Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

Have you had covid yet?

The home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool
Forum rules
This is the home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool

Have you had covid yet?

Yes confirmed by test
24
28%
No
48
56%
Maybe but not confirmed
14
16%
 
Total votes: 86

absolutezero
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1505
Joined: November 17th, 2016, 8:17 pm
Has thanked: 542 times
Been thanked: 653 times

Re: Have you had covid yet?

#489620

Postby absolutezero » March 27th, 2022, 9:17 pm

Mike4 wrote:
Given the above I'm dead curious about why the Chinese are still taking it so seriously. BBC tonight is reporting 25m people in Shanghai are to be locked down, and not a wussy UK type lockdown where there is a list of excuses long as your arm allowing you to go out anyway. What ARE they are so worried about?

It's called socialism.
It never ends well.

Mike4
Lemon Half
Posts: 7085
Joined: November 24th, 2016, 3:29 am
Has thanked: 1637 times
Been thanked: 3794 times

Re: Have you had covid yet?

#489627

Postby Mike4 » March 27th, 2022, 9:35 pm

Doe anyone have a credible reason not coloured by their personal prejudices?

pje16
Lemon Half
Posts: 6050
Joined: May 30th, 2021, 6:01 pm
Has thanked: 1843 times
Been thanked: 2066 times

Re: Have you had covid yet?

#489634

Postby pje16 » March 27th, 2022, 9:50 pm

Lootman wrote:1) They are riddled with guilt and shame because . . they started it.

2) Their approach throughout has been overkill, predicated no doubt on how docile their population is.

Shangai has had an explosion in the number of cases over the last month, so it's not overkill (IMHO)
Since when have the Chinese as a nation had guilt over it, the time for that was early 2020 and they flatly denied it then

I agree they should feel that way.... but it's not likely they do

XFool
The full Lemon
Posts: 12636
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 2608 times

Re: Have you had covid yet?

#489642

Postby XFool » March 27th, 2022, 10:37 pm

Mike4 wrote:Doe anyone have a credible reason not coloured by their personal prejudices?

Not around here. By the sound of it. :roll:

servodude
Lemon Half
Posts: 8271
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 4435 times
Been thanked: 3564 times

Re: Have you had covid yet?

#489646

Postby servodude » March 27th, 2022, 10:59 pm

Mike4 wrote:Doe anyone have a credible reason not coloured by their personal prejudices?


Sinovac doesn't look to be anywhere as effective as the "western" vaccines, and even then the take up has been slow (understandably given the government's tendency for things like forced sterilization)

so it's much closer to a naive population than all lot of the world

-sd

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18681
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6563 times

Re: Have you had covid yet?

#489664

Postby Lootman » March 28th, 2022, 2:24 am

XFool wrote:
Mike4 wrote:Doe anyone have a credible reason not coloured by their personal prejudices?

Not around here. By the sound of it. :roll:

Mike has a point though. People who are naturally worriers or risk-averse are more likely to want to maintain restrictions for much longer. Those who can tolerate risk better are more likely to want to get back to normal.

So yes, personal circumstances dictate what approach people take to this and other risks. And are probably more important than any "science" they can cherry pick to support their chosen position.

And then there are cultural biases as well. We have seen some nations, particularly Asian ones, take drastic steps in response. Whereas nations with a more independently-minded populace and a greater tradition of individual rights and freedoms, have been willing to take a more balanced approach.

Even within the more informed constituency of TLF you can see those forces at work. Those who are more interventionist on other issues tend to favour a more aggressive approach to Covid. Versus those who are more suspicious about government interference and rely more on independent judgement. There is a lot of personal ideology and bias informing peoples' attitude towards Covid.

XFool
The full Lemon
Posts: 12636
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 2608 times

Re: Have you had covid yet?

#489698

Postby XFool » March 28th, 2022, 9:36 am

Lootman wrote:
XFool wrote:
Mike4 wrote:Doe anyone have a credible reason not coloured by their personal prejudices?

Not around here. By the sound of it. :roll:

Mike has a point though. People who are naturally worriers or risk-averse are more likely to want to maintain restrictions for much longer. Those who can tolerate risk better are more likely to want to get back to normal.

Another slant on this is those more of the 'I'm All Right Jack!' persuasion, who are happy for others to bear the risk.

Lootman wrote:And then there are cultural biases as well. We have seen some nations, particularly Asian ones, take drastic steps in response. Whereas nations with a more independently-minded populace and a greater tradition of individual rights and freedoms, have been willing to take a more balanced approach.

And we have seen the consequences of that "more balanced(?) approach", particularly in the USA!

Lootman wrote:Even within the more informed constituency of TLF you can see those forces at work. Those who are more interventionist on other issues tend to favour a more aggressive approach to Covid. Versus those who are more suspicious about government interference and rely more on independent judgement. There is a lot of personal ideology and bias informing peoples' attitude towards Covid.

Can't disagree with that!

For me though, the crunch point comes when you can see instances of people's ideological views dictating their (mis)understanding and (mis)interpretation of the realities. And yes, even with the TLF constituency one can see instances of this.


P.S. Just to add that I think 'individualism' is almost bound to wrongfoot you in a pandemic. If you can't see why, a clue is to be found in a word beginning with 'i'... :)

XFool
The full Lemon
Posts: 12636
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 2608 times

Re: Have you had covid yet?

#489713

Postby XFool » March 28th, 2022, 10:35 am

Why the UK can’t rely on boosters to get through each new wave of Covid

The Guardian

The evidence suggests performance could be less predictable and effective in the future – though there are promising developments

"The take-home message is that the pandemic is very much with us and evolving dynamically, with a long, bumpy road ahead. The option to sleepwalk through this, taking automatic-pilot choices based on what was “good enough” in the first wave is one we adopt at our peril. We must look at options besides simply boosting through every successive wave. At a time when the US has cut future vaccine research funding, and the UK also needs to maintain its momentum, this should be an urgent priority."

Danny Altmann is a professor of immunology at Imperial College London, who has contributed advice to the Cabinet Office, APPG on long Covid, and the EU

So possibly knows a mite more than some commentators on here?

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18681
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6563 times

Re: Have you had covid yet?

#489750

Postby Lootman » March 28th, 2022, 2:12 pm

XFool wrote:
Lootman wrote:Even within the more informed constituency of TLF you can see those forces at work. Those who are more interventionist on other issues tend to favour a more aggressive approach to Covid. Versus those who are more suspicious about government interference and rely more on independent judgement. There is a lot of personal ideology and bias informing peoples' attitude towards Covid.

Can't disagree with that!

For me though, the crunch point comes when you can see instances of people's ideological views dictating their (mis)understanding and (mis)interpretation of the realities. And yes, even with the TLF constituency one can see instances of this.

Ah but the problem is a lack of consensus about who it is who misunderstood and misinterpreted. There is as much disagreement about that as there is disagreement about responses to Covid. Which leads us back to the subjectivity that I cited. Feeling you are right doesn't mean you are right.

Which is why different people and different nations took very different approaches. There is no single approach that is "right". There are just biases, each with their own justifications.

CryptoPlankton
Lemon Slice
Posts: 786
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:12 pm
Has thanked: 1544 times
Been thanked: 873 times

Re: Have you had covid yet?

#489765

Postby CryptoPlankton » March 28th, 2022, 3:08 pm

Lootman wrote:And then there are cultural biases as well. We have seen some nations, particularly Asian ones, take drastic steps in response. Whereas nations with a more independently-minded populace and a greater tradition of individual rights and freedoms, have been willing to take a more balanced approach.

You can actually see the results of those "cultural biases" within one nation, the USA. I have seen several reports (easily Googleable for anyone interested) showing evidence that the "red" states have had significantly higher death rates at times when restrictions were lifted earlier than democratic states, and again since vaccine take up has proved to be much lower by Republicans than by Democrats. Not an issue if they are prepared to take this "more balanced" approach to their own chances of dying (Darwinism at work? :) ), but I suppose the problem arises when those who don't share their views are forced to decide whether to "risk it anyway" or stay at home more than they would in places where restrictions such as masks (and higher vaccine take up) reduce the risk to a level they would find more acceptable.

(BTW, I'm not taking sides here, as you have said, there is no "right" approach - which is generally the precondition for any debate!)

XFool
The full Lemon
Posts: 12636
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 2608 times

Re: Have you had covid yet?

#489791

Postby XFool » March 28th, 2022, 4:36 pm

Lootman wrote:
XFool wrote:
Lootman wrote:Even within the more informed constituency of TLF you can see those forces at work. Those who are more interventionist on other issues tend to favour a more aggressive approach to Covid. Versus those who are more suspicious about government interference and rely more on independent judgement. There is a lot of personal ideology and bias informing peoples' attitude towards Covid.

Can't disagree with that!

For me though, the crunch point comes when you can see instances of people's ideological views dictating their (mis)understanding and (mis)interpretation of the realities. And yes, even with the TLF constituency one can see instances of this.

Ah but the problem is a lack of consensus about who it is who misunderstood and misinterpreted.

In some instances one hardly needs a "consensus". Or, to put it another way, any reasonable person would rightly assume to know the accepted "consensus".

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18681
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6563 times

Re: Have you had covid yet?

#489814

Postby Lootman » March 28th, 2022, 6:05 pm

XFool wrote:
Lootman wrote:
XFool wrote:
Lootman wrote:Even within the more informed constituency of TLF you can see those forces at work. Those who are more interventionist on other issues tend to favour a more aggressive approach to Covid. Versus those who are more suspicious about government interference and rely more on independent judgement. There is a lot of personal ideology and bias informing peoples' attitude towards Covid.

Can't disagree with that!

For me though, the crunch point comes when you can see instances of people's ideological views dictating their (mis)understanding and (mis)interpretation of the realities. And yes, even with the TLF constituency one can see instances of this.

Ah but the problem is a lack of consensus about who it is who misunderstood and misinterpreted.

In some instances one hardly needs a "consensus". Or, to put it another way, any reasonable person would rightly assume to know the accepted "consensus".

Unless of course people also disagree about who and what is "reasonable", and it appears that they do. The reality remains that there is a lot more subjectivity in the opinions expressed about Covid than many here can acknowledge.

CryptoPlankton wrote:You can actually see the results of those "cultural biases" within one nation, the USA. I have seen several reports (easily Googleable for anyone interested) showing evidence that the "red" states have had significantly higher death rates at times when restrictions were lifted earlier than democratic states, and again since vaccine take up has proved to be much lower by Republicans than by Democrats. Not an issue if they are prepared to take this "more balanced" approach to their own chances of dying (Darwinism at work? :) ), but I suppose the problem arises when those who don't share their views are forced to decide whether to "risk it anyway" or stay at home more than they would in places where restrictions such as masks (and higher vaccine take up) reduce the risk to a level they would find more acceptable.

I'd agree. Much of what constitutes who is "right" about Covid is tied up with different and subjective criteria about how to measure outcomes. Specifically some rely on only very narrow definitions of success e.g. number of cases. Whereas others employ a broader and more balanced set of metrics.

redsturgeon
Lemon Half
Posts: 8912
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:06 am
Has thanked: 1309 times
Been thanked: 3667 times

Re: Have you had covid yet?

#490074

Postby redsturgeon » March 29th, 2022, 3:28 pm

Lootman wrote:I'd agree. Much of what constitutes who is "right" about Covid is tied up with different and subjective criteria about how to measure outcomes. Specifically some rely on only very narrow definitions of success e.g. number of cases. Whereas others employ a broader and more balanced set of metrics.


I'd say looking at excess deaths over the last couple of years is a pretty objective and relevant measure of success or failure.

Here's a useful table

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detai ... hs-tracker

John

dealtn
Lemon Half
Posts: 6072
Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 441 times
Been thanked: 2324 times

Re: Have you had covid yet?

#490151

Postby dealtn » March 29th, 2022, 10:03 pm

redsturgeon wrote:
Lootman wrote:I'd agree. Much of what constitutes who is "right" about Covid is tied up with different and subjective criteria about how to measure outcomes. Specifically some rely on only very narrow definitions of success e.g. number of cases. Whereas others employ a broader and more balanced set of metrics.


I'd say looking at excess deaths over the last couple of years is a pretty objective and relevant measure of success or failure.

Here's a useful table

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detai ... hs-tracker

John


Certainly relevant, but not wholly objective. Over what period would you measure excess deaths? How would you account for as yet unknown future avoidable deaths due to things such as undiscovered, or late discovered cancers? What about any future suicides due to mental health resulting from actions now or the recent past that lead to business failure, or marital break up?

Even outside of deaths there will be large differences between the parallel universes of how the planet would have looked without Covid, and with Covid. Within the "with Covid" world differences in how societies reacted produce similar parallel universes where financial measures such as wealth, bankruptcy, homelessness etc. occur. These all have "outcomes" and subjective measurements on their relevance to the question of how appropriate, or optimal, a response was.

It really is too complicated to measure success, or failure, by merely looking at a narrow metric such as deaths, and of those on a "to date" basis.

redsturgeon
Lemon Half
Posts: 8912
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:06 am
Has thanked: 1309 times
Been thanked: 3667 times

Re: Have you had covid yet?

#490152

Postby redsturgeon » March 29th, 2022, 10:05 pm

dealtn wrote:
redsturgeon wrote:
Lootman wrote:I'd agree. Much of what constitutes who is "right" about Covid is tied up with different and subjective criteria about how to measure outcomes. Specifically some rely on only very narrow definitions of success e.g. number of cases. Whereas others employ a broader and more balanced set of metrics.


I'd say looking at excess deaths over the last couple of years is a pretty objective and relevant measure of success or failure.

Here's a useful table

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detai ... hs-tracker

John


Certainly relevant, but not wholly objective. Over what period would you measure excess deaths? How would you account for as yet unknown future avoidable deaths due to things such as undiscovered, or late discovered cancers? What about any future suicides due to mental health resulting from actions now or the recent past that lead to business failure, or marital break up?

Even outside of deaths there will be large differences between the parallel universes of how the planet would have looked without Covid, and with Covid. Within the "with Covid" world differences in how societies reacted produce similar parallel universes where financial measures such as wealth, bankruptcy, homelessness etc. occur. These all have "outcomes" and subjective measurements on their relevance to the question of how appropriate, or optimal, a response was.

It really is too complicated to measure success, or failure, by merely looking at a narrow metric such as deaths, and of those on a "to date" basis.


You're right we can never know everything there is to know about anything...so why even bother?

servodude
Lemon Half
Posts: 8271
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 4435 times
Been thanked: 3564 times

Re: Have you had covid yet?

#490158

Postby servodude » March 29th, 2022, 10:30 pm

redsturgeon wrote:
dealtn wrote:
redsturgeon wrote:
Lootman wrote:I'd agree. Much of what constitutes who is "right" about Covid is tied up with different and subjective criteria about how to measure outcomes. Specifically some rely on only very narrow definitions of success e.g. number of cases. Whereas others employ a broader and more balanced set of metrics.


I'd say looking at excess deaths over the last couple of years is a pretty objective and relevant measure of success or failure.

Here's a useful table

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detai ... hs-tracker

John


Certainly relevant, but not wholly objective. Over what period would you measure excess deaths? How would you account for as yet unknown future avoidable deaths due to things such as undiscovered, or late discovered cancers? What about any future suicides due to mental health resulting from actions now or the recent past that lead to business failure, or marital break up?

Even outside of deaths there will be large differences between the parallel universes of how the planet would have looked without Covid, and with Covid. Within the "with Covid" world differences in how societies reacted produce similar parallel universes where financial measures such as wealth, bankruptcy, homelessness etc. occur. These all have "outcomes" and subjective measurements on their relevance to the question of how appropriate, or optimal, a response was.

It really is too complicated to measure success, or failure, by merely looking at a narrow metric such as deaths, and of those on a "to date" basis.


You're right we can never know everything there is to know about anything...so why even bother?


I have noticed that the whadaboutery around this stuff remains strong to this day - I hope it's not going to stop our species learning from our mistakes (or if mistake is a triggering word consider "past performance" )

AFAIK excess deaths are only considered over a period (that's how integration works in the real world) because on one asymptote everyone dies
That's true, and pointless, and very analogous to a good degree of the "ah well whatever will be" logic that appears to be the direction in which some of the more vocal deniers of Covid have pivoted to. I can see why, there's grains of truth and it follows the same tune as most of their trite output
- but it's just chattering noise

But feels like this is another thread being dragged off topic so I clicked probably given the hallucinations but I didn't have a test to hand
:)
- sd

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18681
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6563 times

Re: Have you had covid yet?

#490160

Postby Lootman » March 29th, 2022, 10:37 pm

servodude wrote:
redsturgeon wrote:
dealtn wrote:
redsturgeon wrote:
Lootman wrote:I'd agree. Much of what constitutes who is "right" about Covid is tied up with different and subjective criteria about how to measure outcomes. Specifically some rely on only very narrow definitions of success e.g. number of cases. Whereas others employ a broader and more balanced set of metrics.

I'd say looking at excess deaths over the last couple of years is a pretty objective and relevant measure of success or failure.

Certainly relevant, but not wholly objective. Over what period would you measure excess deaths? How would you account for as yet unknown future avoidable deaths due to things such as undiscovered, or late discovered cancers? What about any future suicides due to mental health resulting from actions now or the recent past that lead to business failure, or marital break up?

Even outside of deaths there will be large differences between the parallel universes of how the planet would have looked without Covid, and with Covid. Within the "with Covid" world differences in how societies reacted produce similar parallel universes where financial measures such as wealth, bankruptcy, homelessness etc. occur. These all have "outcomes" and subjective measurements on their relevance to the question of how appropriate, or optimal, a response was.

It really is too complicated to measure success, or failure, by merely looking at a narrow metric such as deaths, and of those on a "to date" basis.

You're right we can never know everything there is to know about anything...so why even bother?

I have noticed that the whadaboutery around this stuff remains strong to this day - I hope it's not going to stop our species learning from our mistakes (or if mistake is a triggering word consider "past performance" )

What "whadaboutery" (sic)?

Whatever metric we might agree on about the harm done by Covid, there still remains a question about what that means for what we should have done differently about it.

Even the nations that pretty much ignored it only saw a 1 in 500 death count. How much grief should we endure to avoid that? Not sure you can answer that.


Return to “Coronavirus Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests