Priorities. High seroprevalence is a very compelling argument in favor of reopening - definitely more than hearsay about probable-coded deaths being not-so-probable.
Printable View
Priorities. High seroprevalence is a very compelling argument in favor of reopening - definitely more than hearsay about probable-coded deaths being not-so-probable.
I totally understand that News outlets are biased...Fox= Right wing, CNN= Left wing, so on and so forth, got it...but thats true of ALL information that is coming from a source outside of yourself, and even we have our biases and can even deceive ourselves but that doesn't mean that ALL news they report is untrue...a lot of it is TRUE although as you already know is presented in a way that bolsters their world view...that is why we study logic and understand the difference between an eyewitness or a direct witness and a second hand source..yes, they could have culled through 50 funeral directors and picked the 5 that agree with them but you are still getting information from a primary source and THAT matters because even biased people will often change their views when they themselves experience something directly..it makes all the difference..but doesn't mean they are 100% correct either..the funeral directors are giving us another primary source of evidence separate from the medical and government entities and thus giving us another set of eyes to look at this issue to determine this vital and most important question that we all really want the answer to...IS THIS A REAL THREAT OR NOT ?because we need to seek the answer to that and we're fucked if we get the answer wrong because depending on the answer will be serious consequences
Like they said originally, many many more than were thought to be infected.
Quote:
These prevalence point estimates imply that 54,000 (95CI 25,000 to 91,000 using weighted prevalence; 23,000 with 95CI 14,000-35,000 using unweighted prevalence) people were infected in Santa Clara County by early April, many more than the approximately 1,000 confirmed cases at the time of the survey. Conclusions The estimated population prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in Santa Clara County implies that the infection may be much more widespread than indicated by the number of confirmed cases.
You make your case eloquently, but I couldn't help but be reminded of this. It made me chuckle to myself, and I post it in the spirit of levity in a thread that I feel could use some. I hope it is received as such.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZSoJDUD_bU
This is nice in theory, but we're currently living in an era where there are significant numbers of people who have lost so must trust in received wisdom that they think the planet is flat.
These are the sorts of folks who would campaign for and likely bring into being mass gatherings, if given a chance, no matter what the experts say. And a single mass gathering can cause havoc if conditions are ripe.
Yes, Spacediver, a simple football game could easily mean the end of all human life on the planet. This is absolutely true.
Nobody believes this bullshit anymore. We're more concerned with the survival of our culture.
Not really a strawman in the context of my statement. I was stating what I hoped would be some common ground to build upon. As such, I attempted something basic and obvious that would have a high chance of being agreed upon.
Perhaps this discussion would be more fruitful if you stopped assuming that there are only two positions to this argument. Instead of assuming things about my beliefs, why don't you query them instead, so we can have an actual conversation?
Nothing will be gained through conversation if we merely roleplay our expected scripts.
If we all know it's dangerous, we wouldn't need men with guns preventing us from gathering.
A viral epidemic that spreads through respiration is a decidedly communal phenomenon, and as such, is a rather interesting test of your above-stated principle.
"Innocent until proven guilty" by design weighs the harms associated with depriving freedom of an innocent person more greatly than the harms associated with letting a guilty person go free.
The harms associated with letting unwitting people mingle in large crowds may, in some cases, outweigh the harms associated with restricting their freedom to assemble in large groups.