COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events - Page 366

starting strength gym
Page 366 of 2395 FirstFirst ... 2663163563643653663673683764164668661366 ... LastLast
Results 3,651 to 3,660 of 23944

Thread: COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events

  1. #3651
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Rocksprings, TX
    Posts
    290

    Default

    • starting strength seminar october 2022
    • starting strength seminar december 2022
    • starting strength seminar february 2023
    Quote Originally Posted by mpalios View Post
    Report that George Floyd was covid19 positive.....not terribly relevant. Just like a cherry on top for YTD 2020

    Autopsy report: George Floyd died from cardiopulmonary arrest, was positive for COVID-19

    It WILL count as a COVID death, right?


    sb

  2. #3652
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    49,632

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VNV View Post
    Mattis’s statement is a test of whether you can think for yourself in the face of authority and bona fides.
    The Authority of The SCIENCE: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...6.2020.1772988

    It's in a psychology journal. But it is peer-reviewed.

  3. #3653
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    2,096

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sean Berry View Post
    It WILL count as a COVID death, right?


    sb
    If only he'd been intubated in time...

  4. #3654
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,560

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    The Authority of The SCIENCE: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...6.2020.1772988

    It's in a psychology journal. But it is peer-reviewed.
    So they determine that trust in science and scientists matters most. Therefore “it is important to take steps towards improving the level of public trust in science and scientists. As this is not an easy endeavor . . .” (No kidding!) Soft platitudes throughout, ending with bromides.

    Nonetheless, take it for what it’s worth, a nice stats exercise on Reddit data. (I like their “control/attention verification questions” -“Mark Agree and proceed”)

  5. #3655
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    49,632

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    The Authority of The SCIENCE: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...6.2020.1772988

    It's in a psychology journal. But it is peer-reviewed.
    This really is the goddamndest thing so far. These people do not understand anything about science, in which trust is not a variable -- instead, they write about SCIENCE, and how it must be trusted. This is an amazing paradigm shift, brought on by the media and their obedient servants in government.

    The present study aimed to develop and test the theoretical model that could help us understand the differences in public compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines. The final model highlights at least two important findings. First, COVID-19 risk perception and trust in science (relatively independently) predict compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines; specifically, individuals who perceive COVID-19 as a serious threat and those who have greater trust in science and scientists are more likely to act in accordance with the proposed guidelines. Second, political conservatism, religious orthodoxy, conspiracy ideation and intellectual curiosity do not directly affect compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines but do so indirectly through trust in science. To further elaborate on this finding – individuals who are higher on political conservatism, religious orthodoxy and conspiracy ideation trust science to a lesser degree, which in turn leads to a lower level of compliance with the preventive measures. The opposite is true in the case of intellectual curiosity; participants high on intellectual curiosity trust science more, which in turn leads to a higher level of compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines.

    Although our results are highly consistent with the proposed theoretical model, it is worth noting that one variable, education level, had to be excluded from the theoretical model, as it did not significantly affect trust in science or any of the COVID-19-related variables. Moreover, even on a correlational level, education showed only weak associations with trust in science, perceived risk and compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines. This finding is rather surprising, but not unprecedented, since some previous studies have also found no relationship between education level and trust in science (e.g. Wilgus & Travis, 2019) and between education and disease-preventive behavior (e.g. Velan et al., 2011). It is also worth noting that this finding may be due to the somewhat limited variability of education in the present sample, as, for example, only 2.5% of the participants indicated ‘primary education or less’ and ‘lower secondary education’ as their highest level of education.
    It is interesting to speculate about the relationship of the three clauses in bold.

  6. #3656
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,560

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    This really is the goddamndest thing so far. These people do not understand anything about science, in which trust is not a variable -- instead, they write about SCIENCE, and how it must be trusted. This is an amazing paradigm shift, brought on by the media and their obedient servants in government.
    The authors hijacked their own paper. They pieced out two qualitative factors, out of a larger gauzy set, which seem to directly drive compliance with COVID guidance: risk perception and the trust thing. The other factors played into compliance indirectly through those two main ones, according to their modeling.

    Then they said (my words, see) “Well then! Since COVID guidance and compliance is obviously correct and most important, and we can’t quite do anything about risk perception, we need to increase the sheep coefficient.”

  7. #3657
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    496

    Default

    Received 06 Apr 2020, Accepted 19 May 2020, Published online: 01 Jun 2020
    When lockdowns last longer than peer review.

  8. #3658
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    49,632

    Default

    And here's another very interesting thing: The DA in Minneapolis has changed the charge against their fine officer Derek Chauvin from 3rd-degree murder to 2nd-degree murder. Here is the statute:

    609.19 MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE.
    Subdivision 1.Intentional murder; drive-by shootings. Whoever does either of the following is guilty of murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years:
    (1) causes the death of a human being with intent to effect the death of that person or another, but without premeditation; or

    (2) causes the death of a human being while committing or attempting to commit a drive-by shooting in violation of section 609.66, subdivision 1e, under circumstances other than those described in section 609.185, paragraph (a), clause (3).

    žSubd. 2.Unintentional murders. Whoever does either of the following is guilty of unintentional murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years:
    (1) causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting; or

    (2) causes the death of a human being without intent to effect the death of any person, while intentionally inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily harm upon the victim, when the perpetrator is restrained under an order for protection and the victim is a person designated to receive protection under the order. As used in this clause, "order for protection" includes an order for protection issued under chapter 518B; a harassment restraining order issued under section 609.748; a court order setting conditions of pretrial release or conditions of a criminal sentence or juvenile court disposition; a restraining order issued in a marriage dissolution action; and any order issued by a court of another state or of the United States that is similar to any of these orders.
    Does either of these definitions apply to this case? 1.) Can they prove intent to kill, or 2.) can they prove that Chauvin was committing another felony or was under a restraining order of some type? It will be difficult. And if Chauvin walks, as it seems he might under these charges, what will happen? It may be that the details of the 9 minutes are such that they think they have a case, i.e. the paramedic that said "There's no pulse," and the 2 minutes after that during which Minneapolis's fine officer Chauvin continued to kneel on his neck is going to be interpreted as intent. But the other three have been charged as accessories to 2nd-degree murder, and if they can't prove intent by Chauvin, what happens to the other three thugs?

  9. #3659
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Provo, Utah
    Posts
    521

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    And here's another very interesting thing: The DA in Minneapolis has changed the charge...And if Chauvin walks, as it seems he might under these charges, what will happen?
    Some men just want to watch the world burn.

  10. #3660
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    1,022

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by Fulcrum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kitsuma
    Homemade masks provide no virus protection.
    That's not true.
    You are right. Assuming you've read this thread, you'll agree homemade (bandanna as Dr Gupta demonstrates in quoted video) masks provide poor protection against spreading or catching the virus.

    Admittedly, I'm binary. It either protects or it doesn't. So, it doesn't for me. But, I think you'd be hard to recognize with one on.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hollis View Post
    You've posted anonymous Twitter videos showing a mob of jean-shorts jabronis beating each other up, and some random lawlessness.

    You're distracted by minutiae.
    I'm guessing you don't have time to dig/crowdsource so you rely on "Authoritative sources" to filter these video reports for you and then tell you what to think. Hollis, they are paid lobbyists. They lie.

    There are hundreds of videos posted by regular (unpaid) protesters from all over the US that support my premise: there are professional, militant provocateurs ruining the peaceful protests for everyone.

    The result is: we are distracted & divided. Which is exactly what [they] need.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hollis View Post
    And the b-stock V for Vendetta prose is not giving these ideas the weight you think it does...
    ok, I'll give you that...maybe too much coffee. How about I cut back on the coffee, and you cut back on the martinis? Martinis? Really?

    It wasn't V, but you are only one letter off.

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
  •