.


Also, in two of those links alone, it's mentioned that post-viral effects of viruses are indeed well known which leads one to conclude that the refrain in question ("we don't know enough...") isn't actually true. Even Fauci is quoted in the first one saying something to that effect. I mentioned that already.


The other thing worth noting here is that this is the same refrain being used by people to rationalize their resistance to getting vaccinated: We don't know the long term side-effects of the vaccine yadda-yadda.

While you are laser focused on long term effects from the vaccine, maybe you should read this, it's about t a covid infection causing long term damage to the pancreas (possibly including pancreatic cancer) or maybe this is just yadda-yadda too?

In addition to driving new cases of diabetes, the virus may be directly damaging the pancreas in ways that could lead to chronic inflammation and even cancer. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/s...g-the-pancreas

[sav858]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

You and I certainly have different takes on CA4Now’s postings. I find her contributions good reminders for others to consider as many posters FLOOD these threads with bs home-brewed analyses. She could link a hundred stories and still not accomplish enough ‘balance’ to make her / my point that unqualified, amateur assumptions here are ridiculously out of control.

I’ll also point out that I haven't read CA4Now actually argue anything faux-analytically. All I see from her are interesting contributions of information from credible sources [other than herself] to muse over and consider. Yes, one can glean her personal positions. But they aren’t preached with any ideological OCD, nor as if she thinks of herself as any Madame Currie.

Yeah contributions that only support one narrative and if you post anything to the contrary then the source is automatically questioned/dismissed.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by sav858

Yeah contributions that only support one narrative and if you post anything to the contrary then the source is automatically questioned/dismissed.

Unlike the posts of the ranters?

But beyond that, no … I have read a variety of information from CA4Now postings that represent views from opposing angles … the common thread being: all credible sources … nothing fringe.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Unlike the posts of the ranters?

But beyond that, no … I have read a variety of information from CA4Now postings that represent views from opposing angles … the common thread being: all credible sources … nothing fringe.

No just like them.

Yeah a variety of sources for the same exact narrative.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by sav858

No just like them.

Yeah a variety of sources for the same exact narrative.

Lol. Like your postings as well as everyone else’s here, bub.

And no, not the “same narrative.” I have numerous times read CA4Now contributions that present new, differing views on links she had previously provided.

You have a personal dislike going here. I have differed with CA4Now on some topics, but always been particularly aware of how little she engages argumentatively with those she disagrees with compared to - oh say, you and I. Her posts are quite brief and mostly consist of links to credibly sourced, on-topic information she thinks are relevant and interesting. The subsuming is left to the readers with almost no commentary from her. She is quite unique in this posting style on the forum. Give it a rest.

[CA4Now]

Yes!

How did California go from COVID-19 epicenter to lowest statewide transmission rate?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/med...ate/ar-AAPU4V1

[Social Democrat]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

Yes!

How did California go from COVID-19 epicenter to lowest statewide transmission rate?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/med...ate/ar-AAPU4V1

Good job- I was going to post this info! I'm not going to bother posting in the LA forum re LAPD and LAFD vaccinations. The retired NYPD cop doesn't believe anything that fits his narrative so why bother.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Lol. Like your postings as well as everyone else’s here, bub.

And no, not the “same narrative.” I have numerous times read CA4Now contributions that present new, differing views on links she had previously provided.

You have a personal dislike going here. I have differed with CA4Now on some topics, but always been particularly aware of how little she engages argumentatively with those she disagrees with compared to - oh say, you and I. Her posts are quite brief and mostly consist of links to credibly sourced, on-topic information she thinks are relevant and interesting. The subsuming is left to the readers with almost no commentary from her. She is quite unique in this posting style on the forum. Give it a rest.

Of course, got to provide some balance.

Maybe on some other topics, certainly not this one.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

Yes!

How did California go from COVID-19 epicenter to lowest statewide transmission rate?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/med...ate/ar-AAPU4V1

I don't get how CA has the "lowest statewide transmission" when 8 other states have lower 14-day case rates including Florida (currently the lowest in the nation according to the NYT) and Louisiana.