How to deal with a friend who thinks COVID 19 is a hoax

[vegetariantaxidermy]

The idea that Covid is no worse than flu is just an old bit of fake news only propagated by people too stupid to have been paying attention over the last few months. People like Boris, and Bolsanaro might have believed it in March, but that was when deaths were in their 100s.
44000 have died in the UK since then. 160k reported deaths in the US and that is WITH lockdown. The virus has hardly got started in the US with places like New York, New Jersey recording higher rates than anywhere on earth.

I never said it was 'just a flu'.
If it's so deadly to everyone, then why are we continually being told that we are 'protecting our elderly' (including the older 'middle aged' (semi-elderly) who have fucked up their own immune systems)? As if it isn't perfectly normal for the very old to die The POINT I was making is that the very old can just as easily die of a cold or flu. I don't mind lockdowns myself, but my opinion doesn't matter--it's only facts I'm interested in.

Can't stay in lockdown forever. Nature is going to cull people one way or another so you had better start eating up your greens

There are two reasons for shielding the very old and other vulnerable sorts of people. One reason is civilisation is currently founded upon values that everyone has equal rights, personifications of Justice show her blindfolded.

The other reason is practical. Vulnerable persons are vulnerable for several reasons including poverty, compromised immune systems, and diseases of old age. Virus is opportunistic. The practicality of shielding these groups is to protect health and care services against being overwhelmed. There was never any intention of keeping old people alive for ever.

Bollocks.

[Sculptor]

The idea that Covid is no worse than flu is just an old bit of fake news only propagated by people too stupid to have been paying attention over the last few months. People like Boris, and Bolsanaro might have believed it in March, but that was when deaths were in their 100s.
44000 have died in the UK since then. 160k reported deaths in the US and that is WITH lockdown. The virus has hardly got started in the US with places like New York, New Jersey recording higher rates than anywhere on earth.

I never said it was 'just a flu'.
If it's so deadly to everyone, then why are we continually being told that we are 'protecting our elderly' (including the older 'middle aged' (semi-elderly) who have fucked up their own immune systems)? As if it isn't perfectly normal for the very old to die The POINT I was making is that the very old can just as easily die of a cold or flu. I don't mind lockdowns myself, but my opinion doesn't matter--it's only facts I'm interested in.

Can't stay in lockdown forever. Nature is going to cull people one way or another so you had better start eating up your greens

There are two reasons for shielding the very old and other vulnerable sorts of people. One reason is civilisation is currently founded upon values that everyone has equal rights, personifications of Justice show her blindfolded.

The other reason is practical. Vulnerable persons are vulnerable for several reasons including poverty, compromised immune systems, and diseases of old age. Virus is opportunistic. The practicality of shielding these groups is to protect health and care services against being overwhelmed. There was never any intention of keeping old people alive for ever.

Precise and to the point.
Obvious enough to anyone with the intelligence to avoid the usual hyperbole.

[Sculptor]

Yes, maybe it boils down to nature’s culling of (old) people v. humans’ caring for (old) people. If this is to be a homeostatic situation there must be a balance of the two.

It's nothing of the sort. If humans really 'cared' for old people then they wouldn't be in those awful facilities. If they really 'cared' then people would be screened for any kind of virus or illness before being allowed to enter an aged care home.
Your comments are typical of the emotive, emotionally-blackmailing crap that people come out with every time someone suggests not having lockdowns. 'WAAAH, granny-killer, you're trying to kill my great granny, shame on you wah wah..'

Sweden has got its death rate down to practically nothing without a lockdown.



sweden.png

I see your point.

BTW, Socially Swedes are always very distant.

Sweden is a well ordered society. With critically low population density. It has high health and social care values. It has good healthcare and welfare systems. It is also well educated enough that people are capable of self isolating, without the need for a draconian lockdown. Infrastucture is good and public buildings and public transport are clean and healthy to travel in. There is less overcrowding than in comparable countries.
With the high yield of moronic thinking and childish grasping of fake news corona-skepticism in the US and UK and has can be observed here on this Forum it is obvious enough that having no lockdown in the UK would have been disastrous. If you think 44, 000 deaths is small, imagine what it would have been without it. IN the US the 160.000 deaths is just the start.
But even Sweden was not completely without lockdown. All schools post 16 were closed and gatherings of over 50 discouraged - and complied with.
But whilst people in the UK were reported to be spitting at people and laughing in Sweden people could be trusted to maintain social distancing.
BUT.
A report from mid June reads.
"Sweden has the largest number of cases and fatalities in Scandinavia—around 37 000 confirmed cases at the time of writing, compared with its neighbours Denmark, Norway, and Finland which have 12 000, 8000, and 7000 cases, respectively. All three neighbouring countries adopted a lockdown approach early in the pandemic, which they are now slowly lifting. All three have since re-opened their borders, but not to Sweden."

BBC new July 24
"More than 5,500 people have died with Covid-19 in this country of just 10 million. It is one of the highest death rates relative to population size in Europe,"

So with the best will in the world and the best sort of society to combat the virus the experiement did not work so well, and comparable countries have done better.

It has been a disaster for Sweden.
The most critical figure is deaths per 1M population. Sweden ranks highest in Europe except for Belgium UK and Italy which are higher, and 8th in the world.
The death rate is 10times higher than Norway and 5 times higher than Denmark.

[commonsense]

How to deal with a friend who thinks COVID 19 is a hoax—this very thread is evidence that communication with a conspiracy theorist is daunting. No matter what you offer as evidence that COVID is a serious threat, an illogical negation is offered in response.

Why is that? Is there a hard-wired personality defect in every conspiratist? I doubt it. In the case of the Coronavirus, that would be so many people with the same defect that it would almost be the new normal.

Is it necessary for a conspiratist to have a certain amount of neurosis? Is this situation akin to so-called mass hysteria? I don’t have any idea what it is. But I do know that you can’t accomplish anything by imposing reality on someone who is out of touch with it.

You might communicate by starting from inside their fantasy. Try to find a point of agreement, and if you can’t do that, pretend to agree.

[henry quirk]

No matter what you offer as evidence that COVID is a serious threat, an illogical negation is offered in response.

and: no matter what you offer as evidence that beer virus is not the Coronaopcalypse, the only response is derision

[Lacewing]

you can’t accomplish anything by imposing reality on someone who is out of touch with it.

Well said.

I think there must be a payoff for someone who continually dismisses any broader reality/truth in favor of whatever distorted story they are obsessed with. That payoff is what typically intrigues me. How are they being served? What NEED is so great for them to "go to such a place" of denial and disregard? Is it fear? Ego? What drives someone to feed on ideas of darkness and distrust? Why don't they thoroughly question and doubt narrow and one-sided claims? Why not question EVERYTHING? Instead, it seems that they dive whole-heartedly into whatever convoluted horror story seems to be a good justification for all of their rage and inadequacy, and become mindless, unquestioning pawns who create a self-fulfilling prophecy they can war against. Meanwhile, others are playing a different game that profits from all of the mindless fury and chaos.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

The death rate is 10times higher than Norway and 5 times higher than Denmark.

And the vast majority of deaths have been old farts. Gee. How amazing that old people would die of something.

[Sculptor]

The death rate is 10times higher than Norway and 5 times higher than Denmark.

And the vast majority of deaths have been old farts. Gee. How amazing that old people would die of something.

Not relevant
That's true anywhere.
You really need some basic lessons in thinking.

[Sculptor]

No matter what you offer as evidence that COVID is a serious threat, an illogical negation is offered in response.

and: no matter what you offer as evidence that beer virus is not the Coronaopcalypse, the only response is derision

Dumb fucks get derision thrown at them.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

The death rate is 10times higher than Norway and 5 times higher than Denmark.

And the vast majority of deaths have been old farts. Gee. How amazing that old people would die of something.

Not relevant
That's true anywhere.
You really need some basic lessons in thinking.

How is it not relevant? Stop being such a selfish old fart.

[Belinda]

And the vast majority of deaths have been old farts. Gee. How amazing that old people would die of something.

Not relevant
That's true anywhere.
You really need some basic lessons in thinking.

How is it not relevant? Stop being such a selfish old fart.

Does Veggie think all old people, including those who are not terminally ill, should be allowed to die without any medical intervention?
What would be the difference if any between non intervention and involuntary euthanasia?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Not relevant
That's true anywhere.
You really need some basic lessons in thinking.

How is it not relevant? Stop being such a selfish old fart.

Does Veggie think all old people, including those who are not terminally ill, should be allowed to die without any medical intervention?
What would be the difference if any between non intervention and involuntary euthanasia?

That is generally the case by the time they are in aged care facilities. Duh! And you are 88. Probably hoping to cling to life till the last second. I don't 'think' anything. I'm only interested in facts. It's being old and sick that is killing these people--not the virus.

[Belinda]

How is it not relevant? Stop being such a selfish old fart.

Does Veggie think all old people, including those who are not terminally ill, should be allowed to die without any medical intervention?
What would be the difference if any between non intervention and involuntary euthanasia?

That is generally the case by the time they are in aged care facilities. Duh! And you are 88. Probably hoping to cling to life till the last second. I don't 'think' anything. I'm only interested in facts. It's being old and sick that is killing these people--not the virus.

You ought to think! What use is your life if you don't think?
Here is a fact : while some people may be said to have died of old age there are also acute conditions such as fracture of the femur that intervene in the 'old age' process and hasten the death of the patient.
Perhaps you would advocate non-heroic interventions after a certain age. That is already being done. Many people have made advance directives also called living wills so that there will no heroic clinical interventions when they become terminally ill.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Does Veggie think all old people, including those who are not terminally ill, should be allowed to die without any medical intervention?
What would be the difference if any between non intervention and involuntary euthanasia?

That is generally the case by the time they are in aged care facilities. Duh! And you are 88. Probably hoping to cling to life till the last second. I don't 'think' anything. I'm only interested in facts. It's being old and sick that is killing these people--not the virus.

You ought to think! What use is your life if you don't think?
Here is a fact : while some people may be said to have died of old age there are also acute conditions such as fracture of the femur that intervene in the 'old age' process and hasten the death of the patient.
Perhaps you would advocate non-heroic interventions after a certain age. That is already being done. Many people have made advance directives also called living wills so that there will no heroic clinical interventions when they become terminally ill.

You were clearly asking for my opinion, not literally whether or not I 'think'.
And I wonder how long it will be before young people cotton on to the fact that they are in fact being sacrificed for the old and infirm. It's creepily cannibalistic actually. Reminds me of a science fiction story, where the well-to-do elderly are kept alive on body parts from the young.

[Sculptor]

And the vast majority of deaths have been old farts. Gee. How amazing that old people would die of something.

Not relevant
That's true anywhere.
You really need some basic lessons in thinking.

How is it not relevant? Stop being such a selfish old fart.

F*ck off you rancid old C(nt