Covid question

[Stoic]

That is probably not the best approach to take given what we just experienced with things like the Collusion Delusion where "so many people in the media and the government are adamant that it's real" and many remain so

No, it works there too, if you aren't hopelessly biased. But we're in danger of derailing the thread.

[Stoic]

It's just a blunt statement of the CDC's findings.

No, it's a misinterpretation of the CDC's findings.

Asymptomatic spread doesn't appear to be a thing, but presymptomatic spread is very much a thing with covid-19.

And that means that your claim ("if you don't have symptoms, you can't spread C19 even if you actually are infected") is patently false.

[Juvenal]

CDC MMWR

It was reported multiple times in the media but I just went straight to the CDC. I've seen much more direct statements but this was the first one at hand.

Seriously, if asymptomatic spread was a major vector the infection rate would be significantly higher.

No, it's a misinterpretation of the CDC's findings.

Asymptomatic spread doesn't appear to be a thing, but presymptomatic spread is very much a thing with covid-19.

And that means that your claim ("if you don't have symptoms, you can't spread C19 even if you actually are infected") is patently false.

I don't know what's going on with Teal, but there seems to be a disconnect between what she's reading and what things actually say. Oh well, at least she's still cute.

[mikewhitney]

Being that Jimbo is an ACTUAL Medical Doctor who has dealt with the disease first hand and actually understands how disease and vaccines work, I will take his word over your conspiracy theories any day. Your "evidence" is mostly misinterpreting the actual data, and relying on antivax websites for skewed "reports" by antivax quacks.

haha. I am willing to hear his experience. He just has not wanted to share it. That is why I like discussion forum. I have been listening to (and sharing about) doctors who have treated up to 1000s of patients. Also, are you saying that the scientific studies for cures for covid-19 are conspiracy theories? Please explain.

[mikewhitney]

No, it's a misinterpretation of the CDC's findings.

Asymptomatic spread doesn't appear to be a thing, but presymptomatic spread is very much a thing with covid-19.

And that means that your claim ("if you don't have symptoms, you can't spread C19 even if you actually are infected") is patently false.

Wow. I have been presymptomatic for 20 years.

[Sparko]

haha. I am willing to hear his experience. He just has not wanted to share it. That is why I like discussion forum. I have been listening to (and sharing about) doctors who have treated up to 1000s of patients. Also, are you saying that the scientific studies for cures for covid-19 are conspiracy theories? Please explain.

I am saying you are "finding" your evidence using confirmation bias, accepting "evidence" that supports what you want to believe and rejecting what doesn't. Just as you have been doing to what Jimbo and others have said. The "reports" you keep referring to are written by quacks as I have shown in some of the threads you started previously. Just because some doctor or scientist publishes some study doesn't make it true. Especially when most other scientists and doctors disagree with it and claim he is a nut. You also seem to take bits and pieces of news and incorporate it into your conspiracy theories as "evidence" - like that vaccine passport thing you posted. The fact that the EU was talking about vaccine passports 3 years ago doesn't mean they were planning some pandemic to push their idea through. That's paranoid and nuts.

[Stoic]

Wow. I have been presymptomatic for 20 years.

No, you have to actually be infected to be presymptomatic.

[mikewhitney]

I am saying you are "finding" your evidence using confirmation bias, accepting "evidence" that supports what you want to believe and rejecting what doesn't. Just as you have been doing to what Jimbo and others have said. The "reports" you keep referring to are written by quacks as I have shown in some of the threads you started previously. Just because some doctor or scientist publishes some study doesn't make it true. Especially when most other scientists and doctors disagree with it and claim he is a nut. You also seem to take bits and pieces of news and incorporate it into your conspiracy theories as "evidence" - like that vaccine passport thing you posted. The fact that the EU was talking about vaccine passports 3 years ago doesn't mean they were planning some pandemic to push their idea through. That's paranoid and nuts.

There is no opposition to what i have shared except for people screaming that science does not matter. If you are going to call all the other doctors as quacks, you might as well apply that to JimboJSR. You just reject all the experiences of medical doctors and science as well.

[Sparko]

There is no opposition to what i have shared except for people screaming that science does not matter. If you are going to call all the other doctors as quacks, you might as well apply that to JimboJSR. You just reject all the experiences of medical doctors and science as well.

I never said "all the other doctors are quacks" - now you are trying to burn a strawman. And there has been plenty of opposition to what you have shared, you just handwave it away or ignore it. Also nobody is saying "science doesn't matter" they are saying you don't know the science and what you keep presenting isn't good science.

[mikewhitney]

I never said "all the other doctors are quacks" - now you are trying to burn a strawman. And there has been plenty of opposition to what you have shared, you just handwave it away or ignore it. Also nobody is saying "science doesn't matter" they are saying you don't know the science and what you keep presenting isn't good science.

How do you say it is not good science? Maybe a group of medical doctors cannot risk patient lives by giving them a placebo instead of good healthcare. The indeed do not have millions of dollars to put into the study. One of the big studies failed to use a protocol that was recommended -- they overdosed patients with HCQ. So, the well-paid studies are not always very helpful. You have to pay more attention to the discussions instead of exercising your bias. I am glad that you have done some research into covid stuff but you seem to only seek that which confirms what you believe.

[Sparko]

How do you say it is not good science? Maybe a group of medical doctors cannot risk patient lives by giving them a placebo instead of good healthcare. The indeed do not have millions of dollars to put into the study. One of the big studies failed to use a protocol that was recommended -- they overdosed patients with HCQ. So, the well-paid studies are not always very helpful. You have to pay more attention to the discussions instead of exercising your bias. I am glad that you have done some research into covid stuff but you seem to only seek that which confirms what you believe.

So basically your response to my criticism seems to be

325d48f0dfad9b8c2bc61ca5cb3c0263.jpg

[Teallaura]

No, it's a misinterpretation of the CDC's findings.

Asymptomatic spread doesn't appear to be a thing, but presymptomatic spread is very much a thing with covid-19.

And that means that your claim ("if you don't have symptoms, you can't spread C19 even if you actually are infected") is patently false.

Link?

Seriously, what is 'presymptomatic' supposed to be? Incubating? Or just asymptomatic? So where's this asymptomatic spread data?

There's only asymptomatic and symptomatic - period. If you haven't got symptoms you are asymptomatic - until you develop symptoms which is when you are symptomatic.

So where's this asymptomatic spread data that the CDC has?

[Teallaura]

I don't know what's going on with Teal, but there seems to be a disconnect between what she's reading and what things actually say. Oh well, at least she's still cute.

Grumble, wrong stupid link...

[Stoic]

Link?

Here's one: https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/27/4/20-4576_article

They aren't hard to find if you look for them.

Seriously, what is 'presymptomatic' supposed to be? Incubating? Or just asymptomatic? So where's this asymptomatic spread data?

Presymptomatic means that you've been infected, and don't have symptoms yet, but are going to have symptoms.

Asymptomatic has a couple of meanings. It can mean that you are infected but don't currently have symptoms, or (as used by epidemiologists) that you are infected, don't have symptoms, and are not going to develop symptoms later.

There's only asymptomatic and symptomatic - period. If you haven't got symptoms you are asymptomatic - until you develop symptoms which is when you are symptomatic.

See the link above.

[mikewhitney]

So basically your response to my criticism seems to be

325d48f0dfad9b8c2bc61ca5cb3c0263.jpg

Sometimes I might tailor responses to the best that the other person can handle

I share the tip of the iceberg concerning evidence. There is a whole web of connected evidence showing there was preparation for covid-19 back in 2018 and earlier. Your reasoning is just superficial.

I would so love to be wrong. I have shared my eschatological view -- and it is not the idea that everyone would be chipped. So, I'm not sharing this to squeeze it into an eschatological model.

You also have to ask why people are censored in America. This is the first virus that is protected from the threat of public debate. Why are we not letting the process of freedom contribute to our knowledge here?

If you are not seeing the threats here, then you are just in a fantasy world. You do not have to believe my word on this stuff. There are plenty of decent people making warnings about what is happening -- people who would not have suspected that what Kennedy and Eisnehower warned us about would actually happen.

Look at the evil actions against the churches in Canada. Do you think this is valid action for a pandemic which in most places in just at flu-levels of death? They kill everyone's finances with lockdowns that don't do diddly-squat.

I'm largely pointing people to things that should be obvious.