Today COVID-19 hit 205,000 + cases in a single day which is the record.
- Thread starter The Joker
- Start date
- Mar 19, 2006
- 38,176
- 356
- 83
- 74
Both of you are wrong. This is actually from then non-fat yogurt episode (that really did contain fat and caused the mayor to have heart attack and all the cast to gain weight). Also had the little boy that cursed Bc he followed Jerry?s example.
- Oct 15, 2015
- 3,006
- 20
- 38
Why can't we acknowledge both? The loss of jobs also is going to affect probably 100x the amount of people in so many ways. Both are sad. But we also need to acknowledge that families will be broken, lives will be ruined, kids will grow up in broken homes, education will be the worst it has been in probably close to 100 years, and the systematically oppressed will be further oppressed.
I've never understood why there has to be a line in the sand that if you're against lockdowns you are somehow labeled as someone who doesn't care about the people who lost lives?
I feel terrible for everyone that's been impacted by this. It sucks. My complaint is with the people that act like the restrictions in place are a bridge too far. We're a great country but we're filled with selfish dipshits that won't even do the bare minimum (wear a mask and keep your distance) to keep their fellow countrymen safe. We have to do something and the crazy thing is, we're really not doing much, yet we have people acting like they've been in solitary confinement since March.
Wiley Online Library
Wiley Online Library
There is "no clear, significant" benefit to lockdowns and business closures.
After comparing the countries with more restrictive measures to those with less restrictive measures, it was clear to the researchers that there is "no clear, significant beneficial effect of [more restrictive measures] on case growth in any country."
Their findings suggest that mandatory lockdowns don't significantly stop the spread more than personal measures like social distancing and mask-wearing. "We do not question the role of all public health interventions, or of coordinated communications about the epidemic, but we fail to find an additional benefit of stay-at-home orders and business closures," the authors concluded.
Sweden's approach included "social distancing guidelines, discouraging of international and domestic travel, and a ban on large gatherings," while South Korea "relied on intensive investments in testing, contact tracing, and isolation of infected cases and close contacts," according to the Stanford research. Even without more restrictive measures, both Sweden and South Korea had some of the lowest reported COVID cases for much of the pandemic.
Researchers compared COVID cases in England, France, Germany, Iran, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, and the U.S.?all of which instituted mandatory stay-at-home orders and business closures?to South Korea and Sweden, which only implemented voluntary personal precautions.
As a result, the researchers concluded that "similar reductions in case growth may be achievable with less restrictive interventions" similar to those implemented by these two countries.
Wiley Online Library
There is "no clear, significant" benefit to lockdowns and business closures.
After comparing the countries with more restrictive measures to those with less restrictive measures, it was clear to the researchers that there is "no clear, significant beneficial effect of [more restrictive measures] on case growth in any country."
Their findings suggest that mandatory lockdowns don't significantly stop the spread more than personal measures like social distancing and mask-wearing. "We do not question the role of all public health interventions, or of coordinated communications about the epidemic, but we fail to find an additional benefit of stay-at-home orders and business closures," the authors concluded.
Sweden's approach included "social distancing guidelines, discouraging of international and domestic travel, and a ban on large gatherings," while South Korea "relied on intensive investments in testing, contact tracing, and isolation of infected cases and close contacts," according to the Stanford research. Even without more restrictive measures, both Sweden and South Korea had some of the lowest reported COVID cases for much of the pandemic.
Researchers compared COVID cases in England, France, Germany, Iran, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, and the U.S.?all of which instituted mandatory stay-at-home orders and business closures?to South Korea and Sweden, which only implemented voluntary personal precautions.
As a result, the researchers concluded that "similar reductions in case growth may be achievable with less restrictive interventions" similar to those implemented by these two countries.
The lockdowns simply aren't lockdowns.
If people can come and go, it's not a lockdown. That's why they fail, imo.
This is why getting the fucking vaccine out is imperative. But.....in the US, we can't even get that shit show squared away.
If people can come and go, it's not a lockdown. That's why they fail, imo.
This is why getting the fucking vaccine out is imperative. But.....in the US, we can't even get that shit show squared away.
How can you say that there is "no clear, significant" benefit to limiting human interaction during a pandemic in which the virus is spread by airborne droplets???? That's absolutely asinine.
Sweden's approach changed in December after the "let's just do nothing" plan blew up on them. They have since imposed similar measures as the US. South Korea's approach included a testing program that we can only hope to see here in North America.
The mandatory stay at home orders: When was the last time we saw that in the US? 9 months ago?
I don't know what the answer is but you can't keep complaining about lockdowns that aren't lockdowns. There are restrictions. That's it. As I've argued on here several times, short of attending a large gathering, what is it that you just can't do?
That's what it said :toast:
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/2-covid-precautions-may-not-135247090.html
Last edited:
Stanford Study
Stanford Study
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/s...ffect-in-reducing-covid-19-may-even-spread-it
Stanford Study
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/s...ffect-in-reducing-covid-19-may-even-spread-it
The end of the article says
How does the virus get into the house if there's no transmission outside in the first place? I would agree that you're way more likely to contract it from a family member since you're sharing a confined space, but it has to get in to be transmitted. If the foundation of the argument is that since you're most likely to get it inside your own home from a family member, then you might as well get out of the house.....that would be intellectually dishonest.
<header class="entry-header" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-size: 16px; line-height: inherit; font-family: Roboto; vertical-align: baseline; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">LifeSiteNews
</header><amp-ad width="300" height="250" layout="fixed" type="doubleclick" data-slot="/124067137/mediabiasfactcheck300x250FL_2"></amp-ad><header class="entry-header" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">
RIGHT BIAS
</header>These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.
<amp-auto-ads type="adsense" data-ad-client="ca-pub-6505602311060910"></amp-auto-ads><center style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><amp-ad width="100vw" height="320" type="adsense" data-ad-client="ca-pub-6505602311060910" data-ad-slot="2554123025" data-auto-format="rspv" data-full-width="">
</amp-ad></center>
Detailed Report
Factual Reporting: MIXED
Country: Canada
World Press Freedom Rank: Canada 16/180
I knew something stunk. The source is a pile of shit.
</header><amp-ad width="300" height="250" layout="fixed" type="doubleclick" data-slot="/124067137/mediabiasfactcheck300x250FL_2"></amp-ad><header class="entry-header" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">
RIGHT BIAS
</header>These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.
<amp-auto-ads type="adsense" data-ad-client="ca-pub-6505602311060910"></amp-auto-ads><center style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><amp-ad width="100vw" height="320" type="adsense" data-ad-client="ca-pub-6505602311060910" data-ad-slot="2554123025" data-auto-format="rspv" data-full-width="">
</amp-ad></center>
- Overall, we rate LifeSiteNews far right biased based on story selection that always favors evangelical Christianity and Mixed for factual reporting due to a few failed fact checks.
Detailed Report
Factual Reporting: MIXED
Country: Canada
World Press Freedom Rank: Canada 16/180
I knew something stunk. The source is a pile of shit.
Yep, that lockdown study isn?t very good, I don?t know any epidemiologists taking it very seriously...
https://pubpeer.com/publications/3D81CAC483C2021C00E27C8826DF71
Too bad paper is not that rigorous, as I think not enough attention by the medical establishment is given to the burdens of lockdowns, especially marginal costs of the incremental changes they seem so fond of imposing....
Here?s a good piece on why they are worried Covid-19 will escape human immune response and vaccine efficacy faster than previously thought:
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/202...se-more-reinfections-require-updated-vaccines
https://pubpeer.com/publications/3D81CAC483C2021C00E27C8826DF71
Too bad paper is not that rigorous, as I think not enough attention by the medical establishment is given to the burdens of lockdowns, especially marginal costs of the incremental changes they seem so fond of imposing....
Here?s a good piece on why they are worried Covid-19 will escape human immune response and vaccine efficacy faster than previously thought:
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/202...se-more-reinfections-require-updated-vaccines
I just saw that 60% of all US cases of Covid have occurred since the election.
No end in sight.
:facepalm:
No end in sight.
:facepalm:
