1. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    13814
    25 May '20 20:09
    If you have a virus, how do you maximize the death rate?

    Prevent the healthy in age groups shown to have very little risk of death from being exposed to the virus. Let these people catch it and the death rate would be very low.

    Expose the most likely to die, such as the elderly, by passing laws that ensure they are exposed.

    Prevent people from acquiring the virus while immune systems are strong.

    More than one government seems to be following this recipe, I wonder why.
  2. Joined
    20 Oct '06
    Moves
    9549
    25 May '20 20:31
    @eladar said
    If you have a virus, how do you maximize the death rate?

    Prevent the healthy in age groups shown to have very little risk of death from being exposed to the virus. Let these people catch it and the death rate would be very low.

    Expose the most likely to die, such as the elderly, by passing laws that ensure they are exposed.

    Prevent people from acquiring the virus whil ...[text shortened]... une systems are strong.

    More than one government seems to be following this recipe, I wonder why.
    You forgot a few...

    - Don't trust medical experts.

    - Limit testing to those who are already very sick. You could accomplish this by decentralizing the testing apparatus to local areas instead of federal, forcing dozens of different bureaucratic entities to scramble/compete for supplies and development of accurate readouts.

    - Delay preparing for and strategizing for the inevitable spread. Keep local governments in the dark regarding recommendations for closures/policies. Issue guidelines and then immediately contradict those guidelines in press briefings. Publicly cheer on citizens who defy your own guidelines.

    - Communicate poorly and minimize the importance of statistics that make you look bad but might help people make better decisions. Blame other people when things don't happen as you predict. Change your mind on what policies to recommend on a daily basis.
  3. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    13814
    25 May '20 21:241 edit
    @wildgrass said
    You forgot a few...

    - Don't trust medical experts.

    - Limit testing to those who are already very sick. You could accomplish this by decentralizing the testing apparatus to local areas instead of federal, forcing dozens of different bureaucratic entities to scramble/compete for supplies and development of accurate readouts.

    - Delay preparing for and strategizing for ...[text shortened]... things don't happen as you predict. Change your mind on what policies to recommend on a daily basis.
    What do you mean by do not trust experts. The experts are the ones maximizing the death rate.

    Are you trying to argue that the more people who get sick will cause a rise in rate of death?
  4. Joined
    20 Oct '06
    Moves
    9549
    25 May '20 22:191 edit
    @eladar said
    What do you mean by do not trust experts. The experts are the ones maximizing the death rate.

    Are you trying to argue that the more people who get sick will cause a rise in rate of death?
    I don't understand why you say the experts are maximizing the death rate. That doesn't make sense without a proper citation.

    Medical experts (in this case, epidemiologists) dedicate their lives/careers to studying outbreaks similar to this. Their recommendations necessarily change in light of new information and data. They track recent research (there are dozens of clinical trials and basic science going on all the time) about what we know, and what remains to be determined. Other than political propaganda, there's no reason not to trust them.
  5. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    13814
    25 May '20 22:30
    @wildgrass said
    I don't understand why you say the experts are maximizing the death rate. That doesn't make sense without a proper citation.

    Medical experts (in this case, epidemiologists) dedicate their lives/careers to studying outbreaks similar to this. Their recommendations necessarily change in light of new information and data. They track recent research (there are dozens of clini ...[text shortened]... what remains to be determined. Other than political propaganda, there's no reason not to trust them.
    If you do not allow the young to get sick and acquire immunity, then you have just increased the rate at which the virus kills.

    If you allow covid into nursing homes you have just increased the exposure to the over 75 crowd, thereby increasing the rate at which people are being killed.
  6. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    13814
    25 May '20 22:55
    @eladar said
    If you do not allow the young to get sick and acquire immunity, then you have just increased the rate at which the virus kills.

    If you allow covid into nursing homes you have just increased the exposure to the over 75 crowd, thereby increasing the rate at which people are being killed.
    After artificially increasing the death rate they can use their fake number as evidence they were right lol.
  7. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    53223
    25 May '20 23:54
    @Eladar
    But as it turns out, you are anything BUT a medical expert, but instead just another conspiracy troll.
  8. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    13814
    25 May '20 23:55
    @sonhouse said
    @Eladar
    But as it turns out, you are anything BUT a medical expert, but instead just another conspiracy troll.
    Tell me how what I am saying is incorrect.
  9. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Quiz Master
    RHP Arms
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    48793
    26 May '20 00:04
    @eladar said
    If you have a virus, how do you maximize the death rate?
    If you have a brain, how do you minimise its use?

    (I'm asking because you seem to be an expert in this field.)
  10. Standard memberbunnyknight
    bunny knight
    planet Earth
    Joined
    12 Dec '13
    Moves
    2917
    26 May '20 00:55
    @sonhouse said
    @Eladar
    But as it turns out, you are anything BUT a medical expert, but instead just another conspiracy troll.
    Is it true that big pharma is a corporate for-profit industry and their main goal is to maximize profit, not the well-being of you and your family? If yes, is that not a conspiracy?
  11. Subscribermy2sons
    Retired
    Missouri
    Joined
    02 Aug '07
    Moves
    83442
    26 May '20 01:14
    @bunnyknight
    I worked in the pharmaceutical industry as a business manager for over 30
    years. To say the goal of the pharmaceutical is not to improve the wellness of the general public is strictly BS. Why do you think billions of dollars are spent on development of new drugs annually. Certainly, profits are a necessary by product, but unless drugs improve the well being of the consumer, the whole process is pointless.
  12. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    13814
    26 May '20 02:451 edit
    @my2sons said
    @bunnyknight
    I worked in the pharmaceutical industry as a business manager for over 30
    years. To say the goal of the pharmaceutical is not to improve the wellness of the general public is strictly BS. Why do you think billions of dollars are spent on development of new drugs annually. Certainly, profits are a necessary by product, but unless drugs improve the well being of the consumer, the whole process is pointless.
    It certainly needs to benefit someone, the bottom line, it must benefit the company.

    I believe people who make vaccines are protected from lawsuits.
  13. Standard memberbunnyknight
    bunny knight
    planet Earth
    Joined
    12 Dec '13
    Moves
    2917
    26 May '20 02:48
    @my2sons said
    @bunnyknight
    I worked in the pharmaceutical industry as a business manager for over 30
    years. To say the goal of the pharmaceutical is not to improve the wellness of the general public is strictly BS. Why do you think billions of dollars are spent on development of new drugs annually. Certainly, profits are a necessary by product, but unless drugs improve the well being of the consumer, the whole process is pointless.
    If I gave your child a fake water pill in exchange for 20 dollars, that did nothing to cure her, I would be called a quack and a criminal, yes?

    What would you call a hospital that gives your child a series of drugs in exchange for 400,000 dollars, and the child winds up dead?
  14. Joined
    20 Oct '06
    Moves
    9549
    26 May '20 15:14
    @eladar said
    After artificially increasing the death rate they can use their fake number as evidence they were right lol.
    Who is they? Be specific and provide citations, please.
  15. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    13814
    26 May '20 15:17

    This post is unavailable.

    Please refer to our posting guidelines.

Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree