From: spam@nospam.com
On Mon, 31 Jan 2022 13:02:57 -0500, John McGaw wrote:
> On 1/31/2022 11:16 AM, Andy Burnelli wrote:
>> which most people are immune to
>
> There are a number of dead folks, now approaching 1 million in this country
> alone, that might disagree with that if they were able.
Thank you for posting your feelings because I have a good heart and a ton of
knowledge that I would like to bestow upon others not so fortunate as I.
Notice that I said the CDC said the death rate in the USA is 0.2% overall,
which, as you may recall, already includes the already very old & very sick.
Also notice I never tell other people _what_ foreign substances to inject
into their bodies as every person has to make that decision for themselves.
> I don't claim any
> advanced degrees but I did well in my stat classes
I welcome _intelligent_ discourse on this subject, mainly for two reasons:
a. So that I can learn how others think (who don't know what I know), and,
b. So that others can gain at least an inkling of what I know about Covid.
While I probably have more degrees in this field than anyone on this
newsgroup, all you need is avg adult comprehensive skills to comprehend the
26 logical items that I stated in the prior post (I stopped at the end of
the alphabet because I could essentially go on for a long time with facts).
If you ever find even a single fact stated by me to ever be wrong, let me
know. Lord knows, the iKooks have tried for decades (and failed so far).
HINT: A fact is _different_ from an assessment of that fact; so if you're
going to claim a fact is wrong, look at it again because it could be an
assessment of a fact, where assessments depend on weights given to facts.
> and to me the numbers
> seem to speak for themselves and no sophisticated analysis is required
Are you claiming that CDC 0.2% fatality percentage is factually wrong?
Or that the CDC 0.002% fatality percentage for the 5-11 aged kids is wrong?
(Because only a fool disagrees with well established scientific facts.)
> just put the number, either absolute or by percentage, of dead unvaccinated
> up against the number of dead vaccinated. Little else really matters when
> it is literally a life-and-death situation.
Being logical, I'm well aware of what 0.2% is of a very big number; but that
doesn't change the fact the fatality risk to any one individual _is_ that.
I posit that any one person (whether Democrat or Republican or an individual
thinker as I am) _must_ calculate the risk to _themselves_ when making a
decision of what foreign substances to have injected into their bodies.
> Oh, BTW, assuming that _some_ people are naturally immune as you write, how
> do they know in advance that they are, before going into a high-risk
> high-exposure situation, so that they don't face a higher risk of adding to
> the death toll?
I answered that question in this thread already & I welcome more solutions.
*T-Mobile Nazis to terminate corporate employees who aren't vaccinated*
Notice that my proposed solution would work, and it would have the benefit
that most people would be _safer_ (if my position on senescence is correct).
> Should these _immune_ people be drafted in to work in Covid
> ICUs, perhaps assisting in intubations? I hear that the pay could be very
> good and think of the money that could be saved on PPE.
I'm glad you made that statement above because I try to learn _why_ people
think the way they do, where that statement illustrates _exactly_ what you
base your decisions upon.
Fear.
Not logic.
But fear.
Now it's fine that _you_ make all your decisions based on being driven crazy
by your own fears... but some of us out there use scientific facts & logic.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
