Got Covid.

[Christian Miller]

If he said "maybe" do you think your bank account would be bigger?

I suppose depends if he tweeted it and if I am a publicly traded company in which I also own shares. (I am not)

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

The thoughts of someone who would've preferred a monolithic and united response to a disease that 99.7% of people will survive.

I've tried hard to stay out of this, because most of the thread lacks any objective basis in verifiable facts. Many of the rants are pure personal invective and there seems to be a lot of confusion between bravado and courage. But the repeated misstatement above demands correction. There is no single mortality rate for Covid because it varies greatly with age, among other things. The death rate from Covid is somewhere between 12 and 15 times greater for those between 65 and 74 than it is for those between 35 and 44. Above 74, it goes up even more dramatically. Per the Society of Actuaries, insurance industry stats suggest an overall 5% mortality in 2023 for those with Covid who died from it between the ages of 65 and 84 - but this does not distinguish between vaccinated and unvaccinated people or their overall health status. So it's actually lower than 5% for the healthy and the vaccinated and higher for the sicker and the unvaccinated. And it's a secondary cause of death on another 25% or so of death certificates.

We all know the age distribution of members of this forum because there's a thread on it. Like any other statistical summary, it's not a perfect representation of the entire population because it depends on those who choose to respond. But by this time, there are a lot of respondents and it's probably close to the actual distribution:



More than half of us are over 55 and at much greater risk for Covid and its sequelae. Death is only one of the bad outcomes we wish to avoid. Many have lost their senses of taste and smell. Many have experienced severe brain fog, and I'm fighting the urge to suggest that some of the drivel posted in this thread has resulted from it. It's bad enough that so many of you are unable or unwilling to recognize that the risk of a bad outcome from Covid is far greater for a lot of us here than it is for many of those who are so blithely posting that we should just suck it up so they can be "free".

Are vaccines effective? From the NIH database: "The odds ratio (OR) for mortality among unvaccinated patients compared to vaccinated patients was 2.46 (95% CI: 1.71-3.53), indicating that unvaccinated patients were 2.46 times more likely to die from COVID-19." Similarly, the likelihood of developing long Covid symptoms and the debilitating chronic illness that follows is about 4 to 5 times greater in unvaccinated people than in vaccinated ones.

The study that prompted the outcry of "masks don't work against Covid" was a meta-analysis by the Cochrane Group, which is one of the most authoritative sources of data-based medical evidence (if not the most authoritative) in the world. This work has been widely misinterpreted and misused as pseudoevidence against masks. But the actual study was a review of published research looking at whether masks reduce the spread of respiratory viruses in a population, NOT whether they reduce the risk of contracting Covid. And the conclusion was based on the fact that there was poor compliance with mask wearing in the study groups on which the component articles were based (no higher than 50%). What the study showed was stated well and clearly in the last paragaph: "There is a need for large, well designed RCTs [randomized controlled trials] addressing the effectiveness of many of these interventions in multiple settings and populations, as well as the impact of adherence on effectiveness, especially in those most at risk of ARIs [acute respiratory infections]".

CDC published this clear study showing that in the study populations, those not wearing masks at all had a Covid infection rate 2.3x higher than those who consistently wore a well fitted mask in indoor public spaces. From the latest available statistics from CDC on the leading causes of death in the US, Covid is currently 4th behind heart disease, cancer, and opiod overdoses - it was 3rd last year. This is serious stuff that cannot be ignored. More than half of us on this forum have a far greater than 0.3% chance of dying from Covid if we get it. This is neither political nor mythical - it's simple fact. Ignoring it and intentionally exposing us to such risk is - at best - morally wrong, inconsiderate, and misguided.

Perhaps some of the angst behind this is that we don't deserve to be free to go out and play our guitars because we'e old. But when I last checked, the Constitution doesn't stratify for age.

[DawgBone]

I suppose depends if he tweeted it and if I am a publicly floated company. (I am not)

Depends are adult diapers. Have a nice day!

[Christian Miller]

Depends are adult diapers. Have a nice day!

Not quite sure how that follows from my last post, but sure, why not?

[rpjazzguitar]

I noticed the so-called scientific consensus has changed on a number of key points over the course of the pandemic.

That's a feature of real science, not a bug.

[wintermoon]

As I posted earlier, 3.4 million dead from Covid.
Whether that's "a few already unhealthy/sickly people, happens all the time" as someone posted or whatever percentage you want to assign to it in some feeble way of justifying not taking precautions it's still 3.4 million.and counting, not including the people whose health is permanently compromised as a result of contracting the disease.

[rpjazzguitar]

I've tried hard to stay out of this, because most of the thread lacks any objective basis in verifiable facts. Many of the rants are pure personal invective and there seems to be a lot of confusion between bravado and courage. But the repeated misstatement above demands correction. There is no single mortality rate for Covid because it varies greatly with age, among other things. The death rate from Covid is somewhere between 12 and 15 times greater for those between 65 and 74 than it is for those between 35 and 44. Above 74, it goes up even more dramatically. Per the Society of Actuaries, insurance industry stats suggest an overall 5% mortality in 2023 for those with Covid who died from it between the ages of 65 and 84 - but this does not distinguish between vaccinated and unvaccinated people or their overall health status. So it's actually lower than 5% for the healthy and the vaccinated and higher for the sicker and the unvaccinated. And it's a secondary cause of death on another 25% or so of death certificates.

We all know the age distribution of members of this forum because there's a thread on it. Like any other statistical summary, it's not a perfect representation of the entire population because it depends on those who choose to respond. But by this time, there are a lot of respondents and it's probably close to the actual distribution:



More than half of us are over 55 and at much greater risk for Covid and its sequelae. Death is only one of the bad outcomes we wish to avoid. Many have lost their senses of taste and smell. Many have experienced severe brain fog, and I'm fighting the urge to suggest that some of the drivel posted in this thread has resulted from it. It's bad enough that so many of you are unable or unwilling to recognize that the risk of a bad outcome from Covid is far greater for a lot of us here than it is for many of those who are so blithely posting that we should just suck it up so they can be "free".

Are vaccines effective? From the NIH database: "The odds ratio (OR) for mortality among unvaccinated patients compared to vaccinated patients was 2.46 (95% CI: 1.71-3.53), indicating that unvaccinated patients were 2.46 times more likely to die from COVID-19." Similarly, the likelihood of developing long Covid symptoms and the debilitating chronic illness that follows is about 4 to 5 times greater in unvaccinated people than in vaccinated ones.

The study that prompted the outcry of "masks don't work against Covid" was a meta-analysis by the Cochrane Group, which is one of the most authoritative sources of data-based medical evidence (if not the most authoritative) in the world. This work has been widely misinterpreted and misused as pseudoevidence against masks. But the actual study was a review of published research looking at whether masks reduce the spread of respiratory viruses in a population, NOT whether they reduce the risk of contracting Covid. And the conclusion was based on the fact that there was poor compliance with mask wearing in the study groups on which the component articles were based (no higher than 50%). What the study showed was stated well and clearly in the last paragaph: "There is a need for large, well designed RCTs [randomized controlled trials] addressing the effectiveness of many of these interventions in multiple settings and populations, as well as the impact of adherence on effectiveness, especially in those most at risk of ARIs [acute respiratory infections]".

CDC published this clear study showing that in the study populations, those not wearing masks at all had a Covid infection rate 2.3x higher than those who consistently wore a well fitted mask in indoor public spaces. From the latest available statistics from CDC on the leading causes of death in the US, Covid is currently 4th behind heart disease, cancer, and opiod overdoses - it was 3rd last year. This is serious stuff that cannot be ignored. More than half of us on this forum have a far greater than 0.3% chance of dying from Covid if we get it. This is neither political nor mythical - it's simple fact. Ignoring it and intentionally exposing us to such risk is - at best - morally wrong, inconsiderate, and misguided.

Perhaps some of the angst behind this is that we don't deserve to be free to go out and play our guitars because we'e old. But when I last checked, the Constitution doesn't stratify for age.

Much appreciated. The data are clear and this is a good summary.

[skiboyny]

I've tried hard to stay out of this, because most of the thread lacks any objective basis in verifiable facts. Many of the rants are pure personal invective and there seems to be a lot of confusion between bravado and courage. But the repeated misstatement above demands correction. There is no single mortality rate for Covid because it varies greatly with age, among other things. The death rate from Covid is somewhere between 12 and 15 times greater for those between 65 and 74 than it is for those between 35 and 44. Above 74, it goes up even more dramatically. Per the Society of Actuaries, insurance industry stats suggest an overall 5% mortality in 2023 for those with Covid who died from it between the ages of 65 and 84 - but this does not distinguish between vaccinated and unvaccinated people or their overall health status. So it's actually lower than 5% for the healthy and the vaccinated and higher for the sicker and the unvaccinated. And it's a secondary cause of death on another 25% or so of death certificates.

We all know the age distribution of members of this forum because there's a thread on it. Like any other statistical summary, it's not a perfect representation of the entire population because it depends on those who choose to respond. But by this time, there are a lot of respondents and it's probably close to the actual distribution:

The facts were badly squued along the way of covid.



More than half of us are over 55 and at much greater risk for Covid and its sequelae. Death is only one of the bad outcomes we wish to avoid. Many have lost their senses of taste and smell. Many have experienced severe brain fog, and I'm fighting the urge to suggest that some of the drivel posted in this thread has resulted from it. It's bad enough that so many of you are unable or unwilling to recognize that the risk of a bad outcome from Covid is far greater for a lot of us here than it is for many of those who are so blithely posting that we should just suck it up so they can be "free".

Are vaccines effective? From the NIH database: "The odds ratio (OR) for mortality among unvaccinated patients compared to vaccinated patients was 2.46 (95% CI: 1.71-3.53), indicating that unvaccinated patients were 2.46 times more likely to die from COVID-19." Similarly, the likelihood of developing long Covid symptoms and the debilitating chronic illness that follows is about 4 to 5 times greater in unvaccinated people than in vaccinated ones.

The study that prompted the outcry of "masks don't work against Covid" was a meta-analysis by the Cochrane Group, which is one of the most authoritative sources of data-based medical evidence (if not the most authoritative) in the world. This work has been widely misinterpreted and misused as pseudoevidence against masks. But the actual study was a review of published research looking at whether masks reduce the spread of respiratory viruses in a population, NOT whether they reduce the risk of contracting Covid. And the conclusion was based on the fact that there was poor compliance with mask wearing in the study groups on which the component articles were based (no higher than 50%). What the study showed was stated well and clearly in the last paragaph: "There is a need for large, well designed RCTs [randomized controlled trials] addressing the effectiveness of many of these interventions in multiple settings and populations, as well as the impact of adherence on effectiveness, especially in those most at risk of ARIs [acute respiratory infections]".

CDC published this clear study showing that in the study populations, those not wearing masks at all had a Covid infection rate 2.3x higher than those who consistently wore a well fitted mask in indoor public spaces. From the latest available statistics from CDC on the leading causes of death in the US, Covid is currently 4th behind heart disease, cancer, and opiod overdoses - it was 3rd last year. This is serious stuff that cannot be ignored. More than half of us on this forum have a far greater than 0.3% chance of dying from Covid if we get it. This is neither political nor mythical - it's simple fact. Ignoring it and intentionally exposing us to such risk is - at best - morally wrong, inconsiderate, and misguided.

Perhaps some of the angst behind this is that we don't deserve to be free to go out and play our guitars because we'e old. But when I last checked, the Constitution doesn't stratify for age.

You have to trust the CDC and or the government to accept these "facts" This is where the rub comes in. Watching the handling of Covid, has really opened my eyes personally. I am very distrusting of much of what the government says or does. The Science was not allowed to be questioned by anyone unless it walked the same narrative. Much of the "science" is either directly or indirectly funded by the government. So if you believe, that's great, I remain sceptical.

[mr. beaumont]

I'm still kind of wondering what the questioning of the science actually was? "I don't like it" isn't a question.

[lawson-stone]

I've tried hard to stay out of this, because most of the thread lacks any objective basis in verifiable facts. Many of the rants are pure personal invective and there seems to be a lot of confusion between bravado and courage. But the repeated misstatement above demands correction. There is no single mortality rate for Covid because it varies greatly with age, among other things. The death rate from Covid is somewhere between 12 and 15 times greater for those between 65 and 74 than it is for those between 35 and 44. Above 74, it goes up even more dramatically. Per the Society of Actuaries, insurance industry stats suggest an overall 5% mortality in 2023 for those with Covid who died from it between the ages of 65 and 84 - but this does not distinguish between vaccinated and unvaccinated people or their overall health status. So it's actually lower than 5% for the healthy and the vaccinated and higher for the sicker and the unvaccinated. And it's a secondary cause of death on another 25% or so of death certificates.

We all know the age distribution of members of this forum because there's a thread on it. Like any other statistical summary, it's not a perfect representation of the entire population because it depends on those who choose to respond. But by this time, there are a lot of respondents and it's probably close to the actual distribution:



More than half of us are over 55 and at much greater risk for Covid and its sequelae. Death is only one of the bad outcomes we wish to avoid. Many have lost their senses of taste and smell. Many have experienced severe brain fog, and I'm fighting the urge to suggest that some of the drivel posted in this thread has resulted from it. It's bad enough that so many of you are unable or unwilling to recognize that the risk of a bad outcome from Covid is far greater for a lot of us here than it is for many of those who are so blithely posting that we should just suck it up so they can be "free".

Are vaccines effective? From the NIH database: "The odds ratio (OR) for mortality among unvaccinated patients compared to vaccinated patients was 2.46 (95% CI: 1.71-3.53), indicating that unvaccinated patients were 2.46 times more likely to die from COVID-19." Similarly, the likelihood of developing long Covid symptoms and the debilitating chronic illness that follows is about 4 to 5 times greater in unvaccinated people than in vaccinated ones.

The study that prompted the outcry of "masks don't work against Covid" was a meta-analysis by the Cochrane Group, which is one of the most authoritative sources of data-based medical evidence (if not the most authoritative) in the world. This work has been widely misinterpreted and misused as pseudoevidence against masks. But the actual study was a review of published research looking at whether masks reduce the spread of respiratory viruses in a population, NOT whether they reduce the risk of contracting Covid. And the conclusion was based on the fact that there was poor compliance with mask wearing in the study groups on which the component articles were based (no higher than 50%). What the study showed was stated well and clearly in the last paragaph: "There is a need for large, well designed RCTs [randomized controlled trials] addressing the effectiveness of many of these interventions in multiple settings and populations, as well as the impact of adherence on effectiveness, especially in those most at risk of ARIs [acute respiratory infections]".

CDC published this clear study showing that in the study populations, those not wearing masks at all had a Covid infection rate 2.3x higher than those who consistently wore a well fitted mask in indoor public spaces. From the latest available statistics from CDC on the leading causes of death in the US, Covid is currently 4th behind heart disease, cancer, and opiod overdoses - it was 3rd last year. This is serious stuff that cannot be ignored. More than half of us on this forum have a far greater than 0.3% chance of dying from Covid if we get it. This is neither political nor mythical - it's simple fact. Ignoring it and intentionally exposing us to such risk is - at best - morally wrong, inconsiderate, and misguided.

Perhaps some of the angst behind this is that we don't deserve to be free to go out and play our guitars because we'e old. But when I last checked, the Constitution doesn't stratify for age.

Good heavens man, you actually think people want actual data? This is the internet! People hiding behind aliases enjoy bullying others and saying whatever they please! Don't confuse them with facts, they cling to their (wrong) notions of freedom. So if we end up losing an older player like Kenny Burrell or some to COVID, that's the cost of freedom I guess.

Seriously, good data.

[sgosnell]

An untrained, uneducated random conspiracy theorist who 'challenges' the findings of trained scientists should always be ignored. The absolute core of science is that as data and experimental outcomes change, theories must change.

[BFrench]

Here's a fact that cannot be disputed...It's a big old world and we all have to live out our lifes and one things for sure :ain't none of us gonna get out alive...

[mr. beaumont]

Here's a fact that cannot be disputed...It's a big old world and we all have to live out our lifes and one things for sure :ain't none of us gonna get out alive...

[Kirk Garrett]

Well noticed! If I didn’t know better from the internet that it was all a shady conspiracy by curiously omni-compentent government agencies, I’d say it’s almost as if scientific understanding of a hitherto unknown pathogen evolves over time, even as the pathogen itself mutates and evolves.

but that’s sheeple talk!

Or it’s almost if when the US government works to silence voices with dissenting points of view, and then those voices turn out to have been right all along, there’s an agenda at play.

[Kirk Garrett]

That's a feature of real science, not a bug.

Which is why “real” science shouldn’t necessarily drive policy until it’s been tried and tested.

There’s a reason to follow the money when assessing the value of whatever the US government asserts the “science” says now.

[RJVB]

Besides, Quote by Denis Leary: “Most people think life sucks, and then you die....”

[rpjazzguitar]

If you've ever been at a scientific meeting you have seen one scientist present to a roomful of other scientists. most of whom are trying to impress each other by tearing the presenter apart if there's an error.

Scientific consensus is achieved when the opposition is down to the usual cranks, gadflies and conspiracy theorists. People who will pick away at trivia until somebody says "how far do we have to go to prove a point?" Of course, one of them could be right, but it's not the way you bet.

Nevershould's post summarizes evidence based conclusions. If we're going to have a debate, then post the data or good quality studies on which you base your conclusions, like he did.

My guess is that it's pointless to discuss. We're at a point where facts don't change minds -- often they aren't even seriously considered.

[rpjazzguitar]

Which is why “real” science shouldn’t necessarily drive policy until it’s been tried and tested.

There’s a reason to follow the money when assessing the value of whatever the US government asserts the “science” says now.

There were refrigerated trucks serving as makeshift morgues in hospital parking lots. How long did you want them to wait for settled science?

[AllanAllen]

[princeplanet]

You have to trust the CDC and or the government to accept these "facts" ....

I don't trust anyone who seems certain they know the real truth behind anything or everything to do with the Covid problem. Pick any one narrative, for example the efficacy of the vaccines, you will find tranches of data pointing to one conclusion, but also tranches of data pointing to a rather different one.

And yet it seems nearly everyone seems to be sure that the data set they agree with is the correct one, and that you'd need to be a fool to believe the other lot.

From where I sit (on the fence as always), people on either side seem rather foolish to me.

[DawgBone]

I don't trust anyone who seems certain they know the real truth behind anything or everything to do with the Covid problem. Pick any one narrative, for example the efficacy of the vaccines, you will find tranches of data pointing to one conclusion, but also tranches of data pointing to a rather different one.

And yet it seems nearly everyone seems to be sure that the data set they agree with is the correct one, and that you'd need to be a fool to believe the other lot.

From where I sit (on the fence as always), people on either side seem rather foolish to me.

The government used intimidation, guilt trips, and coercion to get people to take it which gave it a sinister air so to me it didn't matter what all the data said. Only a piece of shit pushes drugs on someone that doesn't want to take them. Even street thugs don't behave that way peddling their wares. From that behavior alone I could deduce that taking it was a piss poor idea.

I heard so many people proudly say "I did the research" with regard to the vaccine. No dude, it's experimental. You ARE the research.

[rpjazzguitar]

People are asked to modify their behavior for others' and their own safety all day every day.

Or should we not stop at red lights?

[princeplanet]

The government used intimidation, guilt trips, and coercion to get people to take it which gave it a sinister air so to me it didn't matter what all the data said. ...

Sure, but what if next time it really is a near 100% lethal disease or virus, be it leaked from a lab or from nature. You would want your govt to use coercion, for the greater good, in fact, you'd probably complain if the govt was inept in that regard. The problem now is that, for one reason or another, at least half of the people will not trust any medical "expert" advice. The boy who cried wolf and all that...

[DawgBone]

Sure, but what if next time it really is a near 100% lethal disease or virus, be it leaked from a lab or from nature. You would want your govt to use coercion, for the greater good, in fact, you'd probably complain if the govt was inept in that regard. The problem now is that, for one reason or another, at least half of the people will not trust any medical "expert" advice. The boy who cried wolf and all that...

I expect men to die like men, not like a bunch of simpering old cowards. I could give a damn about a government response. People want to live forever, but it is clear most of them are dead already.

[pauln]

I'm still kind of wondering what the questioning of the science actually was? "I don't like it" isn't a question.

For most people it is very difficult to question any reported science, even what it means. What is much easier for ordinary people is to observe and trust the example set by those who would know most all about it. Below might be the top four people that one might imagine know most about the reported science, and even ordinary people with only common sense might well feel that they don't like it.

Albert Bourla, CEO of Pfizer
When asked on camera, declared he did not get the Covid vaccine, no reason given.

Dr. Ugur Sahin, CEO of BioNTech (creator of the Pfizer Covid vaccine)
When asked on camera, declared he did not get the Covid vaccine, claimed it was illegal for him to do so.

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organization
When interviewed on camera, declared that he did not get the Covid vaccine, claimed he felt it unseemly to do so ahead of the rest of the waiting world.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and the Chief Medical Advisor to the President
He appeared on live television recieving the Covid vaccine (in his LEFT shoulder). Two days later on camera he was interviewed about it, tapping and rubbing his RIGHT shoulder declaring that he too experieced the reported expected soreness.