re: Dr. Fauci in New England Journal of Medicine Concedes the Coronavirus Mortality Rate May

quote:

---

Yes. That was an easy call. It was in everything being said about the disease from the start.

---

That's the freaking annoying part.

I didn't have to go "discover" the information that allowed me to be correct.

They fricking GAVE it to me...…….and then, they ignored it.

Hell, all by itself, when they were telling us the supposed rates...…….it didn't talk that much effort to say, "wait a fricking second...……..then where are all the dead that no one can figure out why they died?"

People were like, "well, no one knew to check"...……..as if Doctors would have had a huge spate of deaths...….then the virus shows up...…...and none of the doctors would raise their hands about shite they were seeing that they couldn't explain.

I hear ya.

Hopefully when the smoke clears we the public see this as a global frickup and dont repeat it. Unfortunately until we ban women over 25 years old from having social media, itll only be worse next time.

quote:

---

Hopefully when the smoke clears we the public see this as a global frickup and dont repeat it

---

The public won't see it.

The public fricking SUCKS when dealing with large numbers. The average Joe thinks 100K is a large number when dealing with world population.

The public is going to see the MASSIVELY wrong numbers, and think that we just saved everyone with our awesome social distancing

There will be NO convincing them otherwise. People like me will just be voices in the wilderness.

quote:

---

That hasn't really been proven yet to be honest

---

Obviously.

But it will be.

And, it won't matter. Because the public is fricking stupid.

quote:

---

That hasn't really been proven yet to be honest

---

Here's what has ALWAYS been obvious

1. Everyone who ever even MENTIONED the 3.4% mortality rate publicly was the equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theater...…..that they KNEW wasn't on fire. NOT ONE frickING PERSON in a position to know better...…..didn't. They knew they were conflating two different stats. They just didn't fricking care and in a just world, they'd be jailed.

2. To go with #1. Those who mentioned that rate, or even the mid 2s rates and then put it along side the normal FLU mortality rate KNOWING that the average person would do the multiplication KNEW they were full of shite. They wanted to scare people and, in a just world, they'd be jailed.

Both of the above were OBVIOUSLY false narratives from the VERY BEGINNING. No one with an IQ above room temperature has any excuse for propagating it other than economic ruin for political reasons.

Trust me. This is an area I'm pretty decent at, but I can GUARANfrickINTEE you that ShortyRob wasn't the only one who saw the problem. Not by a damned long shot. It didn't take some special unique insight.

Alas. Too many people just assumed that anyone not jumping on the scare everyone narrative was "defending Trump"

For that. frick them for THEIR stupidity too.

A few on here (including some drs) have been staunchly against locking down from the outset.

Could it be that some cases are diagnosed as Coronavirus when in fact that some are the common flu? And when someone dies they put the death in the corona category? That would surely get people horrified with the number of out breaks and deaths.

quote:

---

From the beginning my philosophy was be concerned and avoid panic

---

My doctor: “Some people are gonna get sick. Some people are going to get real sick. But this isn’t the damn apocalypse.”

quote:

---

The public is going to see the MASSIVELY wrong numbers, and think that we just saved everyone with our awesome social distancing

---

On the one hand, it will be difficult to argue that the measures had "no" effect. I think we can agree on that.

On the other hand, many of us have been arguing for a moderated, reasonable response, the President chiefly in that camp early, even with his early travel shut down.

You can't deny that the MSM and the Karens were not having it. Would...not...hear...it. I reluctantly threw in with the - "Okay, if we're going to do it, let's do it right now, short-term and see" camp, because waiting, with all the panic, the damage was going to be done and more drawn out.

Once the antibody assay is done, with a solid estimate of the infection rate, how long in circulation, true IFR, etc., we will all collectively realize that it wasn't nearly as severe as the doomsdayers were pushing early and often (the same folks who called Trump racist for his travel ban just days/weeks before, thus rendering their motives transparent as glass) and even more reason to never listen to the MSM (or frankly, some of the more conservative, panic-prone medical experts) again.

But, I already wasn't listening to them. I know what they're telling me is not the truth, but rather an information operation targeting a behavioral outcome.

Hell, I was a kid during the 1970s gas crisis and I figured that one out.

At the end of the day, it is highly unlikely the net cost to our economy was worth the modest reduction in negative outcomes. We don't do this for traffic fatalities and we don't do it for the seasonal flu. Ergo, we shouldn't have done it for this one. Period.

quote:

---

Yeah that's not really something to throw a party over

---

Not something to shut the country down over either.

ETA: Or pay any attention to at all, really.