Originally Posted by Excargodog (Post 3075705)

your ignorance just doesn’t quit, does it? I BELIEVE you have no idea what I’m talking about because you clearly don’t know even the basics of epidemiology.

Herd immunity is NOT an all or nothing response. Nor would ‘millions need to die.’ All that needs to happen is for enough people to become non susceptible for the Rt to become below 1.0. Sometimes that takes 96-97% of the population being immunized or recovered. Sometimes 10% will do. According to Gov. Cuomo, over 15% of New Yorkers tested positive for coronavirus antibodies.

But there are LOTS of ways to get down to Rt less than 1.0. Immunizations, for one thing. Or do like we have done - well, SINCE BIBLICAL TIMES, and quarantine THE CONTAGIOUS people rather than locking down the uninfected. Or do contact tracing isolation - like we’ve been doing with STD contacts pretty much for a hundred years.

look, nobody can help their ignorance, we are all born that way, but don’t spread yours. Take an epidemiology 101 course or something.

Originally Posted by Knobcrk1 (Post 3075686)

I said it’s the only way to quickly bring it down. As in with least amount of deaths and infections. It’s not the only way unless you want months and years of this.

Originally Posted by Tom Bradys Cat (Post 3075322)

Prima facie you may be correct. But lets discect your logic because what you have written in one sentence sums up the ENTIRE lockdown argument.



110000 because we got R down. Correct, thats just maths. But you went on to draw a baseless conclusion and herein lies the problem. There is scant evidence that your theory is correct, its still a hypothesis.

Originally Posted by samc (Post 3076160)

In the timeline/universe I inhabit, we exercised a lockdown to mitigate spread while simultaneously instituting various other social distancing measures. What we are seeing is now the result of those combined actions. A squirrel in my neighborhood died, and I stepped on a butterfly. I can’t prove it, but my hypothesis is that lockdown and social distancing were responsible for lowering R more than the squirrel’s sacrifice.

Avoiding the ad populum fallacy; I’ll add that the United Kingdom, Germany, China, Korea, Australia, the UAE and the USA all took pretty much the same measures. I’ve been in/out of all of them since January. So, might I suggest that when the majority of the world has reached the same conclusions, maybe the burden of argument lies with those that are saying the majority is wrong?

Or, if you’re just trying to point out that I drew a conclusion that: the numbers we’re seeing now are a result of our earlier actions and when we acted. Then yes, that is a conclusion.

Originally Posted by nludy (Post 3076177)

Beijing under a new major lockdown. I bet they are trying to improve CNN ratings! It must be another virus hoax.

It's strange how they are handling the virus compared to the United States.

Originally Posted by Tom Bradys Cat (Post 3076192)

Children will be forcebly placed in institutions five days a week. Hoards of people will migrate on mass halfway across the country to worship a man sized mouse. Traffic accidents will go up..... Oh the list is endless....and for what?....

Originally Posted by Excargodog (Post 3075855)

https://i.ibb.co/SXhDYw9/F92-EB923-1...-F8-A23-A6.jpg

https://i.ibb.co/qRZ51bF/B6424-ADE-4...F9-F52-ED8.jpg

Res ipsa loquitor