3 ms·

> small, not-yet-peer-reviewed) datapoint in that direction Since we tend to mock such studies when done by antivax, we should also reserve all judgement here.

> small, not-yet-peer-reviewed) datapoint in that direction Since we tend to mock such studies when done by antivax, we should also reserve all judgement here. Let’s keep the bar high for good science, the last year has been a flourish of unverified correlated statistics. > Given massive numbers it has affected already I don’t think people optimize for normal life either. For example, lockdowns do provoke effects which are at least as dangerous: We spend billions a year telling people to move more to fight obesity, so we are 100% sure that lockdowns have a negative effect on obesity and cardiovascular diseases, but also families breaking up, unemployment, loneliness, lack of sports (maybe close to weight gains of a 5-10 pounds in average, I’d be curious), and all those factors multiply further in the future and increase the risk of asthma, cancer, suicide, mental breakdowns (including knife attacks), we haven’t see the real delayed effects. So, overreaction already killed more than even the (reasonable) estimated worst case scenario. Let’s not focus just on Covid, and let’s look at everything else we don’t generally care about. My rule is, since they don’t care for my suicide, which is about 2 orders of magnitude higher than my Covid risk, I won’t vaccinate.

jpmoral 5y ago
>So, overreaction already killed more than even the (reasonable) estimated worst case scenario. How did you come to this conclusion? >My rule is, since they don’t care for my suicide, which is about 2 orders of magnitude higher than my Covid risk, I won’t vaccinate. Not sure if I'm reading this correctly but basically not vaccinating out of spite?
glangdale 5y ago
I love how you pivot from "demanding peer review" and a "high bar for science" to unleashing a great pile of anecdata about overreaction. Much of the science on depression and social ill effects of lockdowns is no more conclusive, but you're already 100% convinced of it, even making up numbers for average weight gain. I find it bizarre that all the stuff about depression, unemployment, etc is always neatly pigeonholed into "lockdown did it". Yeah, like if we were all just going about our business having Brazil-levels of disease and death , we'd all be really cheerful and gainfully employed. Anti-lockdown people somehow interpret the world entirely through this narrow lens - perhaps some people are depressed/suicidal thanks to dread of the disease or personal losses of friends/family members to the disease. There's an amazing rush to judgement to assume that all the risks are due to lockdown, especially in countries that have high rates - as yet I don't think we know what suicide and unemployment rates are for people with Long COVID. It's something of a right-wing bit of unpleasantry to say this, but "facts don't care about your feelings" (ugh). If there is a looming risk of - say - 2% of long COVID suffers getting Lewy Body Dementia or Parkinson's as a result of "mild COVID", that's a lot of new horrible cases - potentially with years of suffering involved. If these ill effects are in fact looming, they will ensure that 'bad lockdown' stuff is lost in the noise. I'm not advocating 'lock everyone down hard forever'; I just think this is a counterpoint to the whole "freedom day" nonsense where it's assumed that once we have a goodly portion of people vaccinated we can just let the virus rage through the population unchecked.
SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
Since you also focus that you want to keep a high bar for good science, where are you studies that claim that “ overreaction already killed more than even the (reasonable) estimated worst case scenario”?

jpmoral 5y ago

>So, overreaction already killed more than even the (reasonable) estimated worst case scenario. How did you come to this conclusion? >My rule is, since they don’t care for my suicide, which is about 2 orders of magnitude higher than my Covid risk, I won’t vaccinate. Not sure if I'm reading this correctly but basically not vaccinating out of spite?

glangdale 5y ago

I love how you pivot from "demanding peer review" and a "high bar for science" to unleashing a great pile of anecdata about overreaction. Much of the science on depression and social ill effects of lockdowns is no more conclusive, but you're already 100% convinced of it, even making up numbers for average weight gain. I find it bizarre that all the stuff about depression, unemployment, etc is always neatly pigeonholed into "lockdown did it". Yeah, like if we were all just going about our business having Brazil-levels of disease and death , we'd all be really cheerful and gainfully employed. Anti-lockdown people somehow interpret the world entirely through this narrow lens - perhaps some people are depressed/suicidal thanks to dread of the disease or personal losses of friends/family members to the disease. There's an amazing rush to judgement to assume that all the risks are due to lockdown, especially in countries that have high rates - as yet I don't think we know what suicide and unemployment rates are for people with Long COVID. It's something of a right-wing bit of unpleasantry to say this, but "facts don't care about your feelings" (ugh). If there is a looming risk of - say - 2% of long COVID suffers getting Lewy Body Dementia or Parkinson's as a result of "mild COVID", that's a lot of new horrible cases - potentially with years of suffering involved. If these ill effects are in fact looming, they will ensure that 'bad lockdown' stuff is lost in the noise. I'm not advocating 'lock everyone down hard forever'; I just think this is a counterpoint to the whole "freedom day" nonsense where it's assumed that once we have a goodly portion of people vaccinated we can just let the virus rage through the population unchecked.

SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago

Since you also focus that you want to keep a high bar for good science, where are you studies that claim that “ overreaction already killed more than even the (reasonable) estimated worst case scenario”?