You are wrong. Whether you are deliberately wrong and thus lying or merely in error is up to you to work out.
You posted some nonsense- I pointed out why it was nonsense. If you don't understand what sample bias is and why it's a bad thing then just say so.
In response you posted something that isn't wrong, but is just misleading. My third point covered why it was misleading. I've explained why several times but you still don't seem to understand it. Which is odd. So here we go again:
First, we have the paradox of prevention - when people either choose to, or are told to behave in ways that protect them from Covid, say, they also protect themselves from all sorts of things that are not Covid. In the case of folks who lock down, they protect themselves from road accidents, for example. They also protect themselves from Flu, for example. Now it may well be the case that all these things protect from short term death but lead to longer term mortality, but that doesn't show. In short, as a result of trying to avoid covid, death rates drop significantly.
That means that before you even count a single death from Covid, death rates will drop significantly.
Now add the Covid deaths.
Say that the preventative action saves 400 deaths a day and then Covid causes 400 deaths a day, that doesn't mean Covid isn't dangerous. It means that the side effects of protecting against it saved as many lives as were lost from it.
And gives the sort of slimeball who prey upon gullible souls, like you are demonstrating yourself to be, plenty of ammunition. Because if we didn't protect against Covid, then we wouldn't get the secondary benefit of prevention, we wouldn't even get the primary benefit of prevention, we'd get the 400 deaths a day and we'd get however many extra deaths a day come from not taking preventative action.
In this case, the Omicron variant looked very dangerous for a while, there was an extended period in which we didn't know - but while Boris dithered for political reasons, rather a lot of people locked down, then as cases increased they quarantined and then it wasn't as terrible as it could have been and so a lot of folks didn't die of other causes and then didn't die of Covid. However 400 a day or so were not so lucky, partially backfilling the numbers.
So first, if I'm wrong,
explain how this is wrong.
Second, you appear to believe the bullshit of a massive disparity between deaths at 8 days and deaths on the death certificate. I agree this will have a smal, possibly even medium sized effect, but it will not lead to:
At this point, nobody knows, even by the most liberal definition of 'know'. But you have twice made the case for this idea and both times I have corrected you on methodological errors that no competent adult with an interest in science should make. The current data, up to mid December simply doesn't show the massive divergence that you have asserted will be there.
So when I said:
So second, if I'm wrong,
explain how this is wrong.
Finally, there is intellectual dishonesty. You started off with one set of claims. When those were shown to be wrong, you moved to a completely different set of claims and implied that they supported the first set. I don't know if you are deceiving yourself, but you certainly are not deceiving us.
Originally Posted by genesos
Reply With Quote
