Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:30 am
Leaving false strength conventions behind
https://www.exodus-strength.com/forum/
You're in the minority. I agree with you entirely however, and I think Emily Oster has been pretty good voice of reason during the pandemic, but man, did that article stir up the angry mobs on both the COVID extremist ends, and the anti-lockdown/antivaxxer end.mgil wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:30 am Thought this was a good article:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... ss/671879/
mgil wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:30 am Thought this was a good article:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... ss/671879/
Clearly, Covid didn't kill enough people.AngryNitwit wrote: You willfully, and deliberately went against the science- blocked people who offered citations, and your actions built a narrative that killed children. You killed children @ProfEmilyOster. You get to live with that. I couldn't, but I bet you can.
N of 3, anecdotal - very, very bad. The type A my sons lovingly brought home to share with me made Covid-19 look like a joke. Top recorded fever during the 7 day illness - 106.7 degrees. Not cool.
I had an appointment with the ophthalmologist last Thursday at 1:30pm. At 10am they called and cancelled because they were short of help due to all of the staff "being out with the flu."
We had roughly 15% of the student body out today. Figure 5% is noise, but the vast majority are marked "illness w/ fever" in our system. Any bets on what that mysterious illness might be?
tummy aches from too much candy?Brackish wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 8:36 amWe had roughly 15% of the student body out today. Figure 5% is noise, but the vast majority are marked "illness w/ fever" in our system. Any bets on what that mysterious illness might be?
I'm not familiar with the writer's other work. Can you summarize the controversy a little?omaniphil wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:51 amYou're in the minority. I agree with you entirely however, and I think Emily Oster has been pretty good voice of reason during the pandemic, but man, did that article stir up the angry mobs on both the COVID extremist ends, and the anti-lockdown/antivaxxer end.mgil wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:30 am Thought this was a good article:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... ss/671879/
Emily Oster is an economist and has written a number of evidence based books on pregnancy, child-rearing, etc. Her general approach is to try to translate outcomes from research studies into practical suggestions. During the pandemic, she was pretty cautious about COVID and supported in some circumstances vaccine mandates, etc, but thought that the harm to children of school closures outweighed the benefit to closing schools. The article is mostly written from the position of "during the pandemic we didn't have sufficient information, therefore, the natural inclination was to be overly cautious, but its over now, lets forgive those who overreacted"dw wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 10:39 amI'm not familiar with the writer's other work. Can you summarize the controversy a little?omaniphil wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:51 amYou're in the minority. I agree with you entirely however, and I think Emily Oster has been pretty good voice of reason during the pandemic, but man, did that article stir up the angry mobs on both the COVID extremist ends, and the anti-lockdown/antivaxxer end.mgil wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:30 am Thought this was a good article:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... ss/671879/
I'm just surprised because the article as written seems inoffensive, in fact willfully inoffensive.
Could also add:omaniphil wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 11:02 amEmily Oster is an economist and has written a number of evidence based books on pregnancy, child-rearing, etc. Her general approach is to try to translate outcomes from research studies into practical suggestions. During the pandemic, she was pretty cautious about COVID and supported in some circumstances vaccine mandates, etc, but thought that the harm to children of school closures outweighed the benefit to closing schools. The article is mostly written from the position of "during the pandemic we didn't have sufficient information, therefore, the natural inclination was to be overly cautious, but its over now, lets forgive those who overreacted"dw wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 10:39 amI'm not familiar with the writer's other work. Can you summarize the controversy a little?omaniphil wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:51 amYou're in the minority. I agree with you entirely however, and I think Emily Oster has been pretty good voice of reason during the pandemic, but man, did that article stir up the angry mobs on both the COVID extremist ends, and the anti-lockdown/antivaxxer end.mgil wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:30 am Thought this was a good article:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... ss/671879/
I'm just surprised because the article as written seems inoffensive, in fact willfully inoffensive.
1) The COVID hawk's general position is "we were trying to protect people, you wanted people to die, we don't need forgiveness"
2) The COVID denialists position is "people like you and the people you want to forgive are responsible for the lives ruined by closures, and you belong in prison" (if you doubt how charitable a description this is, just look at the quote tweets to her post here: https://twitter.com/ProfEmilyOster/stat ... h_comments)
The negative polarization over this is just astounding.
I'm not surprised at that blog post from Ace at all. I should really change my avatar (which references a 15 year old meme from Ace's site).5hout wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 12:55 pmCould also add:omaniphil wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 11:02 amEmily Oster is an economist and has written a number of evidence based books on pregnancy, child-rearing, etc. Her general approach is to try to translate outcomes from research studies into practical suggestions. During the pandemic, she was pretty cautious about COVID and supported in some circumstances vaccine mandates, etc, but thought that the harm to children of school closures outweighed the benefit to closing schools. The article is mostly written from the position of "during the pandemic we didn't have sufficient information, therefore, the natural inclination was to be overly cautious, but its over now, lets forgive those who overreacted"dw wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 10:39 amI'm not familiar with the writer's other work. Can you summarize the controversy a little?omaniphil wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:51 amYou're in the minority. I agree with you entirely however, and I think Emily Oster has been pretty good voice of reason during the pandemic, but man, did that article stir up the angry mobs on both the COVID extremist ends, and the anti-lockdown/antivaxxer end.mgil wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:30 am Thought this was a good article:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... ss/671879/
I'm just surprised because the article as written seems inoffensive, in fact willfully inoffensive.
1) The COVID hawk's general position is "we were trying to protect people, you wanted people to die, we don't need forgiveness"
2) The COVID denialists position is "people like you and the people you want to forgive are responsible for the lives ruined by closures, and you belong in prison" (if you doubt how charitable a description this is, just look at the quote tweets to her post here: https://twitter.com/ProfEmilyOster/stat ... h_comments)
The negative polarization over this is just astounding.
https://bayourenaissanceman.blogspot.co ... o-way.html
and
https://ace.mu.nu/archives/401640.php
On the topic of being correct - I just went back to page 2 and found this whopper from early February 2020mbasic wrote: ↑Mon Feb 03, 2020 6:28 am Also, I wonder if quarantining is the best move sometimes.
Like, you are now concentrating people into tight small little groups, guaranteeing that all those people infect each other in a confined space.
I mean, if they don't run that quarantine out to the Nth degree, and then declare its "off" at the wrong time.
Seems like could be a recipe for disaster.
Yes, the bleach thing was up there for pure stupid-factor. Still, for an article written to be conciliatory, the line she chooses to draw between the well intentioned and the malevolent is pretty conveniently placed.Obviously some people intended to mislead and made wildly irresponsible claims. Remember when the public-health community had to spend a lot of time and resources urging Americans not to inject themselves with bleach? That was bad. Misinformation was, and remains, a huge problem. But most errors were made by people who were working in earnest for the good of society.
Both of those blogs went from "out there, but still interesting stuff linked" to "f'ing bonkers" over the last few years.
Kinda off the main point of the article.....but I discounted anything the woman wrote after this.mgil wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:30 am Thought this was a good article:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... ss/671879/
Obviously some people intended to mislead and made wildly irresponsible claims. Remember when the public-health community had to spend a lot of time and resources urging Americans not to inject themselves with bleach? That was bad. Misinformation was, and remains, a huge...
I wish that were the case. Teacher's kids are getting it too. Most of them end up testing positive for influenza type A, and the fevers are lasting 5-7 days with some outliers lasting much longer than that.gtl wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 9:51 amtummy aches from too much candy?Brackish wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 8:36 amWe had roughly 15% of the student body out today. Figure 5% is noise, but the vast majority are marked "illness w/ fever" in our system. Any bets on what that mysterious illness might be?
I have two kids out of school today, resting listlessly on the couch, with fevers and hacking coughs. The third kid had it last week, and half her class it out sick this week. Our pediatrician thinks its RSV, but who knows.Brackish wrote: ↑Wed Nov 02, 2022 5:21 amI wish that were the case. Teacher's kids are getting it too. Most of them end up testing positive for influenza type A, and the fevers are lasting 5-7 days with some outliers lasting much longer than that.gtl wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 9:51 amtummy aches from too much candy?Brackish wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 8:36 amWe had roughly 15% of the student body out today. Figure 5% is noise, but the vast majority are marked "illness w/ fever" in our system. Any bets on what that mysterious illness might be?
That's the way both of my boys were with this flu. My house sounded like a tuberculosis ward for two weeks. Heck, that was two weeks ago, and they still have random coughing fits where they sound like a 3 pack a day for 20+ years smoker. It's nuts.omaniphil wrote: ↑Wed Nov 02, 2022 5:30 amI have two kids out of school today, resting listlessly on the couch, with fevers and hacking coughs. The third kid had it last week, and half her class it out sick this week. Our pediatrician thinks its RSV, but who knows.Brackish wrote: ↑Wed Nov 02, 2022 5:21 amI wish that were the case. Teacher's kids are getting it too. Most of them end up testing positive for influenza type A, and the fevers are lasting 5-7 days with some outliers lasting much longer than that.gtl wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 9:51 amtummy aches from too much candy?Brackish wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 8:36 amWe had roughly 15% of the student body out today. Figure 5% is noise, but the vast majority are marked "illness w/ fever" in our system. Any bets on what that mysterious illness might be?