Poll of the Day > I went through all of 2020 through 2022 without catching corona. No vax either.

(+) Yeah! (+)

But not 2023. My luck has run out. They didn't tell me what strain yet, but I finally caught it. And now I'm wondering what I did over the weekend to catch it.

But y'know it's not that bad? I mean it's not "good," but if you told me this would be all over in 2 weeks then this is nothing to be afraid of. I hear so many survivor tales about how this thing "kicked their ass," what we aren't spending enough time figuring out is how come I'm cruising but other people are dying?

You probably had some form of it but, you were asymptomatic.

Sounds like you are a living god.

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

what we aren't spending enough time figuring out is how come I'm cruising but other people are dying?

The same reason pneumonia kills millions every year while others just feel a bit icky: Medicine, diseases, and the immune system are extremely complicated and there are countless factors that can influence a given infection's prognosis. Genetics, immune function, other conditions, the exact strain you're infected with, the size of your initial pathogen load, vaccination status... There are enough factors that are outside of anyone's control that attributing it to more than blind luck is little more than guesswork. The best you can do is take the steps that are well-known to reduce risk (like getting vaccinated and wearing a mask) and hope for the best.

BigOlePappy posted...

You probably had some form of it but, you were asymptomatic.

But I got regularly tested, and every time was negative.

adjl posted...

There are enough factors that are outside of anyone's control that attributing it to more than blind luck is little more than guesswork.

Right, there's nothing to figure out. From the beginning an infectious disease expert would have told you any result from being asymptomatic to death was possible. It's all statistics regarding how bad it is in comparison to other diseases amongst the general public. Also, it's now clear that age is a strong factor: it doesn't affect most young people nearly as much as it affects older people. It's also clear that the Omicron/recent strains are not as potent as the earlier strains.

Here's hoping you didn't pass the disease to someone older and more vulnerable because your viral load became larger than it needed to be due your choice not to get a harmless vaccine.

wpot posted...

Right, there's nothing to figure out. From the beginning an infectious disease expert would have told you any result from being asymptomatic to death was possible. It's all statistics regarding how bad it is in comparison to other diseases amongst the general public. Also, it's now clear that age is a strong factor: it doesn't affect most young people nearly as much as it affects older people. It's also clear that the Omicron/recent strains are not as potent as the earlier strains.

Here's hoping you didn't pass the disease to someone older and more vulnerable because your viral load became larger than it needed to be due your choice not to get a harmless vaccine.

Nothing to figure out? You don't just throw your hands up at a medical mystery and say "No one knows." You get to the bottom of it.

The fact that you suggest older people would probably die from this suggests that there is something to figure out. There are at the very least patterns to discern about who lives and who dies.

Also, the vaccine protects me, not the old people. I can still catch it and throw it, it's just the symptoms would be more manageable for me. And only me.

EDIT: Also the vaccine isn't harmless. Know what else is killing people? Heart complications from vaccines. In a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario, I've picked the poison I believe I have the best chance of surviving.

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

Nothing to figure out? You don't just throw your hands up at a medical mystery and say "No one knows." You get to the bottom of it.

The fact that you suggest older people would probably die from this suggests that there is something to figure out. There are at the very least patterns to discern about who lives and who dies.

I just told you the pattern: it is more severe in older people and the unvaccinated. I'm sure a infectious disease expert could explain why in fairly accurate terms at this point. There are other risks groups also, statistically, along with factors like the weight of viral load for a specific person. What more are you wanting to know...are you needing some sort of wacky theory?

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

Also, the vaccine protects me, not the old people. I can still catch it and throw it, it's just the symptoms would be more manageable for me. And only me.

It's odd that you view the severity of the illness as a great mystery but have absolute certainty about your belief that your actions don't affect anyone else.

I would laugh about your edit, but it's too sad. G'day.

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

Nothing to figure out? You don't just throw your hands up at a medical mystery and say "No one knows." You get to the bottom of it.

The fact that you suggest older people would probably die from this suggests that there is something to figure out. There are at the very least patterns to discern about who lives and who dies.

Also, the vaccine protects me, not the old people. I can still catch it and throw it, it's just the symptoms would be more manageable for me. And only me.

EDIT: Also the vaccine isn't harmless. Know what else is killing people? Heart complications from vaccines. In a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario, I've picked the poison I believe I have the best chance of surviving.

Are we reading the same posts. Both adjl and wpot explain that we already know why some people get affected more. Which is the same reason why other illness will affect people more of less

And whos throwing their hands up at the medical mystery and saying Idk. Both of them actually explained things in detail, from what I read

He also didnt suggest older people would die. He said its clear they would And the reason he knows that is science Which he said. Which means they already did enough testing tk figure that out. More testing is always welcome, but they have figured it out

And the vaccine can protect the older people. By getting the vaccine, it lessens your chance or getting it or passing it along And lowers you viral load You can catch it or pass it, but the chance is lower

And while some people had reactions to the vaccines, its usually certain medicine that can either react with the person, or other medications they take. But the vaccine itself is pretty harmless

Fuck off, TC.

LinkPizza posted...

Are we reading the same posts. Both adjl and wpot explain that we already know why some people get affected more. Which is the same reason why other illness will affect people more of less

And whos throwing their hands up at the medical mystery and saying Idk. Both of them actually explained things in detail, from what I read

He also didnt suggest older people would die. He said its clear they would And the reason he knows that is science Which he said. Which means they already did enough testing tk figure that out. More testing is always welcome, but they have figured it out

And the vaccine can protect the older people. By getting the vaccine, it lessens your chance or getting it or passing it along And lowers you viral load You can catch it or pass it, but the chance is lower

And while some people had reactions to the vaccines, its usually certain medicine that can either react with the person, or other medications they take. But the vaccine itself is pretty harmless

But young healthy people are also dying from this. While old, not-as-healthy people are surviving. Why is that happening? He said "There's nothing to figure out," but there clearly is.

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

But young healthy people are also dying from this. While old, not-as-healthy people are surviving. Why is that happening? He said "There's nothing to figure out," but there clearly is.

Just because young people are less likely to die from it doesnt mean they cant die from it. As adjl explained, there are a lot of factors that go into it, from strain to viral load to genetics to vaccination status tk immune functions. Just like pretty much every other illness Sometimes, people die of the flu or pneumonia Sometimes, they live Its not some big mystery So, no. They is nothing to figure out If you dont understand, thats on you. But science does understand already People in this topic do, as well

adjl posted...

The same reason pneumonia kills millions every year while others just feel a bit icky: Medicine, diseases, and the immune system are extremely complicated and there are countless factors that can influence a given infection's prognosis. Genetics, immune function, other conditions, the exact strain you're infected with, the size of your initial pathogen load, vaccination status... There are enough factors that are outside of anyone's control that attributing it to more than blind luck is little more than guesswork. The best you can do is take the steps that are well-known to reduce risk (like getting vaccinated and wearing a mask) and hope for the best.

Nope. Jesus is not behind that by any means.

LinkPizza posted...

Just because young people are less likely to die from it doesnt mean they cant die from it. As adjl explained, there are a lot of factors that go into it, from strain to viral load to genetics to vaccination status tk immune functions. Just like pretty much every other illness Sometimes, people die of the flu or pneumonia Sometimes, they live Its not some big mystery So, no. They is nothing to figure out If you dont understand, thats on you. But science does understand already People in this topic do, as well

So then what are the factors? I should be able to point out someone who died, and science should be able to tell me why they died. Science should be able to tell me why I didn't. "A variety of factors" is not an answer.

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

But young healthy people are also dying from this. While old, not-as-healthy people are surviving. Why is that happening? He said "There's nothing to figure out," but there clearly is.

I'm not interested in your walls of text, but if you're thinking that the vaccine is bullshit please pull your head out of your ass. There are like 5 different vaccines. The entire world uses them. Vaccines have eliminated horrible diseases in the past and you can't deny it. Stop trying to undermine medicine/science out of some misconceptions, because you can and will have an impact... It only works as far as people trust it.

This is worse than a person thinking there's a Colgate conspiracy because he doesn't brush his teeth and none of his teeth fell out. Great, but your breath smells like death and you've got gingivitis.

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

The fact that you suggest older people would probably die from this suggests that there is something to figure out. There are at the very least patterns to discern about who lives and who dies.

There are, but many of them aren't controllable or easily identifiable. Heck, there's strong evidence to suggest that a single nucleotide substitution inherited from a single act of interbreeding between a human and a neanderthal 60,000 years ago more than doubles the chance of serious complications or death, which is ridiculously specific. There are absolutely patterns, but the vast majority of them are identified restrospectively instead of having any useful predictive power, and given that the disease is barely 3 years old and is still evolving pretty rapidly, that identification is very much a work in progress.

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

EDIT: Also the vaccine isn't harmless. Know what else is killing people? Heart complications from vaccines. In a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario, I've picked the poison I believe I have the best chance of surviving.

And you believe that because you have an incomplete understanding of the statistics. Yes, there are risks associated with both options, but all available evidence points to the vaccine being the lower risk option for anyone without an actual allergy to its components. There have been zero confirmed deaths associated with myo(peri)carditis following mRNA vaccines, and the rate of blood clots and associated fatality following the adenoviral vaccines (A-Z, Janssen) is lower than the rate of blood clots and associated fatality from being infected with Covid itself.

It's about as "damned if you do, damned if you don't" as having a heart attack and choosing not to do to the hospital because of the risk of dying in a car accident on the way there: Risks exist for either alternative, but one option is clearly much more dangerous than the other.

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

Also, the vaccine protects me, not the old people. I can still catch it and throw it, it's just the symptoms would be more manageable for me. And only me.

It makes you less likely to be infected (and therefore contagious) in the first place, it makes you less contagious once you are infected (if nothing else, milder symptoms means less coughing), and it means you're contagious for a shorter period (creating fewer exposure opportunities). The personal health benefit may be greater than the public health benefit, but that doesn't mean there's no public health benefit.

Yellow posted...

I'm not interested in your walls of text, but if you're thinking that the vaccine is bullshit please pull your head out of your ass. There are like 5 different vaccines. The entire world uses them. Vaccines have eliminated horrible diseases in the past and you can't deny it. Stop trying to undermine medicine/science out of some misconceptions, because you can and will have an impact... It only works as far as people trust it.

This is worse than a person thinking there's a Colgate conspiracy because he doesn't brush his teeth and none of his teeth fell out. Great, but your breath smells like death and you've got gingivitis.

I never said vaccines were bad. Just that I don't trust these particular vaccines. I have the other vaccines. The ones that aren't killing people because they've gone through decades of refinement. The ones that aren't a last minute book report that, shortly before they were available, reliable authorities were saying "You can't rush a vaccine."

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

So then what are the factors? I should be able to point out someone who died, and science should be able to tell me why they died. Science should be able to tell me why I didn't. "A variety of factors" is not an answer.

I literally just have them to you. Are you even reading the posts? Because it doesnt seem like you are. Ill copy and paste them again Ill even bold them for you

there are a lot of factors that go into it, from strain to viral load to genetics to vaccination status to immune functions.

Science can tell you If you ask about them and have rights to their medical files The problem is you probably dont know who to ask about. And they can share peoples medical files without permission. But you can easily look up why people die from it Or what happens to some peoples bodies when they have it And a variety of factors is answers All it takes is knowledge of science to know how each factor contributes to it

LinkPizza posted...

I literally just have them to you. Are you even reading the posts? Because it doesnt seem like you are. Ill copy and paste them again Ill even bold them for you

there are a lot of factors that go into it, from strain to viral load to genetics to vaccination status to immune functions.

Science can tell you If you ask about them and have rights to their medical files The problem is you probably dont know who to ask about. And they can share peoples medical files without permission. But you can easily look up why people die from it Or what happens to some peoples bodies when they have it And a variety of factors is answers All it takes is knowledge of science to know how each factor contributes to it

Again, those aren't the answers.

I should be able to read an article that says "Here's All The Strains And Which Ones Are Deadly And Which Ones You Don't Have To Worry About Provided You Have This Particular Immune System." I should be able to read an article that says "Even If You're Young And Healthy, Here's What's Likely Wrong With You If You Die From This Particular Strain Of The Virus." I should be able to read an article that says "Here's Where Your Immune System Failed You In The Battle Against This Particular Virus."

If they did an in-depth study of a young person who died (initial viral load, genetics, risk factors, treatment history, etc) science is likely to give you a decent, if imperfect, answer regarding which factors caused a particular case to became severe. However, there is usually not the time to do all of that while a person is being treated (nor a reason in some cases as the treatment is the same regardless of the causal factors) and there is no reason to do to go through all of that effort in an autopsy. Sure, it wouldn't be a complete answer (as adjl points out the number of possible factors is effectively infinite) but it is largely sufficient for our scientific understanding. There is and always will be more to know, but the simple fact that it is severe in one person and negligible in another is not a great mystery.

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

I should be able to read an article that says "Here's All The Strains And Which Ones Are Deadly And Which Ones You Don't Have To Worry About Provided You Have This Particular Immune System." I should be able to read an article that says "Even If You're Young And Healthy, Here's What's Likely Wrong With You If You Die From This Particular Strain Of The Virus." I should be able to read an article that says "Here's Where Your Immune System Failed You In The Battle Against This Particular Virus."

You can read such papers for specific factors. But there are an infinite number of potential factors so it can never be complete.

wpot posted...

If they did an in-depth study of a young person who died (initial viral load, genetics, risk factors, treatment history, etc) science is likely to give you a decent, if imperfect, answer regarding which factors caused a particular case to became severe. However, there is usually not the time to do all of that while a person is being treated (nor a reason in some cases as the treatment is the same regardless of the causal factors) and there is no reason to do to go through all of that effort in an autopsy. Sure, it wouldn't be a complete answer (as adjl points out the number of possible factors is effectively infinite) but it is largely sufficient for our scientific understanding. There is and always will be more to know, but the simple fact that it is severe in one person and negligible in another is not a great mystery.

If it weren't a great mystery, then science could tell me right now why a particular case became severe for a particular person.

But like you said, they're not even doing these studies. And that's my point. This is what we need to be spending our time on. Figuring out exactly why these infections go down the way they do. So we can know exactly why some people die but I don't.

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

I never said vaccines were bad. Just that I don't trust these particular vaccines. I have the other vaccines. The ones that aren't killing people because they've gone through decades of refinement. The ones that aren't a last minute book report that, shortly before they were available, reliable authorities were saying "You can't rush a vaccine."

That's great except these vaccines are empirically not killing anyone and anyone who tells you they are is manipulating you

I feel like I don't need a PHD to explain this, you unfortunately live in a post-reality world.

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

they're not even doing these studies.

That might be the silliest thing you've said yet. The infectious disease organizations have studied little other than this for the past three years. What makes you think they aren't trying to know all that they can? They have identified many strong casual factors, but there is always more to know.

MagicalPrincess posted...

Nope. Jesus is not behind that by any means.

You probably shouldn't take infectious disease advice from a carpenter who predates germ theory by 1800-odd years.

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

So then what are the factors? I should be able to point out someone who died, and science should be able to tell me why they died. Science should be able to tell me why I didn't. "A variety of factors" is not an answer.

When has science ever been able to do that for any disease, let alone one this new? Short of running extensive diagnostics every hour on newly-infected people to see how their bodies are changing, the only actual options are to conduct autopsies on the dead to see what broke, or to look at whatever records are available to identify statistical correlations after the fact. Autopsies are limited in what they can do, and correlations don't necessarily mean anything until you've collected enough data to be able to infer a causal relationship, and that kind of data is hard to come by for an emerging disease.

Science is only ever a product of scientists' best guesses. Always has been. A lot of people did not know this going into the pandemic, since their understanding of science consists entirely of what's published as accepted fact, so getting to watch the cutting edge of science struggle to catch up to Covid has been really confusing because nobody knows as much as they expect them to. This is, in fact, completely normal for new science. If anything, it's going much faster than it usually does, due to the high stakes, but I still fully expect it to be another 5+ years before we get anything resembling a definitive understanding of the factors contributing to Covid's mortality.

This reminds me of a MartianManchild topic. At least they would usually try to cite some statistics though.

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

Again, those aren't the answers.

I should be able to read an article that says "Here's All The Strains And Which Ones Are Deadly And Which Ones You Don't Have To Worry About Provided You Have This Particular Immune System." I should be able to read an article that says "Even If You're Young And Healthy, Here's What's Likely Wrong With You If You Die From This Particular Strain Of The Virus." I should be able to read an article that says "Here's Where Your Immune System Failed You In The Battle Against This Particular Virus."

Those are the factors that give you the answer Whether you believe it or not, those are the facts You may not understand the factors, but the people who study the illness do

And you cant read an article saying heres what strains are dangerous since thats only one factor on its own One factor is only one factor. You need to combine all the factor to get a good read on how dangerous it will be Most people also dont know detailed analysis of their immune system Not to mention, it can change over time based on a number of other factors So, no. You cant read an article like. Even for illness that have been around for years. Because everyone is different Those factors need to be considered at the hospital Especially since you wouldnt even know the viral load until a doctor tells you

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

But not 2023. My luck has run out. They didn't tell me what strain yet, but I finally caught it. And now I'm wondering what I did over the weekend to catch it.

But y'know it's not that bad? I mean it's not "good," but if you told me this would be all over in 2 weeks then this is nothing to be afraid of. I hear so many survivor tales about how this thing "kicked their ass," what we aren't spending enough time figuring out is how come I'm cruising but other people are dying?

You probably had a less severe strain of it, and have less health issues and shit than most others you talk to regarding the subject. I still havent caught it, despite being unvaccinated (not anti-vax, just havent gotten it) and taking no real precautions against it. I consider myself lucky.

Everyone go re-read adjls posts now lmao

LinkPizza posted...

And you cant read an article saying heres what strains are dangerous since thats only one factor on its own

You can, actually. I can't be bothered to fish out exact numbers, but if memory serves, Alpha was somewhere on the order of 50-70% more dangerous than the wild type, Beta was ~20% more dangerous than Alpha, Delta was ~150% more dangerous than Beta, and Omicron dropped back to about 20-30% more dangerous than the wild type (while being 6 or 7 times more contagious). It's hard to pin down exact figures on that because treatment improved so much from the early days of dealing with the wild type to when Omicron became the dominant variant, but it's fairly easy to at least rank them, if not quantitatively compare them.

That information, however, is generally useless for laypersons because identifying a specific strain requires a more in-depth PCR test than the typical one (let alone the rapid tests that comprise the vast majority of Covid tests these days), so a given patient isn't likely to ever know anything beyond "I'm Covid positive." That really only comes up in doing things like wastewater testing to determine the relative incidence of a given strain in the population, which in turn informs public health agencies so they can (try to) respond accordingly.

That information is also only useful for determining relative risk: You cannot say that, because a patient has Omicron and not Delta, they will not die. Only that they're less likely to. Omicron being a less severe disease does not preclude it from being severe enough to kill the patient, which is going to be based on other factors. Those rankings are based on broad statistical analyses with large enough sample sizes to (hopefully) eliminate random variation in other factors (or at least reduce it to insignificant levels).

Well, there you go. adjl said you can read those articles if you want

adjl posted...

You can, actually. I can't be bothered to fish out exact numbers, but if memory serves, Alpha was somewhere on the order of 50-70% more dangerous than the wild type, Beta was ~20% more dangerous than Alpha, Delta was ~150% more dangerous than Beta, and Omicron dropped back to about 20-30% more dangerous than the wild type (while being 6 or 7 times more contagious). It's hard to pin down exact figures on that because treatment improved so much from the early days of dealing with the wild type to when Omicron became the dominant variant, but it's fairly easy to at least rank them, if not quantitatively compare them.

That information, however, is generally useless for laypersons because identifying a specific strain requires a more in-depth PCR test than the typical one (let alone the rapid tests that comprise the vast majority of Covid tests these days), so a given patient isn't likely to ever know anything beyond "I'm Covid positive." That really only comes up in doing things like wastewater testing to determine the relative incidence of a given strain in the population, which in turn informs public health agencies so they can (try to) respond accordingly.

That information is also only useful for determining relative risk: You cannot say that, because a patient has Omicron and not Delta, they will not die. Only that they're less likely to. Omicron being a less severe disease does not preclude it from being severe enough to kill the patient, which is going to be based on other factors. Those rankings are based on broad statistical analyses with large enough sample sizes to (hopefully) eliminate random variation in other factors (or at least reduce it to insignificant levels).

Great to see you still be the voice of logic and reason on this board.

Yellow posted...

That's great except these vaccines are empirically not killing anyone and anyone who tells you they are is manipulating you

I feel like I don't need a PHD to explain this, you unfortunately live in a post-reality world.

Have you not heard about the myocarditis/pericarditis cases cropping up, particularly from the Moderna vaccine?

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2788346

Those who have argue "Well, it's very rare." But "very rare" doesn't mean "Won't ever happen." Because it clearly happened to those people. I don't want myocarditis. I'm trying to make choices that will keep myocarditis out of my way.

wpot posted...

That might be the silliest thing you've said yet. The infectious disease organizations have studied little other than this for the past three years. What makes you think they aren't trying to know all that they can? They have identified many strong casual factors, but there is always more to know.

You were the one who said "They could do this study, but there's little reason to." I'm saying this should be paramount, this should be the main thing we're trying to figure out.

adjl posted...

You can, actually. I can't be bothered to fish out exact numbers, but if memory serves, Alpha was somewhere on the order of 50-70% more dangerous than the wild type, Beta was ~20% more dangerous than Alpha, Delta was ~150% more dangerous than Beta, and Omicron dropped back to about 20-30% more dangerous than the wild type (while being 6 or 7 times more contagious). It's hard to pin down exact figures on that because treatment improved so much from the early days of dealing with the wild type to when Omicron became the dominant variant, but it's fairly easy to at least rank them, if not quantitatively compare them.

That information, however, is generally useless for laypersons because identifying a specific strain requires a more in-depth PCR test than the typical one (let alone the rapid tests that comprise the vast majority of Covid tests these days), so a given patient isn't likely to ever know anything beyond "I'm Covid positive." That really only comes up in doing things like wastewater testing to determine the relative incidence of a given strain in the population, which in turn informs public health agencies so they can (try to) respond accordingly.

That information is also only useful for determining relative risk: You cannot say that, because a patient has Omicron and not Delta, they will not die. Only that they're less likely to. Omicron being a less severe disease does not preclude it from being severe enough to kill the patient, which is going to be based on other factors. Those rankings are based on broad statistical analyses with large enough sample sizes to (hopefully) eliminate random variation in other factors (or at least reduce it to insignificant levels).

But what you should be able to do is look at that person who died of a particular strain and answer why. Or catch them before they die and figure out why they're having such a bad reaction to it.

I'm not talking about just one factor, I know the strain type is one factor. That's why I'm presenting questions like "Okay but this person is young and they exercise and they're only suffering from a supposedly weak strain, so why are they having such a hard time of it? What specifically is going wrong with them?"

Why did you guys feed OP and just leave the thread where I called him a living god?

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

You were the one who said "They could do this study, but there's little reason to." I'm saying this should be paramount, this should be the main thing we're trying to figure out.

I think the main thing we aren't connecting on is the difference between doing a study for one case (which is usually not terribly useful for the individual, usually not very interesting scientifically, and frankly not possible to do for anything close to every difficult case due to the resources needed) and doing a study that covers many people in relation to a specific factor (which is being done constantly). We cannot do a large number of detailed studies of individuals to address their individual issues. We CAN do large studies of many individuals to address the issues that are regularly seen in them. Statistics can't be removed from the process in a world of eight billion people.

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

But what you should be able to do is look at that person who died of a particular strain and answer why. Or catch them before they die and figure out why they're having such a bad reaction to it.

In most cases science, even now - three years in to a pandemic - can give a good answer in most cases. They can - even now - warn people who are at high risk. Will we ever be able to do so with near certainty for ALL cases? No, that's impossible given the near infinite numbers of causal interactions. That is true of both COVID and any other disease. The more we study the better we will know and the quicker we'll be able to identify causes, but expecting diagnosis perfection isn't reasonable.

wpot posted...

I think the main thing we aren't connecting on is the difference between doing a study for one case (which is usually not terribly useful for the individual, usually not very interesting scientifically, and frankly not possible to do for anything close to every difficult case due to the resources needed) and doing a study that covers many people in relation to a specific factor (which is being done constantly). We cannot do a large number of detailed studies of individuals to address their individual issues. We CAN do large studies of many individuals to address the issues that are regularly seen in them. Statistics can't be removed from the process in a world of eight billion people.

In most cases science, even now - three years in to a pandemic - can give a good answer in most cases. They can - even now - warn people who are at high risk. Will we ever be able to do so with near certainty for ALL cases? No, that's impossible given the near infinite numbers of causal interactions. That is true of both COVID and any other disease. The more we study the better we will know and the quicker we'll be able to identify causes, but expecting diagnosis perfection isn't reasonable.

That is the medical mystery that we need to solve. In most cases the old will die and the young will live. But in those cases where the opposite happens, we need to know why.

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

But in those cases where the opposite happens, we need to know why.

Which is why medical science is trying to figure that out using their best tools, which include bulk data and statistics.

wpot posted...

Which is why medical science is trying to figure that out using their best tools, which include bulk data and statistics.

So three years in and all we know is "The young and healthy tend to live, the old and infirm tend to die, and here are the strains that tend to kill more than others?" So many other factors to consider and we don't anything about them?

There's been case after case of people dying of this that surprised people. You'd think by now someone would've looked into those cases and figured something out.

Oh look, some random dude on the internet who thinks he knows more than the worlds best scientists

So, TC gets mad that he doesnt know anything about COVID, even though there are many articles talking about it. But instead of reading the articles to learn about it, continues to not read them, and complains he doesnt know anything about COVID Including the things most people do know about it

Isn't there a Simpsons bit that goes like this?

Homer or whoever: I'm just saying that someone should look into it.
Other person: evidence of looking into it
Homer or whoever: I'm just saying that someone should look into it.
Other person: evidence of looking into it
Homer or whoever: I'm just saying that someone should look into it.
Other person: evidence of looking into it
...etc.

I'm done, anyways!

FrozenBananas posted...

Oh look, some random dude on the internet who thinks he knows more than the worlds best scientists

That's not what I'm saying, I'm saying the world's best scientists should be doing more to figure out why these so called "anomalies" in our limited understanding of the virus are happening. If we understand the virus more, they won't be "anomalies."

LinkPizza posted...

So, TC gets mad that he doesnt know anything about COVID, even though there are many articles talking about it. But instead of reading the articles to learn about it, continues to not read them, and complains he doesnt know anything about COVID Including the things most people do know about it

wpot posted...

Isn't there a Simpsons bit that goes like this?

Homer or whoever: I'm just saying that someone should look into it.
Other person: evidence of looking into it
Homer or whoever: I'm just saying that someone should look into it.
Other person: evidence of looking into it
Homer or whoever: I'm just saying that someone should look into it.
Other person: evidence of looking into it
...etc.

I'm done, anyways!

That's also not what I said. You were the one who said "There's nothing to figure out." But then you said "There's stuff we don't know, but the scientists are working on figuring it out."

So Tc is an antivax who doesnt actually listen to medical professionals and is surprised they got an infectious airborne disease.

#ShockeredPikachu

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

That's also not what I said. You were the one who said "There's nothing to figure out." But then you said "There's stuff we don't know, but the scientists are working on figuring it out."

Except were not saying theres. I thing to figure out. Youre the one acting like we know next to nothing about COVID when we actually know a good amount. Just because we dont know everything doesnt mean we dont know quite a bit. We know some of why it affects other differently. But not everything. The same is for every other disease or illness out there. We can know a lot about all of them. But we dont know everything about any of them. And weve even given answers to some of your questions. But you ignore them, and claim we havent given you anything

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

That is the medical mystery that we need to solve. In most cases the old will die and the young will live. But in those cases where the opposite happens, we need to know why.

This... this isnt a mystery and it fucking hasnt been for years. Holy shit do antivax find the most fallacious arguments to shit all over the rest of society, but this might just be the one with the least digested amount of peanuts.

LinkPizza posted...

Except were not saying theres. I thing to figure out. Youre the one acting like we know next to nothing about COVID when we actually know a good amount. Just because we dont know everything doesnt mean we dont know quite a bit. We know some of why it affects other differently. But not everything. The same is for every other disease or illness out there. We can know a lot about all of them. But we dont know everything about any of them. And weve even given answers to some of your questions. But you ignore them, and claim we havent given you anything

The exact words from @wpot were "There's nothing to figure out." As if all the mysteries of this virus had been solved. No one here has answered my questions because the actual answer to my questions is "Science hasn't figured it out yet." I'm not asking whether the immunocompromised are more susceptible than the immuno-doing-alright. What I'm asking is "How come these people we thought would live are dying? These healthy people with strong immune systems? Tell me what went wrong there."

ZangsBeard posted...

This... this isnt a mystery and it fucking hasnt been for years. Holy shit do antivax find the most fallacious arguments to shit all over the rest of society, but this might just be the one with the least digested amount of peanuts.

What isn't a mystery? Are you even reading my posts? Do you even know what I'm asking?

Oh dear I've been @ summoned. :) Very well...

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

I hear so many survivor tales about how this thing "kicked their ass," what we aren't spending enough time figuring out is how come I'm cruising but other people are dying?

wpot posted...

Right, there's nothing to figure out.

In regards to why some people are dying and others are living there 'isn't anything to figure out' in the sense that isn't a surprise statistically: variation in case severity is the nature of disease. There will always be anecdotal stories about surprising differences between cases. We should not hear those anecdotes and assume that something baffling is occurring.

There is of course more to learn about all diseases and COVID, which is still relatively new, in particular. That work will never end and there will always be more to figure out. And the best infectious disease scientists in the world are doing exactly that.

wpot posted...

Oh dear I've been @ summoned. :) Very well...

In regards to why some people are dying and others are living there 'isn't anything to figure out' in the sense that isn't a surprise statistically: variation in case severity is the nature of disease. There will always be anecdotal stories about surprising differences between cases. We should not hear those anecdotes and assume that something baffling is occurring.

There is of course more to learn about all diseases and COVID, which is still relatively new, in particular. That work will never end and there will always be more to figure out. And the best infectious disease scientists in the world are doing exactly that.

There are no "surprise differences," if someone is affected by a disease in some way, they're affected for a reason. And that's what's left to figure out. The reasons we don't yet understand for why certain people are affected in certain ways by certain diseases when we thought they wouldn't be.

I am an example of someone who should've died from this based on the trends, but I didn't. So why didn't I?

• There are very many possible factors
• We DO know many factors that appear quite significant beyond simple age
• Even if you have all known risk factors it doesn't mean you will die. They have just increased your odds of dying from (making up numbers) 0.1% to 58.7%.

I can't decide if you are asking legitimately, wanting us to declare you superman and study you (perhaps I should have listened to Judgmenl), or simply trolling. Done for real this time, though.

ItsKaljinyuTime posted...

What isn't a mystery? Are you even reading my posts? Do you even know what I'm asking?

Yes. I do know actually which is why I can confidently saying youre refusing professionals statements on the situations when you dont actually have any valid knowledge to dispute them. Youre just spewing nutty diarrhea in the form of bad faith arguments and infectious airborne disease all over the people around you in the name of just asking questions

ZangsBeard posted...

Yes. I do know actually which is why I can confidently saying youre refusing professionals statements on the situations when you dont actually have any valid knowledge to dispute them. Youre just spewing nutty diarrhea in the form of bad faith arguments and infectious airborne disease all over the people around you in the name of just asking questions

I haven't been given any professional statements in response to my question because my question is "Why wasn't this worse for me?" Science should be able to tell me what went right with me that I'm managing this so well.

wpot posted...

* There are very many possible factors
* We DO know many factors that appear quite significant beyond simple age
* Even if you have all known risk factors it doesn't mean you will die. They have just increased your odds of dying from (making up numbers) 0.1% to 58.7%.

I can't decide if you are asking legitimately, wanting us to declare you superman and study you (perhaps I should have listened to Judgmenl), or simply trolling. Done for real this time, though.

But if I do have all known risk factors and survive, there should be a more substantial answer beyond "You just got lucky." That is what I want science to figure out.

Oh look. More bad faith arguments from the diarrhea kid.