5 ms·

Our last president went on live TV and said we should try cleaning people's lungs with bleach. The leading American news channel regularly aired anti-vaccine pr

Our last president went on live TV and said we should try cleaning people's lungs with bleach. The leading American news channel regularly aired anti-vaccine propaganda. People at protests were calling for the execution of officials at the CDC, FDA, and NIAID. Meanwhile the "deep state" saved lives. If you aren't aware of those things, you are ignorant of some of the most important events in recent history. Covid-19 killed a million Americans, more than any war. Being clueless doesn't put you above the fray.

blitz_skull 3y ago
> Covid-19 killed a million Americans Covid _related_ deaths. Big difference.
- sdfignaionio 3y ago
  You're quibbling over whether Covid-19 killed a million people or there were merely a million excess deaths attributable to Covid-19. It was a big deal.
  - blitz_skull 3y ago
    I disagree, it is not trivial to delineate the difference between direct death and related death. It's an important distinction. For example, the deaths in World War 2 jumps from ~53 million, up to ~80 million if we include "related" deaths (famine, etc). So, it is definitively not quibbling. Also, I'm not sure why a million deaths makes this "some of the most important events in recent history". If we're going by this mindset, then we have to agree that Roe v Wade is perhaps the one of the worst events in all of American history—contributing to more than 64 million American deaths (and still rising). I might highlight that's more than all of the deaths in World War 1 (~40 million), and more than all of the directly-related causes of death in World War 2 (~53 million). IMO, COVID was _a deal_, but we've much bigger deals afoot and COVID is basically gone now.
    - haldujai 3y ago
      For the purposes of discussing the impact of an event we generally refer to the "excess death" metric rather than "direct" or "related deaths" which are very challenging to define and determine, as you stated. In this context, whether the death was directly due to COVID or a consequence of health strain/policy decisions/phobia delaying care is irrelevant to the overall impact of the virus on the population. > For example, the deaths in World War 2 jumps from ~53 million, up to ~80 million if we include "related" deaths (famine, etc). So, it is definitively not quibbling. I don't understand what you think this "definitively" demonstrates? Non-combat fatalities is absolutely relevant and should be included when discussing the impact of WWII on the world population. The statement that WWII killed ~80 million people is valid and accurate. > If we're going by this mindset, then we have to agree that Roe v Wade is perhaps the one of the worst events in all of American history—contributing to more than 64 million American deaths (and still rising). I'm assuming you're referring to 64 million abortions suggesting you believe a fetus is considered a human being. This is not the view of the scientific community, 36/50 US states and the vast majority of the international community so no we don't have to agree on that.
      - blitz_skull 3y ago
        > This is not the view of the scientific community, 36/50 US states and the vast majority of the international community Unless you've got sources, I'm going to have to respectfully disbelieve that you somehow speak for the scientific community at large, 36 whole states, and the world. Despite the morally-devoid echo chamber that many choose to live in, we've seen time and time again that social consensus doesn't mean anything when it comes to morality or truth. I seem to recall at one point, owning human beings as slaves was both lawful and even considered morally necessary by many US states, and even the international community! Yet we can easily look back and realize that was a bitter mistake that has and will continue to affect generations to come. Not because we somehow "came to a consensus" that slavery was wrong, but because we finally acknowledged what was always true—slavery is wrong. Our consensus was just us coming to our senses. I'll say it again, consensus means nothing when the subject is murder. The entire world agreeing does not, in any way, shape objective moral truth.

blitz_skull 3y ago

> Covid-19 killed a million Americans Covid _related_ deaths. Big difference.

sdfignaionio 3y ago
You're quibbling over whether Covid-19 killed a million people or there were merely a million excess deaths attributable to Covid-19. It was a big deal.
- blitz_skull 3y ago
  I disagree, it is not trivial to delineate the difference between direct death and related death. It's an important distinction. For example, the deaths in World War 2 jumps from ~53 million, up to ~80 million if we include "related" deaths (famine, etc). So, it is definitively not quibbling. Also, I'm not sure why a million deaths makes this "some of the most important events in recent history". If we're going by this mindset, then we have to agree that Roe v Wade is perhaps the one of the worst events in all of American history—contributing to more than 64 million American deaths (and still rising). I might highlight that's more than all of the deaths in World War 1 (~40 million), and more than all of the directly-related causes of death in World War 2 (~53 million). IMO, COVID was _a deal_, but we've much bigger deals afoot and COVID is basically gone now.
  - haldujai 3y ago
    For the purposes of discussing the impact of an event we generally refer to the "excess death" metric rather than "direct" or "related deaths" which are very challenging to define and determine, as you stated. In this context, whether the death was directly due to COVID or a consequence of health strain/policy decisions/phobia delaying care is irrelevant to the overall impact of the virus on the population. > For example, the deaths in World War 2 jumps from ~53 million, up to ~80 million if we include "related" deaths (famine, etc). So, it is definitively not quibbling. I don't understand what you think this "definitively" demonstrates? Non-combat fatalities is absolutely relevant and should be included when discussing the impact of WWII on the world population. The statement that WWII killed ~80 million people is valid and accurate. > If we're going by this mindset, then we have to agree that Roe v Wade is perhaps the one of the worst events in all of American history—contributing to more than 64 million American deaths (and still rising). I'm assuming you're referring to 64 million abortions suggesting you believe a fetus is considered a human being. This is not the view of the scientific community, 36/50 US states and the vast majority of the international community so no we don't have to agree on that.
    - blitz_skull 3y ago
      > This is not the view of the scientific community, 36/50 US states and the vast majority of the international community Unless you've got sources, I'm going to have to respectfully disbelieve that you somehow speak for the scientific community at large, 36 whole states, and the world. Despite the morally-devoid echo chamber that many choose to live in, we've seen time and time again that social consensus doesn't mean anything when it comes to morality or truth. I seem to recall at one point, owning human beings as slaves was both lawful and even considered morally necessary by many US states, and even the international community! Yet we can easily look back and realize that was a bitter mistake that has and will continue to affect generations to come. Not because we somehow "came to a consensus" that slavery was wrong, but because we finally acknowledged what was always true—slavery is wrong. Our consensus was just us coming to our senses. I'll say it again, consensus means nothing when the subject is murder. The entire world agreeing does not, in any way, shape objective moral truth.