Wuhan Killer Sneeze (thanks Tea)

[mixed_biscuits]

Never mind "long covid" and the economic fallout - I think an underreported aspect of all this has been the massive uptick in unsolicited opinions from has-been pop stars.

Oh, so Brown Ian has to wait for the green light from you - or Boris? - before tweeting?

 

[version]

An anecdote. My uncle's a mechanic and recently asked a customer who works for the NHS how bad COVID is and he said the media have a lot to answer for and that it's only really an issue if you're overweight, an alcoholic, a smoker or already have serious health issues and that they're counting anyone who dies whilst infected as dying from the virus, regardless of whether it's the virus that actually kills them.

Another anecdote. My friend's been living and working near Shanghai for almost two years and says everything's more or less back to normal now. Nobody over there was too bothered they had to wear a mask. They just got on with it. They also have a very long quarantine period for anyone coming into the country.

A third anecdote. I recently read an interview with Tzusing who said that in Taiwan, much like China, everyone just wore a mask. You'd be too ashamed to be seen without one. Also that people closed their own businesses without being forced to by the government and the general sense of civic duty has made the whole situation much easier to deal with.

 

[HMGovt’s Glorious Return!]

An anecdote. My uncle's a mechanic and recently asked a customer who works for the NHS how bad COVID is and he said the media have a lot to answer for and that it's only really an issue if you're overweight, an alcoholic, a smoker or already have serious health issues and that they're counting anyone who dies whilst infected as dying from the virus, regardless of whether it's the virus that actually kills them.

Another anecdote. My friend's been living and working near Shanghai for almost two years and says everything's more or less back to normal now. Nobody over there was too bothered they had to wear a mask. They just got on with it. They also have a very long quarantine period for anyone coming into the country.

A third anecdote. I recently read an interview with Tzusing who said that in Taiwan, much like China, everyone just wore a mask. You'd be too ashamed to be seen without one. Also that people closed their own businesses without being forced to by the government and the general sense of civic duty has made the whole situation much easier to deal with.

Yes. The west was trolled to economic extinction. Pretty sure I pointed this out up thread somewhere, just after the Wuhan pool party

China's COVID-19 Propaganda Campaign

Inside China's COVID-19 Propaganda Campaign headed by leader Xi Jinping and how disinformation promoted China's virus response.

www.tabletmag.com

 

[WashYourHands]

Can’t deny the strategy of military agencies in totalitarian regimes, but I’d take the witness statements of friends who are grizzled NHS veterans in ICU over what they were up against during spring into summer. One has a referral for suspected ptsd and is barely getting by. Expendable to a govt that never knew its arse from its elbow.

No-one denies the government’s omnishambles, but if a bomb had just gone off and killed 45,000 (official figures) we’d be understandably conscious re the harm bombs can do.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

A third anecdote. I recently read an interview with Tzusing who said that in Taiwan, much like China, everyone just wore a mask. You'd be too ashamed to be seen without one.

If people are wearing one to avoid being shamed, then you can be sure that those who are unable to wear one are confining themselves to their quarters - not fair.

 

[linebaugh]

they're counting anyone who dies whilst infected as dying from the virus, regardless of whether it's the virus that actually kills them.

I've been seeing this alot but its undermined by the fact that 2020 U.S. deaths are up 150+ thousand compared to previous years. Is there any reason to be skeptical of that statistic? (not directed at you)

 

[constant escape]

Well the central point to the skepticism of causation here boils down to whether or not covid causes all the deaths that would not have happened without it.

Sort of depends on how you define causation, right? More like covid is a contributing factor to many of the deaths, rather than a central/primary cause. If even merely the straw that broke the camel's back. Deaths can have an ensemble of causes, with this or that condition situationally proving to have more of an impact. Each condition having system-wide ramifications that are complicated further by compounding with other conditions - and people watching the news can't afford to bear all this complexity in mind.

But like someone just pointed out, the mainstream media sources, at least here in the US, seem to have pointedly emphasized the gross effects of covid, rather than attempting to identify covid's net effects within a broader context of pre-existing health issues. But hey, I can't imagine it would be easy, either to precisely understand covid's effects or to effectively convey nuance to an anxious audience.

Additionally, the fear mongering works to the advantage of the anti-trump crusade, which sometimes appears to me as being more against Trump than for anything in particular. Reactive. Can't blame anyone there, though.

 

[linebaugh]

I feel like pre existing conditions have been a primary talking point since day 1. Its not that complicated- theres a disease purportedly killing hundreds of thousands and we have hundreds of thousands more deaths than weve had in previous years. I don't feel any problem placing blame on those that dont see that as its really that simple- people arent getting duped theyre performing mental gymnastics on their own accord. The 'well technically its not the covid that thats killing them' is just a menial and petty point.

I'm not saying to avoid skepticism of the response towards the virus, from governments and media and etc., but unless there's reason to doubt the increased death toll in the U.S. for 2020 (which there could be, I asked in earnest), I don't see the point in specifying that technically its pre existing conditions that are killing them, especially since that wasn't ever really denied, other than to entertain some resistance fantasy that the virus is an Orwellian psyop

 

[Mr. Tea]

I think if someone is diagnosed with a virus that's known to be lethal and is dead within a few weeks to a couple of months, then there is a pretty good chance the virus had something to do with their death.

Not in every case, obviously - some people will have died of something totally unrelated, like falling under a bus or being shot by a rival drug dealer or a tantric stranglewank gone wrong - but nonetheless in the vast majority of cases.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

 

[mixed_biscuits]

I think if someone is diagnosed with a virus that's known to be lethal and is dead within a few weeks to a couple of months, then there is a pretty good chance the virus had something to do with their death.

But it's also known not to be very lethal at all to most people; any deaths in the under-30s with COVID mentioned are likely to be COVID-with, for instance.

 

[constant escape]

Good points, perhaps I was leaning on skepticism too much, and I could very likely be underestimating the impact of covid alone.

I was just trying to say that its tough to convey the middle ground, between A) covid is responsible for the deaths of those who had covid, and B) near total skepticism, especially when those two ends more or less map onto the political poles, at least in regards to the approaches taken.

But treating covid like it is primarily responsible for these deaths, rather than just aiding the existing deteriorative health conditions, does coerce people into complicity with whatever policies can be put out under some state of exception. Then again, beyond reading the initial Family First coronavirus bill, I'm really not too familiar with the polices that are responding to covid.

 

[Mr. Tea]

An anecdote. My uncle's a mechanic and recently asked a customer who works for the NHS how bad COVID is and he said the media have a lot to answer for and that it's only really an issue if you're overweight, an alcoholic, a smoker or already have serious health issues and that they're counting anyone who dies whilst infected as dying from the virus, regardless of whether it's the virus that actually kills them.

Did this guy elaborate on what he meant by "an issue"? I've got a baby to look after. If I'm bed-ridden for a couple of weeks, that's a pretty big issue for me, even if I subsequently make a full recovery.

And I'm sure we all know by now that a lot of people who haven't died also haven't made full recoveries.

 

[Mr. Tea]

But it's also known not to be very lethal at all to most people; any deaths in the under-30s with COVID mentioned are likely to be COVID-with, for instance.

Have I been completely wasting my time every time I've pointed out that this disease can badly fuck you up without killing you?

I mean I must have mentioned it like twenty times or something in this thread alone.

 

[constant escape]

I think if someone is diagnosed with a virus that's known to be lethal and is dead within a few weeks to a couple of months, then there is a pretty good chance the virus had something to do with their death.

Totally, but does that make the virus a worthy enough threat to warrant seismic infrastructural shifts? Perhaps - not a rhetorical question.

Its one thing to argue that a false positive would result in less loss than a false negative, in and of themselves. But what if the false positive approach allows the overton window to be more manipulable? The whole "state of exception" argument, similar in essence to wartime, I'd imagine.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

Have I been completely wasting my time every time I've pointed out that this disease can badly fuck you up without killing you?

I mean I must have mentioned it like twenty times or something in this thread alone.

Yes, but so can lots of other things...still waiting for the precise proportion of those f'ed up.

 

[constant escape]

A successful psyop needs a plausible foundation, no? To deter or dissuade skepticism. Doesn't mean the whole shebang is a fraud, or even most of it - just that it can grant wiggle room that would otherwise not be tolerated.

To be clear, this is largely a theoretical statement about psyops and state-of-exception hegemony (?), rather than an argument that our current global situation is classifiable as such.

 

[Mr. Tea]

Yes, but so can lots of other things...still waiting for the precise proportion of those f'ed up.

This is utterly disingenuous.

 

[version]

Did this guy elaborate on what he meant by "an issue"? I've got a baby to look after. If I'm bed-ridden for a couple of weeks, that's a pretty big issue for me, even if I subsequently make a full recovery.

And I'm sure we all know by now that a lot of people who haven't died also haven't made full recoveries.

Well, that's my phrasing, but the gist of it seemed to be that he was talking about personal safety. As in, you don't need to worry about dying unless you're in one of the stated categories.

 

[Mr. Tea]

This is utterly disingenuous.

It's also plain stupid, because covid-19 isn't an alternative to heroin overdoses, Aids, getting hit by a car and every other bad thing you can think of. It's in addition to all those things.