COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events - Page 1424

starting strength gym
Page 1424 of 1592 FirstFirst ... 42492413241374141414221423142414251426143414741524 ... LastLast
Results 14,231 to 14,240 of 15916

Thread: COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events

  1. #14231
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    46,330

    Default

    • starting strength seminar october 2021
    • starting strength seminar december 2021
    • starting strength seminar february 2022
    Quote Originally Posted by anticausal View Post
    I like Tucker, but why is everything so often framed this way? It will happen. We're just notifying you. Resistance is futile.
    What about the events of the past year have indicated to you that this will NOT happen?

  2. #14232
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    792

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    First Cuba, and now South Africa. I'll bet CNN is all over it.
    and what about the other CCP? Churches being burned in Canada as Trudeau looks on - YouTube

  3. #14233
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    46,330

  4. #14234
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,201

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    What about the events of the past year have indicated to you that this will NOT happen?
    Not much. There aren't many bullets flying yet, but we are at war, and we are losing badly. I think the good guys need to take more care not to run defeatist propaganda. Some of it is intentional, but most of it is just sloppiness.

    For example, I would have framed the headline as "DNC declares war on your privacy" or something to that effect.

  5. #14235
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    792

  6. #14236
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Here is a bad-faith attempt at a rebuttal. Its main supporting evidence is a meta-analysis which was found to be erroneous as a preprint, but was nonetheless published with mistakes. These are detailed in the request for retraction.

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Grantham View Post
    I can't say an awful lot about how the cutoffs for RT-PCR are determined by various clinical labs. However I can say that if you have a very well behaved assay, it will rarely give you false positives, even out to 40 cycles. I don't have any personal experience with the assays that are being used for this virus, so I can't say whether this assay behaves or not.
    This is a narrow technical interpretation which fails to see the bigger picture. Yes, it is (somewhat) true that, even after many cycles, a well-tuned assay is specific to the presence of the nucleic acid of interest. However, this is not equivalent to the presence of clinically-significant, infectious disease, which is the actual downstream interpretation of the test.

  7. #14237
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anticausal View Post
    Not much. There aren't many bullets flying yet, but we are at war, and we are losing badly. I think the good guys need to take more care not to run defeatist propaganda. Some of it is intentional, but most of it is just sloppiness.

    For example, I would have framed the headline as "DNC declares war on your privacy" or something to that effect.
    I agree.

    I watched a 4 hour video with Dr. Fleming regarding CoVid, the vaccines, etc. One of the most important points he made is the following:
    In the Vietnam War they did not use the most lethal bullets. It was "better" to severely injure the enemy combatants. That way you take out him, and his buddies that had to bring him off the field. In addition, the injured solder brings the story of the incident home. The goal is to demoralize the enemy.

    I generally like Tucker, but sometimes think the conspiratorial view of him could be right. He's the gatekeeper of allowable opinion for conservatives. At the same time he often demoralizes by presenting encroaching tyranny as something we have to accept. I've seen this at least a few times. Would the oligarchs allow him to continue, if he was a real threat, rather than a controlled threat?

  8. #14238
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Village of Afton, Virginia
    Posts
    871

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David A. Rowe View Post
    There are deltas because they are different countries,
    Don't understand this

  9. #14239
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Posts
    2,349

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelPB View Post

    I generally like Tucker, but sometimes think the conspiratorial view of him could be right. He's the gatekeeper of allowable opinion for conservatives. At the same time he often demoralizes by presenting encroaching tyranny as something we have to accept. I've seen this at least a few times. Would the oligarchs allow him to continue, if he was a real threat, rather than a controlled threat?
    Hes an entertainer. He happens to be very good at putting together coherent stories.

    I guess what I enjoy most about him is the left has no one close.

  10. #14240
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    St. Joseph, MO
    Posts
    369

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Perhaps I wasn't clear about my position wrt ivermectin. I've not said that people should not be treated with ivermectin. I don't have the expertise to evaluate treatment protocols. Metanalyses like this appear to make a reasonable case, but I leave those decisions to folks that are more qualified than me to evaluate these studies.

    The issue that I had was wrt using ivermectin as the primary means to prevent infections. I stand by my assesment that there are not compelling evidence that we should drop vaccinations and all non pharmaceutical interventions and replace them with ivermectin. It may make sense to add it to what is already being done, but not as a wholesale replacement yet. Squishing together a bunch of small studies to make that case is not enough.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva Kaul View Post
    This is a narrow technical interpretation which fails to see the bigger picture. Yes, it is (somewhat) true that, even after many cycles, a well-tuned assay is specific to the presence of the nucleic acid of interest. However, this is not equivalent to the presence of clinically-significant, infectious disease, which is the actual downstream interpretation of the test.
    Maybe I misunderstood the issue that was brought up in the post I was responding to. I thought the issue being brought up was why they use 35-45 cycles if it wasn't reliable. There is of course a difference between a positive RT-PCR assay and disease.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •