6 ms·

>Regardless, you're going to get Covid. It is inevitable. It isn't going away. You can get it when you're younger and healthier, or you can get it when you're o

>Regardless, you're going to get Covid. It is inevitable. It isn't going away. You can get it when you're younger and healthier, or you can get it when you're older and sicker. You know you're full of sh*t when you still treat covid as a one-time infection when it's perfectly clear that it will reinfect you at best on a biyearly basis.

timr 4y ago
I said nothing about reinfection, but you're right: you're going to get it multiple times in your life, just like any other circulating coronavirus, the risk of which you've completely neglected in every prior year you have been alive. You can't do anything about it. You have a choice: you can lock yourself indoors, keep your face hidden, and live in perpetual anxiety -- in a futile attempt to stave off the inevitable -- based on questionable research. Alternatively, you can accept that life comes with some level of risk. What you can't do, no matter how much you hide and curse at others, is avoid a respiratory virus.
- trention 4y ago
  The fact that you are going to get reinfected has a significant bearing on your ridiculous implicit claim made here: > You can get it when you're younger and healthier, or you can get it when you're older and sicker. that you are better off getting infected sooner rather than later and that there is only negative value to be had in postponing infection. >What you can't do, no matter how much you hide and curse at others, is avoid a respiratory virus. You may want to keep that sentiment for when a 30+% IFR respiratory virus like MERS causes a pandemic which, given the law of large numbers, will absolutely happen. Then, the attitude "you can do nothing" leads to only one thing - total civilizational collapse. (BTW, measles and rubella are both respiratory viruses that I have avoided and will continue to avoid but thanks for again proving the point that you have no idea what you are talking about.) But looking at your submission history, I don't intend to lose any more time with the definition of covidiotism.
  - nradov 4y ago
    Most of us are able to avoid measles and rubella because the vaccines are highly effective at preventing infection and transmission. By contrast, the COVID-19 vaccines are pretty good at preventing severe symptoms but do little to prevent infection and transmission. Attempting to avoid SARS-CoV-2 is utterly pointless; unless you live like a hermit, you're going to be occasionally exposed no matter what.
    - trention 4y ago
      >attempting to avoid SARS-CoV-2 is utterly pointless Maybe you should start by learning about cumulative probability and hence why n/2 infections carry less risk than n infections.
      - nradov 4y ago
        Biology can seldom be reduced to such simplistic calculations. Do you have any actual evidence for that claim? Please provide a quantitative estimate of the relative risk reduction for a serious adverse cardiac event under your proposed course of action, and show your work.
        trention 4y ago
        It is axiomatically true that a repeated event that carries non-zero probability for an adverse effect increases the cumulative probability of said adverse effect when it recurs. I don't need to show any work since covid infection AND reinfection has already been proven beyond any doubt to have non-zero risk of adverse effects on those that don't die from the infection. So either provide proof that covid reinfection carries 0 risk of permanent sequelae or stop wasting my time with the ridiculous claim that reducing the number of times someone is getting reinfected has no health benefit.
        OrvalWintermute 4y ago
        trention, you need to provide some evidence instead of endlessly misusing some heuristic, or principle like Occam's Razor.

timr 4y ago

I said nothing about reinfection, but you're right: you're going to get it multiple times in your life, just like any other circulating coronavirus, the risk of which you've completely neglected in every prior year you have been alive. You can't do anything about it. You have a choice: you can lock yourself indoors, keep your face hidden, and live in perpetual anxiety -- in a futile attempt to stave off the inevitable -- based on questionable research. Alternatively, you can accept that life comes with some level of risk. What you can't do, no matter how much you hide and curse at others, is avoid a respiratory virus.

trention 4y ago
The fact that you are going to get reinfected has a significant bearing on your ridiculous implicit claim made here: > You can get it when you're younger and healthier, or you can get it when you're older and sicker. that you are better off getting infected sooner rather than later and that there is only negative value to be had in postponing infection. >What you can't do, no matter how much you hide and curse at others, is avoid a respiratory virus. You may want to keep that sentiment for when a 30+% IFR respiratory virus like MERS causes a pandemic which, given the law of large numbers, will absolutely happen. Then, the attitude "you can do nothing" leads to only one thing - total civilizational collapse. (BTW, measles and rubella are both respiratory viruses that I have avoided and will continue to avoid but thanks for again proving the point that you have no idea what you are talking about.) But looking at your submission history, I don't intend to lose any more time with the definition of covidiotism.
- nradov 4y ago
  Most of us are able to avoid measles and rubella because the vaccines are highly effective at preventing infection and transmission. By contrast, the COVID-19 vaccines are pretty good at preventing severe symptoms but do little to prevent infection and transmission. Attempting to avoid SARS-CoV-2 is utterly pointless; unless you live like a hermit, you're going to be occasionally exposed no matter what.
  - trention 4y ago
    >attempting to avoid SARS-CoV-2 is utterly pointless Maybe you should start by learning about cumulative probability and hence why n/2 infections carry less risk than n infections.
    - nradov 4y ago
      Biology can seldom be reduced to such simplistic calculations. Do you have any actual evidence for that claim? Please provide a quantitative estimate of the relative risk reduction for a serious adverse cardiac event under your proposed course of action, and show your work.
      - trention 4y ago
        It is axiomatically true that a repeated event that carries non-zero probability for an adverse effect increases the cumulative probability of said adverse effect when it recurs. I don't need to show any work since covid infection AND reinfection has already been proven beyond any doubt to have non-zero risk of adverse effects on those that don't die from the infection. So either provide proof that covid reinfection carries 0 risk of permanent sequelae or stop wasting my time with the ridiculous claim that reducing the number of times someone is getting reinfected has no health benefit.
        OrvalWintermute 4y ago
        trention, you need to provide some evidence instead of endlessly misusing some heuristic, or principle like Occam's Razor.