Covid and Science

Sorry, not trying to give you a hard time. Just genuinely interested in where people think the fallout from this mess will hit hardest.
Hmmm. How about the parents that genuinely think that someone else taught their spawn to be prima donnas with glass brains. One punch to the head and the brain shatters.
 
Hmmm. How about the parents that genuinely think that someone else taught their spawn to be prima donnas with glass brains. One punch to the head and the brain shatters.

Let them continue that path so people who aren't groupthinking can feedback loop these idiots into oblivion and win at their expense.

.......just double downing on a previous comment lol....and I'm not sure if I'm kidding.
 
March second looks pretty cold :(
Hope if it's not 2 but at most 4 weeks :)

View attachment 53506
Yeah last year was quite mild and the snow didn't stick around long like it has this year. But we had that odd snow fall late Apr or early May I believe. Who knows it weather, can't make sense of it, maybe we should trust the "science" :unsure: :LOL:
 
It's a specific range imo. I'd argue every child from ages 2 to 20~ got effected.

Everyone agrees school is for learning right? What a lot of "sticks far up their ass" types don't admit, however, is that schools are also for having some of the most stupid fun you'll ever have in your life.

It's a really important skill everyone here likely picked up: how to maintain really good grades while getting piss drunk on Thursdays and help wingman your retard of a friend so he stops shooting himself in his foot.

The above would be a repeated experience between 18-20. What are the ones between 2-18 missing?
Both my kids would probably be able to swim by now. We had them signed up for swim camp March 2020
Heck I'd also be a swim star as i had started going to masters swim training 2-3 times a week for about 1.5hrs a pop. But up to now, the program still hasn't resume (mainly because it's affiliated with UoTM but that's another story)

But 2-18 is a great time to try different things/activities, maybe they might find a passion that takes them through their teens whether it be music, sports, etc. And then they might make friends in those activities, may i say lifelong friends. For those who can afford it, travelling, seeing different cultures. You never know what will sprout ideas in their little minds
 
One fallacy is to believe that 'science' is one single blob, where all of the 'scientists' agree. An epidemiologist is going to have a very specific (although likely accurate) view of a problem, while an economist is going to have a different view. Both views can be true, but explaining the possible interactions between those two views to the general public is almost impossible.

Consider that by some measures (source picked at random), half of the Canadian population can't read at a high school level. Consider that A&W's third-pounder burger failed because people didn't understand that a 1/3 of a pound is larger than 1/4 of a pound: "3 is smaller than 4, why are you charging more money for less meat?"

Now try to explain exponential growth to any of those people. Or the difference between correlation and causation. Or the difference between absolute and relative risk: "This thing has double the risk of this other thing!", when the risk of either thing is .001% and .002%.
One of the gross misconceptions of the Left is that everyone needs to be intelligent or educated, otherwise their opinions (and maybe themselves) don't count.

It is society's responsibility to provide good education to all, but it's not a requirement to get a good education.

Thinks about the old proverb - if you are a Canadian of average intelligence, 1/2 of Canadians are dumber than you. They count, whether the intelligencia thinks so or not. When that lesser group participates in democracy, they are attacked for their views. Perhaps that's justified, but that doesn't mean their views are disregarded. Do that too long and a leader with similar views will round them up and advance their agenda -- get enough of them following a charismatic leader and you have discord and division dominating the political landscape.

Critical thinkers might start reviewing history to see where these things can go if you discount the proletariat.
 
One of the gross misconceptions of the Left is that everyone needs to be intelligent or educated, otherwise their opinions (and maybe themselves) don't count.

It is society's responsibility to provide good education to all, but it's not a requirement to get a good education.

Thinks about the old proverb - if you are a Canadian of average intelligence, 1/2 of Canadians are dumber than you. They count, whether the intelligencia thinks so or not. When that lesser group participates in democracy, they are attacked for their views. Perhaps that's justified, but that doesn't mean their views are disregarded. Do that too long and a leader with similar views will round them up and advance their agenda -- get enough of them following a charismatic leader and you have discord and division dominating the political landscape.

Critical thinkers might start reviewing history to see where these things can go if you discount the proletariat.

I hope my post wasn't interpreted as a judgement of less educated people (see post #25). It was intended to illustrate how incredibly difficult it must be to try to explain all of the competing factors behind something as complicated and uncertain as a pandemic response to the general public. I'm not actually sure if it's possible to do so, unless you are able to target a variant of your message specifically enough so that every demographic gets something that they can digest in their own terms.

Ultimately, a lot of science today can't truly be fully understood by anyone, regardless of their education level, unless they happen to be a specialist in that field. So convincing someone of anything usually comes down to whether the audience trusts that specialist (or organization or institution) and is willing to believe them or not.

In the case of medical science, a significant portion of people clearly have a lack of trust in the system. And with the Sackler family (Purdue opioids), or that smirking douche-bag Martin Shkreli in the news, who can blame them? Unfortunately, I think the worst excesses of the capitalist, profit-driven 'big pharma' industry have seriously damaged trust in what should be a purely altruistic scientific field.

Even worse, there are individuals, organizations and countries that are actively promoting information that is intended to damage that trust even further.
 
In the case of medical science, a significant portion of people clearly have a lack of trust in the system. And with the Sackler family (Purdue opioids), or that smirking douche-bag Martin Shkreli in the news, who can blame them? Unfortunately, I think the worst excesses of the capitalist, profit-driven 'big pharma' industry have seriously damaged trust in what should be a purely altruistic scientific field.

Even worse, there are individuals, organizations and countries that are actively promoting information that is intended to damage that trust even further.
This is one of the reasons big pharma has so little trust from the general public. This list is just the times they have been "caught" in the last 18yrs bribing doctors/pharmacists/scientists or straight up falsifying trial data and research...

Pharmaceutical.jpg
 
All those fines and they're still in business.
It's a market worth trillions. The fines are less then a slap on the wrist. That video that just came out of the FDA executive saying they pump $1b a year into the FDA shows they are pretty much guaranteed to never face any real consequences.

When the police homicide department are on your steady payroll, you can pretty much get away with murder. The traffic cops (state attorney generals in this case) may still give you a speeding ticket though...
 
Last edited:
Pretty heavy words there. Your posts are sounding more like bits from the "Enquirer" all the time. GTAM likes facts. Please clean it up.
So you think pharmaceutical companies donate over a billion a year to the FDA out of the kindness of their hearts? Not expecting anything for their return? They are just being great Samaritans...

Next your going to tell me the government funding the CBC doesn't get them preferable treatment and perks.
 
I'm not commenting about pharma at all.I'm just asking you to not make ridiculous comments like the one you did without a reliable source and facts. "When the police homicide department are on your steady payroll, you can pretty much get away with murder."
Everyone is entitled to their opinions.
 
I hope my post wasn't interpreted as a judgement of less educated people (see post #25). It was intended to illustrate how incredibly difficult it must be to try to explain all of the competing factors behind something as complicated and uncertain as a pandemic response to the general public. I'm not actually sure if it's possible to do so, unless you are able to target a variant of your message specifically enough so that every demographic gets something that they can digest in their own terms.

Ultimately, a lot of science today can't truly be fully understood by anyone, regardless of their education level, unless they happen to be a specialist in that field. So convincing someone of anything usually comes down to whether the audience trusts that specialist (or organization or institution) and is willing to believe them or not.

In the case of medical science, a significant portion of people clearly have a lack of trust in the system. And with the Sackler family (Purdue opioids), or that smirking douche-bag Martin Shkreli in the news, who can blame them? Unfortunately, I think the worst excesses of the capitalist, profit-driven 'big pharma' industry have seriously damaged trust in what should be a purely altruistic scientific field.

Even worse, there are individuals, organizations and countries that are actively promoting information that is intended to damage that trust even further.

You said this far more elegantly/politely than I've ever heard it. I find the vast majority has a hard time changing their minds and are very weak; they're afraid of pain caused by cognitive dissonance by putting up iron walls around some beliefs, no matter how fictitious.

With that said, this is also the group (mass majority) most easily controlled; very easily manipulated via echo chamber and groupthink effects. I'd argue this is the vast majority in both right and left parties.

In other words, it might be impossible to explain to the vast majority how two domain experts can be completely right but the combined answer is grey af. For example: all COVID models have shown who was gonna die We picked the path where we tried to save everyone and instead caused a bigger rift between one another (in the West at least)...but it's easier for ppl to blame the other side and hope they die, so a bunch do that.
 
I'm not commenting about pharma at all.I'm just asking you to not make ridiculous comments like the one you did without a reliable source and facts. "When the police homicide department are on your steady payroll, you can pretty much get away with murder."
Everyone is entitled to their opinions.
It was an analogy...
 
I'm not commenting about pharma at all.I'm just asking you to not make ridiculous comments like the one you did without a reliable source and facts. "When the police homicide department are on your steady payroll, you can pretty much get away with murder."
Everyone is entitled to their opinions.
I don't disagree with his sentiments but incitement is more contagious than Covid, possibly more lethal......
 
How can anyone do proper science in the US if the CDC withholds a large portion of the data?

New York Times
 
So you think pharmaceutical companies donate over a billion a year to the FDA out of the kindness of their hearts? Not expecting anything for their return? They are just being great Samaritans...

Next your going to tell me the government funding the CBC doesn't get them preferable treatment and perks.

Does this mean everything big pharma does is bad? Tell that to the people that can now take a pill instead of finding a matching liver donor and expensive surgery to stay alive. Tell that to the cancer patients in remission from use of groundbreaking drugs where their nausea from the powerful drugs is controlled by yet more effective drugs. Tell that to the countless people who will never get cervical cancer now because of HPV vaccines. Tell that to the people with HIV that live normal lives now.

Is there ****** behaviour? Yes. Show me a multi-billion $ company that doesn’t have some ****** behaviour.
 
Does this mean everything big pharma does is bad? Tell that to the people that can now take a pill instead of finding a matching liver donor and expensive surgery to stay alive. Tell that to the cancer patients in remission from use of groundbreaking drugs where their nausea from the powerful drugs is controlled by yet more effective drugs. Tell that to the countless people who will never get cervical cancer now because of HPV vaccines. Tell that to the people with HIV that live normal lives now.

Is there ****** behaviour? Yes. Show me a multi-billion $ company that doesn’t have some ****** behaviour.
They've made some products that help people... let's ignore the corruption, bribery and falsifying of trial data. Hitler painted some nice paintings , lets ignore the whole ww2 thing.
 

Back
Top Bottom