3 ms·

Ok, so the original motivations for some making that claim were suspect. Should that automatically excuse or prevent discussion that better safety protocols sh

Ok, so the original motivations for some making that claim were suspect. Should that automatically excuse or prevent discussion that better safety protocols should be used or a better “ways of doing things” should be undertaken when handling viruses and pathogens that are capable of killing 7M people? I think it’s a valid topic and important one that should be verboten lest the next time we accidentally kill 14M with carelessness as the cause.

plagiarist 3y ago
If the people making that claim had been sane, instead of pushing it in the middle of; "it's not deadly, just a flu," "masks do nothing," "maybe a bit of bleach is fine in the lungs," "hydroxychloroquine cures everything," "no, wait, it is horse paste that cures everything," "the vaccine will kill you in X months, guaranteed," and "GREAT RESET," it'd be easier to transition into a serious discussion about studying deadly viruses in labs.
- kcplate 3y ago
  I honestly don’t see much difference in the level of extremism between everything you listed vs people deciding a specific topic is off limits just because the theory may not be politically correct, or because the alt opinion may have some factual basis.
  - plagiarist 3y ago
    Yes, of course, everyone should treat disingenuous propagandists as if they were attempting to have a serious discussion. If anyone objects to that, it is "deciding a topic is off-limits," which is insane. Of course we should let them run their horse paste grift and just patiently repeat over and over, "no, no, studies show it doesn't work. Please wear a mask to reduce spread."
    - kcplate 3y ago
      Considering that you are intentionally misconstruing that ivermectin position that folks were discussing at the time using the same tired and dishonest “horse paste” media talking point, I’ll assume that “disingenuous propaganda” runs in many directions.
- Natsu 3y ago
  The middle ground always gets pushed to the extremes when there's a strong push to alienate some views. Covid was worse than the flu, but the flu is also deadly and we should be paying more attention to vaccinating it. The deaths aren't evenly distributed, either, young healthy people have less to worry about, but "less" isn't "nothing." For masks, you really wanted N95 masks, not cloth, and you still have to avoid large indoor gatherings. Nobody said that bleach in the lungs was good. Trump mentioned disinfectant presumably butchering a description of the HealLight which would use UV to destroy the virus, effectively "disinfecting" the lungs. There are always idiots poisoning themselves with bleach, though, but nobody pays much attention to the poison control stats most of the time. HCQ and Ivermectin had some promising studies but no real effectiveness for the things people wanted them for. There probably is some rise in myocarditis due to vaccines... but they're still a lot safer if you look at mortality rates. "Great Reset" was from an actual policy proposal someone put out, but doesn't really stand for the things the conspiracies say it does. All of these things got pushed into extreme caricatures depending on what side you trust.
  - pyuser583 3y ago
    I thought that Ivermectin was proven to be helpful in places where parasitic infestations are extremely common (most of the world). The problem being that treating someone with steroids also strengthens parasites, which burdens the immune system even more. So in parts of the world where parasites are common, it makes sense to treat with an anti-parasite drug from the beginning (no need to test for actual parasites). In parts of the world without widespread parasite infections (for example, the US), the costs outweigh the benefits. This caused lots of confusion because there were quite a few papers promoting Ivermectin as part of treatment. The fine print said “in developing countries” but nobody reads the fine print.
- goatlover 3y ago
  So you want to let the conspiracy theorists dictate discussion. And not everyone claiming there could have been a lab leak was pushing for those other things. There were sane claims. You seem to want to ignore the possibility that the Chinese and American governments had something to coverup, if there was a lab leak given the kind of research done there.

plagiarist 3y ago

If the people making that claim had been sane, instead of pushing it in the middle of; "it's not deadly, just a flu," "masks do nothing," "maybe a bit of bleach is fine in the lungs," "hydroxychloroquine cures everything," "no, wait, it is horse paste that cures everything," "the vaccine will kill you in X months, guaranteed," and "GREAT RESET," it'd be easier to transition into a serious discussion about studying deadly viruses in labs.

kcplate 3y ago
I honestly don’t see much difference in the level of extremism between everything you listed vs people deciding a specific topic is off limits just because the theory may not be politically correct, or because the alt opinion may have some factual basis.
- plagiarist 3y ago
  Yes, of course, everyone should treat disingenuous propagandists as if they were attempting to have a serious discussion. If anyone objects to that, it is "deciding a topic is off-limits," which is insane. Of course we should let them run their horse paste grift and just patiently repeat over and over, "no, no, studies show it doesn't work. Please wear a mask to reduce spread."
  - kcplate 3y ago
    Considering that you are intentionally misconstruing that ivermectin position that folks were discussing at the time using the same tired and dishonest “horse paste” media talking point, I’ll assume that “disingenuous propaganda” runs in many directions.
Natsu 3y ago
The middle ground always gets pushed to the extremes when there's a strong push to alienate some views. Covid was worse than the flu, but the flu is also deadly and we should be paying more attention to vaccinating it. The deaths aren't evenly distributed, either, young healthy people have less to worry about, but "less" isn't "nothing." For masks, you really wanted N95 masks, not cloth, and you still have to avoid large indoor gatherings. Nobody said that bleach in the lungs was good. Trump mentioned disinfectant presumably butchering a description of the HealLight which would use UV to destroy the virus, effectively "disinfecting" the lungs. There are always idiots poisoning themselves with bleach, though, but nobody pays much attention to the poison control stats most of the time. HCQ and Ivermectin had some promising studies but no real effectiveness for the things people wanted them for. There probably is some rise in myocarditis due to vaccines... but they're still a lot safer if you look at mortality rates. "Great Reset" was from an actual policy proposal someone put out, but doesn't really stand for the things the conspiracies say it does. All of these things got pushed into extreme caricatures depending on what side you trust.
- pyuser583 3y ago
  I thought that Ivermectin was proven to be helpful in places where parasitic infestations are extremely common (most of the world). The problem being that treating someone with steroids also strengthens parasites, which burdens the immune system even more. So in parts of the world where parasites are common, it makes sense to treat with an anti-parasite drug from the beginning (no need to test for actual parasites). In parts of the world without widespread parasite infections (for example, the US), the costs outweigh the benefits. This caused lots of confusion because there were quite a few papers promoting Ivermectin as part of treatment. The fine print said “in developing countries” but nobody reads the fine print.
goatlover 3y ago
So you want to let the conspiracy theorists dictate discussion. And not everyone claiming there could have been a lab leak was pushing for those other things. There were sane claims. You seem to want to ignore the possibility that the Chinese and American governments had something to coverup, if there was a lab leak given the kind of research done there.