On 5/13/2022 2:45 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 5/13/2022 10:02 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 5/12/2022 5:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>>>
>>> The tiny or illusory benefits of lockdowns are plainly
>>> outweighed
>>> by the damages to industry, commerce, education, non-COVID
>>> health care,
>>> civil liberties, and confidence in government
>>> institutions.  That last
>>> one might be the clincher.
>>>
>>> Here's a study for you:
>>>
>>> https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf
>>>
>>>
>>
>>  From
>> https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220204/lockdowns-covid-deaths-study
>>
>>
>> "The findings, which have not been peer reviewed, conflict
>> with previous studies that found lockdowns worked."
>>
>> And: "Reaction to the paper’s release has been mixed. Many
>> conservatives have seized on the paper to argue that
>> lockdowns never worked and to criticize governments that
>> implemented them. Other experts, meanwhile, point to what
>> they see as major flaws in the report.
>>
>>   “Smoking causes cancer, the earth is round, and ordering
>> people to stay at home (the correct definition of lockdown)
>> decreases disease transmission,” Seth Flaxman, associate
>> professor in the Department of Computer Science at the
>> University of Oxford, said in a statement. “. None of this
>> is controversial among scientists. A study purporting to
>> prove the opposite is almost certain to be fundamentally
>> flawed.”
>>
>>> Currently infant formula is unavailable at 43% of the
>>> normal retail
>>> locations, are you in favor of that?
>>
>> I've always favored natural breast feeding. And no rational
>> person thought that COVID rules and responses would be free
>> of negative effects. But ever since the virus appeared, some
>> irrational right-wingers have been pretending all would have
>> been perfect if we had just let COVID run its course unabated.
>>
>> As it was, we've had a million deaths (no matter what Tom
>> says) despite serious defense measures. Without measures,
>> those deaths might have doubled. Are you in favor of that?
>>
>>> Lockdowns are plainly untenable.  But if you want to
>>> remove yourself
>>> from human circulation, save for the occasional usenet
>>> posting, zoom
>>> call, or grocery drone delivery, then I wish you well.
>>> Just don't try
>>> to enforce that on the rest of us.
>>
>> You ignore the fact that the infected and ignorant put not
>> only themselves at risk. They impose their ignorant choices
>> on others.
>>
>> I'm reminded of the woman who, during the "masks are
>> required" phase, stormed barefaced into our local pharmacy
>> yelling "Freedom! Freedom! Freedom!" and stormed back out.
>> SO impressive! SO convincing!
>>
>>
>
> > "You ignore the fact that the infected and ignorant put not
> > only themselves at risk. They impose their ignorant choices
> > on others."
>
> People who have survived the Wuhan bioweapon virus put no one at risk.

Perhaps so, once their bout with the virus has ended. But while the
virus is still active in their bodies, it's a different story.

Have you somehow missed the phrase "super-spreader event"?

--
- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> writes:

> On 5/13/2022 2:45 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 5/13/2022 10:02 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 5/12/2022 5:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The tiny or illusory benefits of lockdowns are plainly
>>>> outweighed
>>>> by the damages to industry, commerce, education, non-COVID
>>>> health care,
>>>> civil liberties, and confidence in government
>>>> institutions.  That last
>>>> one might be the clincher.
>>>>
>>>> Here's a study for you:
>>>>
>>>> https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf
>>>>
>>>
>>>  From
>>> https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220204/lockdowns-covid-deaths-study
>>>
>>>
>>> "The findings, which have not been peer reviewed, conflict
>>> with previous studies that found lockdowns worked."
>>>
>>> And: "Reaction to the paper’s release has been mixed. Many
>>> conservatives have seized on the paper to argue that
>>> lockdowns never worked and to criticize governments that
>>> implemented them. Other experts, meanwhile, point to what
>>> they see as major flaws in the report.
>>>
>>>   “Smoking causes cancer, the earth is round, and ordering
>>> people to stay at home (the correct definition of lockdown)
>>> decreases disease transmission,” Seth Flaxman, associate
>>> professor in the Department of Computer Science at the
>>> University of Oxford, said in a statement. “. None of this
>>> is controversial among scientists. A study purporting to
>>> prove the opposite is almost certain to be fundamentally
>>> flawed.”
>>>
>>>> Currently infant formula is unavailable at 43% of the
>>>> normal retail
>>>> locations, are you in favor of that?
>>>
>>> I've always favored natural breast feeding. And no rational
>>> person thought that COVID rules and responses would be free
>>> of negative effects. But ever since the virus appeared, some
>>> irrational right-wingers have been pretending all would have
>>> been perfect if we had just let COVID run its course unabated.
>>>
>>> As it was, we've had a million deaths (no matter what Tom
>>> says) despite serious defense measures. Without measures,
>>> those deaths might have doubled. Are you in favor of that?
>>>
>>>> Lockdowns are plainly untenable.  But if you want to
>>>> remove yourself
>>>> from human circulation, save for the occasional usenet
>>>> posting, zoom
>>>> call, or grocery drone delivery, then I wish you well.
>>>> Just don't try
>>>> to enforce that on the rest of us.
>>>
>>> You ignore the fact that the infected and ignorant put not
>>> only themselves at risk. They impose their ignorant choices
>>> on others.
>>>
>>> I'm reminded of the woman who, during the "masks are
>>> required" phase, stormed barefaced into our local pharmacy
>>> yelling "Freedom! Freedom! Freedom!" and stormed back out.
>>> SO impressive! SO convincing!
>>>
>>>
>> > "You ignore the fact that the infected and ignorant put not
>> > only themselves at risk. They impose their ignorant choices
>> > on others."
>> People who have survived the Wuhan bioweapon virus put no one at
>> risk.
>
> Perhaps so, once their bout with the virus has ended. But while the
> virus is still active in their bodies, it's a different story.
>
> Have you somehow missed the phrase "super-spreader event"?

I read that the most recent White House Correspondents' dinner was
one. Fancy that.

On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 10:11:01 AM UTC-7, Sepp Ruf wrote:
> russell... lied:
>
> (....)
> > If the goal was to kill people with no economic benefits, then Sweden
> > won by not locking down and having no Covid restrictions. Yeah
> > Sweden. Kill em, kill em, kill em.
> As if Americans would seriously shed a tear about a little mortality
> anywhere, or some 7,000 extra foreign dead, median age 84 or so.
>
> <https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FSj0aZHXsAA48Nn?format=jpg>
> <https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FSAA5HIUUAEQDpV?format=jpg>
> <https://www.scb.se/en/finding-statistics/statistics-by-subject-area/population/population-composition/population-statistics/pong/tables-and-graphs/yearly-statistics--the-whole-country/population-and-population-changes/>
> <https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FSYvsMuXMAAlmyQ?format=jpg>
> <https://twitter.com/IdoKobi/status/1523234945187127296>
>
>
> --
> "Now Auditioning Ukrainian Strippers" (Little Darlings, Las Vegas)
>
> Just don't call it a p***y war!
From the time of the Spanish Flu in 1918 we have known that lockdowns are destructive of human life and economic well being. Yet Fauci was allowed to break every single medical rule. Lock-downs CANNOT do a think because people must go out to do things so the people that are sensitive to these illnesses should be protected and everyone else with normal health must take their chances. From the VERY first we knew that it was very old and very sick people that died from covid-19. So precisely why was it that Fauci - an investor and even PART OWNER in vaccine companies - was allowed to do as he pleased?

Every single study of masks since 1918 showed that masks didn't work. These tests are repeated every couple of years and they have never had any different results. In order to breath the holes in the masks are ALWAYS larger than the virus. Covid-19 is airborne so masks are useless and only a show of being a social misfit.

Fauci managed to get a small team to "write a study" in which it showed that K95 masked did work. No they didn't they cut infection rates by a couple of percent. But the Slime Stream Media was quite happy to turn that into "every mask works every time."

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> writes:

> On 5/12/2022 5:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>> The tiny or illusory benefits of lockdowns are plainly outweighed
>> by the damages to industry, commerce, education, non-COVID health care,
>> civil liberties, and confidence in government institutions. That last
>> one might be the clincher.
>> Here's a study for you:
>> https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf
>
> From https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220204/lockdowns-covid-deaths-study
>
> "The findings, which have not been peer reviewed, conflict with
> previous studies that found lockdowns worked."
>
> And: "Reaction to the paper’s release has been mixed. Many
> conservatives have seized on the paper to argue that lockdowns never
> worked and to criticize governments that implemented them. Other
> experts, meanwhile, point to what they see as major flaws in the
> report.
>
> “Smoking causes cancer, the earth is round, and ordering people to
> stay at home (the correct definition of lockdown) decreases disease
> transmission,” Seth Flaxman, associate professor in the Department of
> Computer Science at the University of Oxford, said in a statement. “.
> None of this is controversial among scientists. A study purporting to
> prove the opposite is almost certain to be fundamentally flawed.”
>
>> Currently infant formula is unavailable at 43% of the normal retail
>> locations, are you in favor of that?
>
> I've always favored natural breast feeding. And no rational person

Easy for you to say, not being equipped for the task. Some mothers are
able to breast feed, some are not.

> thought that COVID rules and responses would be free of negative
> effects. But ever since the virus appeared, some irrational
> right-wingers have been pretending all would have been perfect if we
> had just let COVID run its course unabated.

I find it odd the way that public health questions can no longer be
discussed without devolving into completely irrelevant tribal politics.
It should be possible to discuss these things on their merits without
lumping anyone who disagrees with you into the *-winger camp.

> As it was, we've had a million deaths (no matter what Tom says)
> despite serious defense measures. Without measures, those deaths might
> have doubled. Are you in favor of that?

I have not seen any credible evidence that the deaths would have doubled,
or even increased at all. When you see claims that they would, I
beseech you, just for a moment apply your bike helmet standard to what
is being said.

Western governments had documented plans for dealing with a respiratory
pandemic before it happened, and they would have almost certainly have
resulted in less destruction than we have actually seen (and will
continue to see for many years). Anders Tegnell stuck by his country's
plan.

For some reason that is hard to for me to understand most of the rest of
the world fell into line with the Chinese Communist Party government
actions. I am reminded of the old parental question "If your friend
jumped off a cliff would you do it too?".

I am in favor of medical people, in public or private roles, following
Hippocrates directive: First do no harm.

>> Lockdowns are plainly untenable. But if you want to remove yourself
>> from human circulation, save for the occasional usenet posting, zoom
>> call, or grocery drone delivery, then I wish you well. Just don't try
>> to enforce that on the rest of us.
>
> You ignore the fact that the infected and ignorant put not only
> themselves at risk. They impose their ignorant choices on others.

There has never, ever been a case in human history when controlling
"ignorance" stopped a respiratory pandemic. There is no reason to
expect such a case in the future. This virus, like previous viruses,
will spread across the Earth until most of humanity is naturally immune.
Pretending that it might have been otherwise does not make it so.

> I'm reminded of the woman who, during the "masks are required" phase,
> stormed barefaced into our local pharmacy yelling "Freedom! Freedom!
> Freedom!" and stormed back out. SO impressive! SO convincing!

SO snarky!

On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 1:47:14 PM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
> Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>
> > On 5/13/2022 2:45 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >> On 5/13/2022 10:02 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>> On 5/12/2022 5:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> The tiny or illusory benefits of lockdowns are plainly
> >>>> outweighed
> >>>> by the damages to industry, commerce, education, non-COVID
> >>>> health care,
> >>>> civil liberties, and confidence in government
> >>>> institutions. That last
> >>>> one might be the clincher.
> >>>>
> >>>> Here's a study for you:
> >>>>
> >>>> https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> From
> >>> https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220204/lockdowns-covid-deaths-study
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "The findings, which have not been peer reviewed, conflict
> >>> with previous studies that found lockdowns worked."
> >>>
> >>> And: "Reaction to the paper’s release has been mixed. Many
> >>> conservatives have seized on the paper to argue that
> >>> lockdowns never worked and to criticize governments that
> >>> implemented them. Other experts, meanwhile, point to what
> >>> they see as major flaws in the report.
> >>>
> >>> “Smoking causes cancer, the earth is round, and ordering
> >>> people to stay at home (the correct definition of lockdown)
> >>> decreases disease transmission,†Seth Flaxman, associate
> >>> professor in the Department of Computer Science at the
> >>> University of Oxford, said in a statement. “. None of this
> >>> is controversial among scientists. A study purporting to
> >>> prove the opposite is almost certain to be fundamentally
> >>> flawed.â€
> >>>
> >>>> Currently infant formula is unavailable at 43% of the
> >>>> normal retail
> >>>> locations, are you in favor of that?
> >>>
> >>> I've always favored natural breast feeding. And no rational
> >>> person thought that COVID rules and responses would be free
> >>> of negative effects. But ever since the virus appeared, some
> >>> irrational right-wingers have been pretending all would have
> >>> been perfect if we had just let COVID run its course unabated.
> >>>
> >>> As it was, we've had a million deaths (no matter what Tom
> >>> says) despite serious defense measures. Without measures,
> >>> those deaths might have doubled. Are you in favor of that?
> >>>
> >>>> Lockdowns are plainly untenable. But if you want to
> >>>> remove yourself
> >>>> from human circulation, save for the occasional usenet
> >>>> posting, zoom
> >>>> call, or grocery drone delivery, then I wish you well.
> >>>> Just don't try
> >>>> to enforce that on the rest of us.
> >>>
> >>> You ignore the fact that the infected and ignorant put not
> >>> only themselves at risk. They impose their ignorant choices
> >>> on others.
> >>>
> >>> I'm reminded of the woman who, during the "masks are
> >>> required" phase, stormed barefaced into our local pharmacy
> >>> yelling "Freedom! Freedom! Freedom!" and stormed back out.
> >>> SO impressive! SO convincing!
> >>>
> >>>
> >> > "You ignore the fact that the infected and ignorant put not
> >> > only themselves at risk. They impose their ignorant choices
> >> > on others."
> >> People who have survived the Wuhan bioweapon virus put no one at
> >> risk.
> >
> > Perhaps so, once their bout with the virus has ended. But while the
> > virus is still active in their bodies, it's a different story.
> >
> > Have you somehow missed the phrase "super-spreader event"?
> I read that the most recent White House Correspondents' dinner was
> one. Fancy that.

Frank, on his smartest day is stupid. He insists that the CDC is lying to him and Lord Fauci is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. This is why I have repeatedly quoted the CDC statistics page which shows that at the end of 2020 instead of telling us how many covid-19 deaths there were, they counted "excess deaths for all reasons" and left it to the exceedingly brilliant low achievers like Frank to jump to the conclusion they all died from that deadly covid-19. Since this pandemic started, in the USA, there have been 300,000 excess deaths from Fentanyl but Frank will scream that they all died of covid-19 because he has worked in real research jobs so much.

Well, I showed that some 8,000 people actually died from undefined respiratory diseases of which civid-19 was only ONE of them. When you have fools telling you how smart they are, and you SHOW them that the dead absolutely tracked the numbers of vaccinated that they might just catch a clue. But not Frank

On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 2:28:43 PM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
> Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>
> > On 5/12/2022 5:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
> >> The tiny or illusory benefits of lockdowns are plainly outweighed
> >> by the damages to industry, commerce, education, non-COVID health care,
> >> civil liberties, and confidence in government institutions. That last
> >> one might be the clincher.
> >> Here's a study for you:
> >> https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf
> >
> > From https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220204/lockdowns-covid-deaths-study
> >
> > "The findings, which have not been peer reviewed, conflict with
> > previous studies that found lockdowns worked."
> >
> > And: "Reaction to the paper’s release has been mixed. Many
> > conservatives have seized on the paper to argue that lockdowns never
> > worked and to criticize governments that implemented them. Other
> > experts, meanwhile, point to what they see as major flaws in the
> > report.
> >
> > “Smoking causes cancer, the earth is round, and ordering people to
> > stay at home (the correct definition of lockdown) decreases disease
> > transmission,” Seth Flaxman, associate professor in the Department of
> > Computer Science at the University of Oxford, said in a statement. “.
> > None of this is controversial among scientists. A study purporting to
> > prove the opposite is almost certain to be fundamentally flawed.”
> >
> >> Currently infant formula is unavailable at 43% of the normal retail
> >> locations, are you in favor of that?
> >
> > I've always favored natural breast feeding. And no rational person
> Easy for you to say, not being equipped for the task. Some mothers are
> able to breast feed, some are not.
> > thought that COVID rules and responses would be free of negative
> > effects. But ever since the virus appeared, some irrational
> > right-wingers have been pretending all would have been perfect if we
> > had just let COVID run its course unabated.
> I find it odd the way that public health questions can no longer be
> discussed without devolving into completely irrelevant tribal politics.
> It should be possible to discuss these things on their merits without
> lumping anyone who disagrees with you into the *-winger camp.
> > As it was, we've had a million deaths (no matter what Tom says)
> > despite serious defense measures. Without measures, those deaths might
> > have doubled. Are you in favor of that?
> I have not seen any credible evidence that the deaths would have doubled,
> or even increased at all. When you see claims that they would, I
> beseech you, just for a moment apply your bike helmet standard to what
> is being said.
>
> Western governments had documented plans for dealing with a respiratory
> pandemic before it happened, and they would have almost certainly have
> resulted in less destruction than we have actually seen (and will
> continue to see for many years). Anders Tegnell stuck by his country's
> plan.
>
> For some reason that is hard to for me to understand most of the rest of
> the world fell into line with the Chinese Communist Party government
> actions. I am reminded of the old parental question "If your friend
> jumped off a cliff would you do it too?".
>
> I am in favor of medical people, in public or private roles, following
> Hippocrates directive: First do no harm.
> >> Lockdowns are plainly untenable. But if you want to remove yourself
> >> from human circulation, save for the occasional usenet posting, zoom
> >> call, or grocery drone delivery, then I wish you well. Just don't try
> >> to enforce that on the rest of us.
> >
> > You ignore the fact that the infected and ignorant put not only
> > themselves at risk. They impose their ignorant choices on others.
> There has never, ever been a case in human history when controlling
> "ignorance" stopped a respiratory pandemic. There is no reason to
> expect such a case in the future. This virus, like previous viruses,
> will spread across the Earth until most of humanity is naturally immune.
> Pretending that it might have been otherwise does not make it so.
> > I'm reminded of the woman who, during the "masks are required" phase,
> > stormed barefaced into our local pharmacy yelling "Freedom! Freedom!
> > Freedom!" and stormed back out. SO impressive! SO convincing!
> SO snarky!

I would suggest again that Frank is a complete fool but let these doctors tell him: https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-pty-browser_wavebrowser&ei=UTF-8&hsimp=yhs-browser_wavebrowser&hspart=pty&param1=20220306&param2=a3dff400-f8fe-4521-9725-96179c4bf5a4&param3=wav%7EUS%7Eappfocus1%7E&param4=d-cp15084693744-lp5-hh6-obgc-wav-vuentp%3Aon-igzJjxmEGkmkmNamDWVfzg-ab36-w64-brwsr-ntb-ntp%7EChrome%7Eyoutube+covid+mistakes%7EB2D7D7656EB4E5153688637C8FBF7B49%7EWin10&p=youtube+covid+mistakes+Scott+Atlas&type=A1-brwsr-%7E2022-11%7E#id=147&vid=5f8a1a6c26f32acdf9193f064e22ddfa&action=view

On Fri, 13 May 2022 14:08:19 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 10:11:01 AM UTC-7, Sepp Ruf wrote:
>> russell... lied:
>>
>> (....)
>> > If the goal was to kill people with no economic benefits, then Sweden
>> > won by not locking down and having no Covid restrictions. Yeah
>> > Sweden. Kill em, kill em, kill em.
>> As if Americans would seriously shed a tear about a little mortality
>> anywhere, or some 7,000 extra foreign dead, median age 84 or so.
>>
>> <https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FSj0aZHXsAA48Nn?format=jpg>
>> <https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FSAA5HIUUAEQDpV?format=jpg>
>> <https://www.scb.se/en/finding-statistics/statistics-by-subject-area/population/population-composition/population-statistics/pong/tables-and-graphs/yearly-statistics--the-whole-country/population-and-population-changes/>
>> <https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FSYvsMuXMAAlmyQ?format=jpg>
>> <https://twitter.com/IdoKobi/status/1523234945187127296>
>>
>>
>> --
>> "Now Auditioning Ukrainian Strippers" (Little Darlings, Las Vegas)
>>
>> Just don't call it a p***y war!
>From the time of the Spanish Flu in 1918 we have known that lockdowns are destructive of human life and economic well being. Yet Fauci was allowed to break every single medical rule. Lock-downs CANNOT do a think because people must go out to do things so the people that are sensitive to these illnesses should be protected and everyone else with normal health must take their chances. From the VERY first we knew that it was very old and very sick people that died from covid-19. So precisely why was it that Fauci - an investor and even PART OWNER in vaccine companies - was allowed to do as he pleased?
>
>Every single study of masks since 1918 showed that masks didn't work. These tests are repeated every couple of years and they have never had any different results. In order to breath the holes in the masks are ALWAYS larger than the virus. Covid-19 is airborne so masks are useless and only a show of being a social misfit.
>
>Fauci managed to get a small team to "write a study" in which it showed that K95 masked did work. No they didn't they cut infection rates by a couple of percent. But the Slime Stream Media was quite happy to turn that into "every mask works every time."

Sorry Tommy but you get it wrong yet again.

Thailand has/had lock downs, in some cases entire provinces were
locked down, mandatory wearing of masks - I read the 90+ percent of
Bangkok inhabitants wear masks - and even devices to take your
temperature before you are allowed to enter a shopping center.

And the results? The total number of deaths due to the Covid, in
Thailand, is 29,370. A rate of 419/1 million population.

While in comparison California, with roughly, one half the population
of Thailand has some 90,923 deaths. A rate of 2,301/1 million.

--
Cheers,

John B.

On 5/13/2022 4:47 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>
>> On 5/13/2022 2:45 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>
>>> People who have survived the Wuhan bioweapon virus put no one at
>>> risk.
>>
>> Perhaps so, once their bout with the virus has ended. But while the
>> virus is still active in their bodies, it's a different story.
>>
>> Have you somehow missed the phrase "super-spreader event"?
>
> I read that the most recent White House Correspondents' dinner was
> one. Fancy that.

The virus doesn't care who a person voted for.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 5/13/2022 5:37 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>
> Well, I showed that some 8,000 people actually died from undefined respiratory diseases of which civid-19 was only ONE of them.

No you didn't, Tom. You've been corrected many times. You are unwilling
or unable to learn.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Fri, 13 May 2022 20:56:25 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 5/13/2022 5:37 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>
>> Well, I showed that some 8,000 people actually died from undefined respiratory diseases of which civid-19 was only ONE of them.
>
>No you didn't, Tom. You've been corrected many times. You are unwilling
>or unable to learn.

Strange. Tommy says one thing while the CDC says something entirely
different:
https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#datatracker-home
Covid total deaths - 996,653

But then, Old Tommy has failed at everything he's tried to do so why
should be surprised that he fails at counting Covid deaths?
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 5/13/2022 5:28 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>
>> On 5/12/2022 5:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>>> The tiny or illusory benefits of lockdowns are plainly outweighed
>>> by the damages to industry, commerce, education, non-COVID health care,
>>> civil liberties, and confidence in government institutions. That last
>>> one might be the clincher.
>>> Here's a study for you:
>>> https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf
>>
>> From https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220204/lockdowns-covid-deaths-study
>>
>> "The findings, which have not been peer reviewed, conflict with
>> previous studies that found lockdowns worked."
>>
>> And: "Reaction to the paper’s release has been mixed. Many
>> conservatives have seized on the paper to argue that lockdowns never
>> worked and to criticize governments that implemented them. Other
>> experts, meanwhile, point to what they see as major flaws in the
>> report.
>>
>> “Smoking causes cancer, the earth is round, and ordering people to
>> stay at home (the correct definition of lockdown) decreases disease
>> transmission,” Seth Flaxman, associate professor in the Department of
>> Computer Science at the University of Oxford, said in a statement. “.
>> None of this is controversial among scientists. A study purporting to
>> prove the opposite is almost certain to be fundamentally flawed.”
>>
>>> Currently infant formula is unavailable at 43% of the normal retail
>>> locations, are you in favor of that?
>>
>> I've always favored natural breast feeding. And no rational person
>
> Easy for you to say, not being equipped for the task. Some mothers are
> able to breast feed, some are not.

That's certainly true. OTOH, one of our best friends worked for many
years for the LaLeche League, promoting and supporting breast feeding.
It may seem odd to have to promote and support what is arguably one of
the most natural things in the world; but as she explained, there's huge
money being made by promoting the alternative, and dissuading or
restricting the natural way.

>> thought that COVID rules and responses would be free of negative
>> effects. But ever since the virus appeared, some irrational
>> right-wingers have been pretending all would have been perfect if we
>> had just let COVID run its course unabated.
>
> I find it odd the way that public health questions can no longer be
> discussed without devolving into completely irrelevant tribal politics.
> It should be possible to discuss these things on their merits without
> lumping anyone who disagrees with you into the *-winger camp.

You're ignoring very strong correlations. From the very beginning of
this epidemic, the right and far-right were dismissive of the problem
and against almost any proposed defense. To this day, it's hard to find
a COVID skeptic who isn't pretty hard right.

That's not to say every proposed defense was correct, nor that every
attitude of every left-winger was logical. But the farthest-right guy I
ever hang around with was the only one in a backyard party who said
"Hell no, I'm not getting vaccinated. I don't know what's in that
vaccine." Oddly enough, he was later treated with monoclonal antibodies,
at ~100 times the cost, even though I'm sure he didn't know what was in
that treatment either.

>> As it was, we've had a million deaths (no matter what Tom says)
>> despite serious defense measures. Without measures, those deaths might
>> have doubled. Are you in favor of that?
>
> I have not seen any credible evidence that the deaths would have doubled,
> or even increased at all.

The word "credible" is inherently subjective. Tom still doesn't believe
that the stock market rose during Obama's presidency, despite reams of
proof.

Think back to the times when hospitals were treating people in tents
because all beds were full, when people were on ventilators for weeks.
You're pretending mass gatherings would still have made sense? _That's_
incredible.

> When you see claims that they would, I
> beseech you, just for a moment apply your bike helmet standard to what
> is being said.

I've done that. Do it yourself. Start with a quick comparison of
fatality counts.

>> You ignore the fact that the infected and ignorant put not only
>> themselves at risk. They impose their ignorant choices on others.
>
> There has never, ever been a case in human history when controlling
> "ignorance" stopped a respiratory pandemic.

Human history is very old. Knowledge of viruses occurred in only the
last sliver of that time. In other words, the world as a whole is much
less ignorant than it was.

Which does not mean there are not exceptions - dedicated, enthusiastic,
even bombastic exceptions who treasure their ignorance.

I've never been a fan of ignorance.

>> I'm reminded of the woman who, during the "masks are required" phase,
>> stormed barefaced into our local pharmacy yelling "Freedom! Freedom!
>> Freedom!" and stormed back out. SO impressive! SO convincing!
>
> SO snarky!

Some behavior is richly deserving of "snark" or disapproval!

Based on the facial expressions, shared looks and head shaking by the
others in that store, she impressed nobody. If you think her behavior
was admirable, I'm rather amazed.

--
- Frank Krygowski

"russellseaton1@yahoo.com" <ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> writes:

> On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 2:12:11 AM UTC-5, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Thursday, May 12, 2022 at 7:34:15 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>> > On 5/12/2022 4:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>> > > "russell...@yahoo.com" <ritzann...@gmail.com> writes:
>> > >
>> > >> On Tuesday, May 10, 2022 at 10:21:11 AM UTC-5, Radey Shouman wrote:
>> > >>> Joy Beeson <jbe...@invalid.net.invalid> writes:
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> On Sun, 8 May 2022 16:12:54 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> > >>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>> The only object overhead might, I suppose, have been a meteor. And
>> > >>>>> really, his biggest chance of a head injury would have been while
>> > >>>>> driving the truck, unless he tripped on exit. But apparently no
>> > >>>>> regulation said to wear a helmet while driving or exiting.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> The main purpose of hard hats on open-air jobs is to make it easy to
>> > >>>> tell the workmen from spectators who need to be shooed out of the
>> > >>>> workzone.
>> > >>> +1. A hard hat says "I belong here, I know the rules and follow them".
>> > >>> Finer gradations are possible -- visitors get semi-disposable "bump
>> > >>> caps", possibly in an odd color. Management have spotless hard hats.
>> > >>> Actual workers have dingy looking hard hats, in the winter they've got
>> > >>> ear warmers on them. Those that wish to stand out can procure
>> > >>> OSHA-approved cowboy style hard hats.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> But why rag on hard hats when we've just seen most of the world forced
>> > >>> to learn a new pointless performative PPE dance? Walk up to the door of
>> > >>> the pub, drag a minimal face rag out of your pocket, put it on, walk to
>> > >>> your table, take it off and put it in your pocket. Eat, drink, and be
>> > >>> merry until you have to stand up and walk to the john, then put the
>> > >>> nasty contaminated face rag on until you get back to the table. Sit
>> > >>> down, take it off ...
>> > >>>
>> > >>> --
>> > >>
>> > >> Agree. We should re-implement the policies used in the mid and later
>> > >> 2020. Stop all gatherings and close restaurants, bars, meeting
>> > >> places. That would help to stamp out the Covid epidemic. But USians
>> > >> value human life very little. So we are happy to tolerate a couple
>> > >> hundred thousand extra dead people each year. 350,831 Covid deaths in
>> > >> 2020 per the CDC. 323 deaths each day according to the CDC right now.
>> > >> That only amounts to 118,000 dead each year. A pittance.
>> > >
>> > > I really can't tell whether you're trying to be serious.
>> > >
>> > > Fortunately governments all over the world, with the exception of the
>> > > CCP, have finally realized what lunacy that is. Perhaps it's only
>> > > temporary, as we're plainly living through one of the more extreme
>> > > episodes of popular delusions and the madness of crowds.
>> > >
>> > > The tiny or illusory benefits of lockdowns are plainly outweighed
>> > > by the damages to industry, commerce, education, non-COVID health care,
>> > > civil liberties, and confidence in government institutions. That last
>> > > one might be the clincher.
>> > >
>> > > Here's a study for you:
>> > >
>> > > https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf
>> > >
>> > > Currently infant formula is unavailable at 43% of the normal retail
>> > > locations, are you in favor of that? How about introducing another
>> > > first grade class to school at the boring end of a computer screen,
>> > > assuming their parents have the wherewithal to provide broadband access?
>> > > Or another years toll of the sick, tired, and old dying in nursing homes
>> > > and hospitals without the comfort and support of even one visit from
>> > > family or friends?
>> > >
>> > > Lockdowns are plainly untenable. But if you want to remove yourself
>> > > from human circulation, save for the occasional usenet posting, zoom
>> > > call, or grocery drone delivery, then I wish you well. Just don't try
>> > > to enforce that on the rest of us.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >> These were the leading causes of death in the USA in 2020. Heart
>> > >> disease: 696,962, Cancer: 602,350, COVID-19: 350,831, Accidents
>> > >> (unintentional injuries): 200,955, Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases):
>> > >> 160,264, Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 152,657 (Tommy thinks
>> > >> Covid should be included in this category), Alzheimer’s disease:
>> > >> 134,242, Diabetes: 102,188, Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,544 (or maybe
>> > >> Tommy thinks this is Covid), Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and
>> > >> nephrosis: 52,547. Not sure why CDC has 2020 deaths and not 2021
>> > >> deaths. Government is not too up to date on their websites.
>> > >>
>> > >> But Covid killing only 118,000 per year at the current rate. That
>> > >> would be only 7th best killer. We can ignore it now.
>> > >>
>> > >> https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#datatracker-home
>> > >> https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm
>> > >
>> > The Swedes, amazingly, were the un-lemmings on that suicide
>> > mission. Took everyone else (except the Middle Kingdom of
>> > Xi) 2 years to wake up and smell the coffee.
>> > --
>> > Andrew Muzi
>> > <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>> > Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>> I assume you are referring to Sweden going against the worldwide
>> methodology of lockdowns and restrictions for Covid. At least
>> initially in 2020 and through part of 2021. Everyone except Shanghai
>> is wide open now. Was Sweden successful?
>>
>> Sweden population 10.2 million Covid deaths 18,824 Infections 2.5 million
>> Finland pop. 5.5 million Covid deaths 4,150 Infections 1.05 million
>> Norway pop. 5.5 million Covid deaths 3,061 Infections 1.4 million
>> Denmark pop. 5.8 million Covid deaths 6,260 Infections 3.1 million
>>
>> Sweden has double the population of all of its nordic neighbors. So
>> you have to double the deaths and cases to get comparisons with its
>> nordic neighbors. If you do that then Sweden had 50% more Covid
>> deaths than Denmark. 200% more than Norway. 125% more than
>> Finland. Success?

The argument wasn't that Sweden did better than any other country, or
even better than they would have with lockdowns and masks, it was that
they didn't do *worse*. We see around the world a range of results,
some worse, some better. There are those that claim to know why, I'm
not one of them. If you compare Sweden to their neighbors Poland and
the Baltic states, they look better.

Finland, Denmark, and Norway actually did really well, it's just not
clear that NPIs had anything to do with that. All were fairly
non-stringent by world standards. If you're feeling open minded you
might read this page: https://swprs.org/judgment-day-sweden-vindicated/
lots of good links to follow.

>> And here is the total GDP of each country in 2020 and the percentage
>> change from the prior year. Sweden has double the population so has
>> a bigger GDP than its neighbors. Its double Finland's, but not near
>> double of Denmark and Norway. But per person GDP wealth is somewhat
>> similar amongst all these nordic countries.
>> Denmark GDP 2020 355 Billion -2.1%
>> Finland GDP 2020 271 Billion -2.8%
>> Norway GDP 2020 362 Billion -0.7%
>> Sweden GDP 2020 537 Billion -2.9%
>> Did Sweden win by not locking down? Economically it appears they saw
>> similar declines in GDP in 2020 as its neighbors. Except Norway did
>> really well. But they are an outlier apparently.
>>
>> Did Sweden WIN by not locking down? Their GDP dropped similar to
>> their neighbors. So no economic win. They had a lot WORSE death rate
>> than their neighbors. I think deaths is kind of important. And their
>> sick/infections was similar to Finland and Norway so cost of people
>> going to the hospital was about the same. Denmark was an outlier
>> with sick people so throw them out.
>>
>> If the goal was to kill people with no economic benefits, then
>> Sweden won by not locking down and having no Covid
>> restrictions. Yeah Sweden. Kill em, kill em, kill em.

On 5/13/2022 5:08 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> From the VERY first we knew that it was very old and very sick people that died from covid-19.

False, as usual.

As I've mentioned many times, one of my cycling friends was an early
COVID case. He spent many, many weeks on a respirator, and very nearly
died. He was 51 and very healthy when he contracted it, one of the
fastest riders in our club. While here (before his company transferred
him) he was an almost daily bike commuter (in fact, we met during our
bike commutes) and in perfect health.

When he finally had the ventilator removed, it was treated as a minor
miracle and given front page coverage in his new hometown paper. The
hospital staff had been expecting him to die.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 5/13/2022 4:22 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Fri, 13 May 2022 14:08:19 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 10:11:01 AM UTC-7, Sepp Ruf wrote:
>>> russell... lied:
>>>
>>> (....)
>>>> If the goal was to kill people with no economic benefits, then Sweden
>>>> won by not locking down and having no Covid restrictions. Yeah
>>>> Sweden. Kill em, kill em, kill em.
>>> As if Americans would seriously shed a tear about a little mortality
>>> anywhere, or some 7,000 extra foreign dead, median age 84 or so.
>>>
>>> <https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FSj0aZHXsAA48Nn?format=jpg>
>>> <https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FSAA5HIUUAEQDpV?format=jpg>
>>> <https://www.scb.se/en/finding-statistics/statistics-by-subject-area/population/population-composition/population-statistics/pong/tables-and-graphs/yearly-statistics--the-whole-country/population-and-population-changes/>
>>> <https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FSYvsMuXMAAlmyQ?format=jpg>
>>> <https://twitter.com/IdoKobi/status/1523234945187127296>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> "Now Auditioning Ukrainian Strippers" (Little Darlings, Las Vegas)
>>>
>>> Just don't call it a p***y war!
>>From the time of the Spanish Flu in 1918 we have known that lockdowns are destructive of human life and economic well being. Yet Fauci was allowed to break every single medical rule. Lock-downs CANNOT do a think because people must go out to do things so the people that are sensitive to these illnesses should be protected and everyone else with normal health must take their chances. From the VERY first we knew that it was very old and very sick people that died from covid-19. So precisely why was it that Fauci - an investor and even PART OWNER in vaccine companies - was allowed to do as he pleased?
>>
>> Every single study of masks since 1918 showed that masks didn't work. These tests are repeated every couple of years and they have never had any different results. In order to breath the holes in the masks are ALWAYS larger than the virus. Covid-19 is airborne so masks are useless and only a show of being a social misfit.
>>
>> Fauci managed to get a small team to "write a study" in which it showed that K95 masked did work. No they didn't they cut infection rates by a couple of percent. But the Slime Stream Media was quite happy to turn that into "every mask works every time."
>
> Sorry Tommy but you get it wrong yet again.
>
> Thailand has/had lock downs, in some cases entire provinces were
> locked down, mandatory wearing of masks - I read the 90+ percent of
> Bangkok inhabitants wear masks - and even devices to take your
> temperature before you are allowed to enter a shopping center.
>
> And the results? The total number of deaths due to the Covid, in
> Thailand, is 29,370. A rate of 419/1 million population.
>
> While in comparison California, with roughly, one half the population
> of Thailand has some 90,923 deaths. A rate of 2,301/1 million.

"Lock-down" is really not an accurate description of what transpired in
the U.S..

In the U.S. we never had draconian lock-downs like what is occurring in
parts of China where you cannot leave your home and food is delivered to
you. In the U.S. you were free to leave your home and go to the
supermarket, to get restaurant take-out, to go to parks, etc.. What you
could not do was to gather in places like inside bars and restaurants.
Some businesses could not operate. The biggest issue was remote learning
since schools are always the biggest super-spreader venues.

It's impossible to know exactly how many lives the ban on gatherings
saved. You can't easily compare countries because the quality of health
care varies so greatly.

For the U.S., the precautions that were put in place (mask mandates and
bans on public gatherings) are estimated to reduced the number of Covid
infections by about 60% and the number of deaths by 23%. So without the
precautions, we'd be at about 1.4 million deaths instead of 1 million.
If there were no vaccines we'd be at about 1.8 million deaths. If we
could get the morons that refuse to be vaccinated to give up their
fake-news influenced false-beliefs then we'd be done with this already.

What is troubling is that too many people are now pretending that Covid
is over, and dropping precautions like wearing masks, and doing
high-risk activities like going on cruises.

If you look at the per-capita death rates you see the stark difference
between states that took Covid seriously and those that did not. For
high-population states, California is at 229 per 100,000 while Florida
is at 345 per 100,000, a 51% higher death rate in Florida. Texas is at
304, a 33% higher death rate than California.

On 5/13/2022 8:30 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
> "russellseaton1@yahoo.com" <ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 2:12:11 AM UTC-5, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> On Thursday, May 12, 2022 at 7:34:15 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 5/12/2022 4:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>>>>> "russell...@yahoo.com" <ritzann...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tuesday, May 10, 2022 at 10:21:11 AM UTC-5, Radey Shouman wrote:
>>>>>>> Joy Beeson <jbe...@invalid.net.invalid> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 8 May 2022 16:12:54 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The only object overhead might, I suppose, have been a meteor. And
>>>>>>>>> really, his biggest chance of a head injury would have been while
>>>>>>>>> driving the truck, unless he tripped on exit. But apparently no
>>>>>>>>> regulation said to wear a helmet while driving or exiting.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The main purpose of hard hats on open-air jobs is to make it easy to
>>>>>>>> tell the workmen from spectators who need to be shooed out of the
>>>>>>>> workzone.
>>>>>>> +1. A hard hat says "I belong here, I know the rules and follow them".
>>>>>>> Finer gradations are possible -- visitors get semi-disposable "bump
>>>>>>> caps", possibly in an odd color. Management have spotless hard hats.
>>>>>>> Actual workers have dingy looking hard hats, in the winter they've got
>>>>>>> ear warmers on them. Those that wish to stand out can procure
>>>>>>> OSHA-approved cowboy style hard hats.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But why rag on hard hats when we've just seen most of the world forced
>>>>>>> to learn a new pointless performative PPE dance? Walk up to the door of
>>>>>>> the pub, drag a minimal face rag out of your pocket, put it on, walk to
>>>>>>> your table, take it off and put it in your pocket. Eat, drink, and be
>>>>>>> merry until you have to stand up and walk to the john, then put the
>>>>>>> nasty contaminated face rag on until you get back to the table. Sit
>>>>>>> down, take it off ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Agree. We should re-implement the policies used in the mid and later
>>>>>> 2020. Stop all gatherings and close restaurants, bars, meeting
>>>>>> places. That would help to stamp out the Covid epidemic. But USians
>>>>>> value human life very little. So we are happy to tolerate a couple
>>>>>> hundred thousand extra dead people each year. 350,831 Covid deaths in
>>>>>> 2020 per the CDC. 323 deaths each day according to the CDC right now.
>>>>>> That only amounts to 118,000 dead each year. A pittance.
>>>>>
>>>>> I really can't tell whether you're trying to be serious.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fortunately governments all over the world, with the exception of the
>>>>> CCP, have finally realized what lunacy that is. Perhaps it's only
>>>>> temporary, as we're plainly living through one of the more extreme
>>>>> episodes of popular delusions and the madness of crowds.
>>>>>
>>>>> The tiny or illusory benefits of lockdowns are plainly outweighed
>>>>> by the damages to industry, commerce, education, non-COVID health care,
>>>>> civil liberties, and confidence in government institutions. That last
>>>>> one might be the clincher.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's a study for you:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>> Currently infant formula is unavailable at 43% of the normal retail
>>>>> locations, are you in favor of that? How about introducing another
>>>>> first grade class to school at the boring end of a computer screen,
>>>>> assuming their parents have the wherewithal to provide broadband access?
>>>>> Or another years toll of the sick, tired, and old dying in nursing homes
>>>>> and hospitals without the comfort and support of even one visit from
>>>>> family or friends?
>>>>>
>>>>> Lockdowns are plainly untenable. But if you want to remove yourself
>>>>> from human circulation, save for the occasional usenet posting, zoom
>>>>> call, or grocery drone delivery, then I wish you well. Just don't try
>>>>> to enforce that on the rest of us.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> These were the leading causes of death in the USA in 2020. Heart
>>>>>> disease: 696,962, Cancer: 602,350, COVID-19: 350,831, Accidents
>>>>>> (unintentional injuries): 200,955, Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases):
>>>>>> 160,264, Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 152,657 (Tommy thinks
>>>>>> Covid should be included in this category), Alzheimer’s disease:
>>>>>> 134,242, Diabetes: 102,188, Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,544 (or maybe
>>>>>> Tommy thinks this is Covid), Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and
>>>>>> nephrosis: 52,547. Not sure why CDC has 2020 deaths and not 2021
>>>>>> deaths. Government is not too up to date on their websites.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But Covid killing only 118,000 per year at the current rate. That
>>>>>> would be only 7th best killer. We can ignore it now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#datatracker-home
>>>>>> https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm
>>>>>
>>>> The Swedes, amazingly, were the un-lemmings on that suicide
>>>> mission. Took everyone else (except the Middle Kingdom of
>>>> Xi) 2 years to wake up and smell the coffee.
>>>> --
>>>> Andrew Muzi
>>>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>>>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>>> I assume you are referring to Sweden going against the worldwide
>>> methodology of lockdowns and restrictions for Covid. At least
>>> initially in 2020 and through part of 2021. Everyone except Shanghai
>>> is wide open now. Was Sweden successful?
>>>
>>> Sweden population 10.2 million Covid deaths 18,824 Infections 2.5 million
>>> Finland pop. 5.5 million Covid deaths 4,150 Infections 1.05 million
>>> Norway pop. 5.5 million Covid deaths 3,061 Infections 1.4 million
>>> Denmark pop. 5.8 million Covid deaths 6,260 Infections 3.1 million
>>>
>>> Sweden has double the population of all of its nordic neighbors. So
>>> you have to double the deaths and cases to get comparisons with its
>>> nordic neighbors. If you do that then Sweden had 50% more Covid
>>> deaths than Denmark. 200% more than Norway. 125% more than
>>> Finland. Success?
>
> The argument wasn't that Sweden did better than any other country, or
> even better than they would have with lockdowns and masks, it was that
> they didn't do *worse*. We see around the world a range of results,
> some worse, some better. There are those that claim to know why, I'm
> not one of them. If you compare Sweden to their neighbors Poland and
> the Baltic states, they look better.
>
> Finland, Denmark, and Norway actually did really well, it's just not
> clear that NPIs had anything to do with that. All were fairly
> non-stringent by world standards. If you're feeling open minded you
> might read this page: https://swprs.org/judgment-day-sweden-vindicated/
> lots of good links to follow.
>
>>> And here is the total GDP of each country in 2020 and the percentage
>>> change from the prior year. Sweden has double the population so has
>>> a bigger GDP than its neighbors. Its double Finland's, but not near
>>> double of Denmark and Norway. But per person GDP wealth is somewhat
>>> similar amongst all these nordic countries.
>>> Denmark GDP 2020 355 Billion -2.1%
>>> Finland GDP 2020 271 Billion -2.8%
>>> Norway GDP 2020 362 Billion -0.7%
>>> Sweden GDP 2020 537 Billion -2.9%
>>> Did Sweden win by not locking down? Economically it appears they saw
>>> similar declines in GDP in 2020 as its neighbors. Except Norway did
>>> really well. But they are an outlier apparently.
>>>
>>> Did Sweden WIN by not locking down? Their GDP dropped similar to
>>> their neighbors. So no economic win. They had a lot WORSE death rate
>>> than their neighbors. I think deaths is kind of important. And their
>>> sick/infections was similar to Finland and Norway so cost of people
>>> going to the hospital was about the same. Denmark was an outlier
>>> with sick people so throw them out.
>>>
>>> If the goal was to kill people with no economic benefits, then
>>> Sweden won by not locking down and having no Covid
>>> restrictions. Yeah Sweden. Kill em, kill em, kill em.
>
> The world economy is all tied together these days. At work I'm
> constantly reminded of things that are very hard to buy any more because
> of troubles in China. When your trading partners' economies suffer,
> yours will tend to suffer as well.
>
> But, it's really not all about the GDP. Consider the children and young
> people that have missed educational and employment opportunities they
> can never really make up -- they and their country will be somewhat
> worse off for as long as they live.
>
> Consider health care. My neighbor died of cancer during the covid
> fiasco. Normally she would have been in hospital taking chemotherapy,
> but that was not allowed. Her husband certainly believes that was
> responsible for her death, and I suspect he's right. Cancer and high
> blood pressure screening, psychiatric care, routine vaccinations like
> measles, polio, and chickenpox all declined markedly during the covid
> NPIs; far from being swamped, hospitals laid off workers and lost a lot
> of money. If you believe medical care does any good, you can see that
> this is a bad thing. Measles or chickenpox in a naive population would
> make covid look like a walk in the park. Drug overdose deaths, the
> panic du jour before covid, are also way up.
>
> Then there is the normal enjoyment of life. How much is it worth to be
> able to attend a wedding, a graduation, a funeral? How much to be able
> to hold a new grandchild? Be with a dying parent? How about just
> riding down to the local coffee house to have a coffee, or the one four
> towns and a state over, if you feel like it? That's worth something to
> me.
>
> How much do you suppose you would have to pay Mr. Krygowski to give up
> religious services and playing music with his friends for a year? I'll
> bet it's a check I don't want to write. How about Mr. Muzi, to remain
> celibate, assuming he's not allowed out of the house? That's what got
> Neil Ferguson, he couldn't stay away from his mistress all the while he
> was telling everyone in the UK they had to stay home. For that matter,
> how much would you have to pay the median well-coiffed individual to
> give up hair cuts for a year? That should have got Nancy Pelosi, but
> we're apparently not as demanding of our politicians as the brits are.
>
> My point is that an economist would tell you that all of those costs are
> actually taken from the wealth of the nation, even if they don't appear
> directly in the GDP. Multiply by 300 million, almost all of whom care
> about *something* outside the house, and you're talking real money.
> Normal life is worth something.
>
>> Sorry, forgot to post links providing the numbers above.
>>
>> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8242624/
>> Cases and deaths from Covid.
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:COVID-19_pandemic_data
>> GDP and growth.
>> https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locations=SE&name_desc=true
>> I used Google search to get each country's population.

On Fri, 13 May 2022 21:29:29 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 5/13/2022 5:28 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/12/2022 5:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>>>> The tiny or illusory benefits of lockdowns are plainly outweighed
>>>> by the damages to industry, commerce, education, non-COVID health care,
>>>> civil liberties, and confidence in government institutions. That last
>>>> one might be the clincher.
>>>> Here's a study for you:
>>>> https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf
>>>
>>> From https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220204/lockdowns-covid-deaths-study
>>>
>>> "The findings, which have not been peer reviewed, conflict with
>>> previous studies that found lockdowns worked."
>>>
>>> And: "Reaction to the paper’s release has been mixed. Many
>>> conservatives have seized on the paper to argue that lockdowns never
>>> worked and to criticize governments that implemented them. Other
>>> experts, meanwhile, point to what they see as major flaws in the
>>> report.
>>>
>>> “Smoking causes cancer, the earth is round, and ordering people to
>>> stay at home (the correct definition of lockdown) decreases disease
>>> transmission,” Seth Flaxman, associate professor in the Department of
>>> Computer Science at the University of Oxford, said in a statement. “.
>>> None of this is controversial among scientists. A study purporting to
>>> prove the opposite is almost certain to be fundamentally flawed.”
>>>
>>>> Currently infant formula is unavailable at 43% of the normal retail
>>>> locations, are you in favor of that?
>>>
>>> I've always favored natural breast feeding. And no rational person
>>
>> Easy for you to say, not being equipped for the task. Some mothers are
>> able to breast feed, some are not.
>
>That's certainly true. OTOH, one of our best friends worked for many
>years for the LaLeche League, promoting and supporting breast feeding.
>It may seem odd to have to promote and support what is arguably one of
>the most natural things in the world; but as she explained, there's huge
>money being made by promoting the alternative, and dissuading or
>restricting the natural way.

I find it interesting that up until the mid 1940's or even later that
"infant formula" was not commonly used. Canned milk was mixed with
water and probably other ingredients to feed baby's that weren't
breast fed or had been weaned "off the breast".
And now the lack it is some sort of great catastrophe.

Rather like the "Great Toilet Paper" fervor.

Re breast feeding... I seem to recall some apathy toward this as, I
believe, there was the thought that it might destroy the pleasing
shape of the breast, although it is a rather hazy recollection (:-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Fri, 13 May 2022 21:30:49 -0400, Radey Shouman
<shouman@comcast.net> wrote:

>"russellseaton1@yahoo.com" <ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 2:12:11 AM UTC-5, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> On Thursday, May 12, 2022 at 7:34:15 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
>>> > On 5/12/2022 4:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>>> > > "russell...@yahoo.com" <ritzann...@gmail.com> writes:
>>> > >
>>> > >> On Tuesday, May 10, 2022 at 10:21:11 AM UTC-5, Radey Shouman wrote:
>>> > >>> Joy Beeson <jbe...@invalid.net.invalid> writes:
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>> On Sun, 8 May 2022 16:12:54 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>>> > >>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>> The only object overhead might, I suppose, have been a meteor. And
>>> > >>>>> really, his biggest chance of a head injury would have been while
>>> > >>>>> driving the truck, unless he tripped on exit. But apparently no
>>> > >>>>> regulation said to wear a helmet while driving or exiting.
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> The main purpose of hard hats on open-air jobs is to make it easy to
>>> > >>>> tell the workmen from spectators who need to be shooed out of the
>>> > >>>> workzone.
>>> > >>> +1. A hard hat says "I belong here, I know the rules and follow them".
>>> > >>> Finer gradations are possible -- visitors get semi-disposable "bump
>>> > >>> caps", possibly in an odd color. Management have spotless hard hats.
>>> > >>> Actual workers have dingy looking hard hats, in the winter they've got
>>> > >>> ear warmers on them. Those that wish to stand out can procure
>>> > >>> OSHA-approved cowboy style hard hats.
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> But why rag on hard hats when we've just seen most of the world forced
>>> > >>> to learn a new pointless performative PPE dance? Walk up to the door of
>>> > >>> the pub, drag a minimal face rag out of your pocket, put it on, walk to
>>> > >>> your table, take it off and put it in your pocket. Eat, drink, and be
>>> > >>> merry until you have to stand up and walk to the john, then put the
>>> > >>> nasty contaminated face rag on until you get back to the table. Sit
>>> > >>> down, take it off ...
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> --
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Agree. We should re-implement the policies used in the mid and later
>>> > >> 2020. Stop all gatherings and close restaurants, bars, meeting
>>> > >> places. That would help to stamp out the Covid epidemic. But USians
>>> > >> value human life very little. So we are happy to tolerate a couple
>>> > >> hundred thousand extra dead people each year. 350,831 Covid deaths in
>>> > >> 2020 per the CDC. 323 deaths each day according to the CDC right now.
>>> > >> That only amounts to 118,000 dead each year. A pittance.
>>> > >
>>> > > I really can't tell whether you're trying to be serious.
>>> > >
>>> > > Fortunately governments all over the world, with the exception of the
>>> > > CCP, have finally realized what lunacy that is. Perhaps it's only
>>> > > temporary, as we're plainly living through one of the more extreme
>>> > > episodes of popular delusions and the madness of crowds.
>>> > >
>>> > > The tiny or illusory benefits of lockdowns are plainly outweighed
>>> > > by the damages to industry, commerce, education, non-COVID health care,
>>> > > civil liberties, and confidence in government institutions. That last
>>> > > one might be the clincher.
>>> > >
>>> > > Here's a study for you:
>>> > >
>>> > > https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf
>>> > >
>>> > > Currently infant formula is unavailable at 43% of the normal retail
>>> > > locations, are you in favor of that? How about introducing another
>>> > > first grade class to school at the boring end of a computer screen,
>>> > > assuming their parents have the wherewithal to provide broadband access?
>>> > > Or another years toll of the sick, tired, and old dying in nursing homes
>>> > > and hospitals without the comfort and support of even one visit from
>>> > > family or friends?
>>> > >
>>> > > Lockdowns are plainly untenable. But if you want to remove yourself
>>> > > from human circulation, save for the occasional usenet posting, zoom
>>> > > call, or grocery drone delivery, then I wish you well. Just don't try
>>> > > to enforce that on the rest of us.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >> These were the leading causes of death in the USA in 2020. Heart
>>> > >> disease: 696,962, Cancer: 602,350, COVID-19: 350,831, Accidents
>>> > >> (unintentional injuries): 200,955, Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases):
>>> > >> 160,264, Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 152,657 (Tommy thinks
>>> > >> Covid should be included in this category), Alzheimer’s disease:
>>> > >> 134,242, Diabetes: 102,188, Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,544 (or maybe
>>> > >> Tommy thinks this is Covid), Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and
>>> > >> nephrosis: 52,547. Not sure why CDC has 2020 deaths and not 2021
>>> > >> deaths. Government is not too up to date on their websites.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> But Covid killing only 118,000 per year at the current rate. That
>>> > >> would be only 7th best killer. We can ignore it now.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#datatracker-home
>>> > >> https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm
>>> > >
>>> > The Swedes, amazingly, were the un-lemmings on that suicide
>>> > mission. Took everyone else (except the Middle Kingdom of
>>> > Xi) 2 years to wake up and smell the coffee.
>>> > --
>>> > Andrew Muzi
>>> > <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>>> > Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>>> I assume you are referring to Sweden going against the worldwide
>>> methodology of lockdowns and restrictions for Covid. At least
>>> initially in 2020 and through part of 2021. Everyone except Shanghai
>>> is wide open now. Was Sweden successful?
>>>
>>> Sweden population 10.2 million Covid deaths 18,824 Infections 2.5 million
>>> Finland pop. 5.5 million Covid deaths 4,150 Infections 1.05 million
>>> Norway pop. 5.5 million Covid deaths 3,061 Infections 1.4 million
>>> Denmark pop. 5.8 million Covid deaths 6,260 Infections 3.1 million
>>>
>>> Sweden has double the population of all of its nordic neighbors. So
>>> you have to double the deaths and cases to get comparisons with its
>>> nordic neighbors. If you do that then Sweden had 50% more Covid
>>> deaths than Denmark. 200% more than Norway. 125% more than
>>> Finland. Success?
>
>The argument wasn't that Sweden did better than any other country, or
>even better than they would have with lockdowns and masks, it was that
>they didn't do *worse*. We see around the world a range of results,
>some worse, some better. There are those that claim to know why, I'm
>not one of them. If you compare Sweden to their neighbors Poland and
>the Baltic states, they look better.
>
>Finland, Denmark, and Norway actually did really well, it's just not
>clear that NPIs had anything to do with that. All were fairly
>non-stringent by world standards. If you're feeling open minded you
>might read this page: https://swprs.org/judgment-day-sweden-vindicated/
>lots of good links to follow.
>
>>> And here is the total GDP of each country in 2020 and the percentage
>>> change from the prior year. Sweden has double the population so has
>>> a bigger GDP than its neighbors. Its double Finland's, but not near
>>> double of Denmark and Norway. But per person GDP wealth is somewhat
>>> similar amongst all these nordic countries.
>>> Denmark GDP 2020 355 Billion -2.1%
>>> Finland GDP 2020 271 Billion -2.8%
>>> Norway GDP 2020 362 Billion -0.7%
>>> Sweden GDP 2020 537 Billion -2.9%
>>> Did Sweden win by not locking down? Economically it appears they saw
>>> similar declines in GDP in 2020 as its neighbors. Except Norway did
>>> really well. But they are an outlier apparently.
>>>
>>> Did Sweden WIN by not locking down? Their GDP dropped similar to
>>> their neighbors. So no economic win. They had a lot WORSE death rate
>>> than their neighbors. I think deaths is kind of important. And their
>>> sick/infections was similar to Finland and Norway so cost of people
>>> going to the hospital was about the same. Denmark was an outlier
>>> with sick people so throw them out.
>>>
>>> If the goal was to kill people with no economic benefits, then
>>> Sweden won by not locking down and having no Covid
>>> restrictions. Yeah Sweden. Kill em, kill em, kill em.
>
>The world economy is all tied together these days. At work I'm
>constantly reminded of things that are very hard to buy any more because
>of troubles in China. When your trading partners' economies suffer,
>yours will tend to suffer as well.
>
>But, it's really not all about the GDP. Consider the children and young
>people that have missed educational and employment opportunities they
>can never really make up -- they and their country will be somewhat
>worse off for as long as they live.
>
>Consider health care. My neighbor died of cancer during the covid
>fiasco. Normally she would have been in hospital taking chemotherapy,
>but that was not allowed. Her husband certainly believes that was
>responsible for her death, and I suspect he's right. Cancer and high
>blood pressure screening, psychiatric care, routine vaccinations like
>measles, polio, and chickenpox all declined markedly during the covid
>NPIs; far from being swamped, hospitals laid off workers and lost a lot
>of money. If you believe medical care does any good, you can see that
>this is a bad thing. Measles or chickenpox in a naive population would
>make covid look like a walk in the park. Drug overdose deaths, the
>panic du jour before covid, are also way up.
>
>Then there is the normal enjoyment of life. How much is it worth to be
>able to attend a wedding, a graduation, a funeral? How much to be able
>to hold a new grandchild? Be with a dying parent? How about just
>riding down to the local coffee house to have a coffee, or the one four
>towns and a state over, if you feel like it? That's worth something to
>me.
>
>How much do you suppose you would have to pay Mr. Krygowski to give up
>religious services and playing music with his friends for a year? I'll
>bet it's a check I don't want to write. How about Mr. Muzi, to remain
>celibate, assuming he's not allowed out of the house? That's what got
>Neil Ferguson, he couldn't stay away from his mistress all the while he
>was telling everyone in the UK they had to stay home. For that matter,
>how much would you have to pay the median well-coiffed individual to
>give up hair cuts for a year? That should have got Nancy Pelosi, but
>we're apparently not as demanding of our politicians as the brits are.
>
>My point is that an economist would tell you that all of those costs are
>actually taken from the wealth of the nation, even if they don't appear
>directly in the GDP. Multiply by 300 million, almost all of whom care
>about *something* outside the house, and you're talking real money.
>Normal life is worth something.
>

On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 4:37:30 PM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 1:47:14 PM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
> > Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> writes:
> >
> > > On 5/13/2022 2:45 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> > >> On 5/13/2022 10:02 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > >>> On 5/12/2022 5:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The tiny or illusory benefits of lockdowns are plainly
> > >>>> outweighed
> > >>>> by the damages to industry, commerce, education, non-COVID
> > >>>> health care,
> > >>>> civil liberties, and confidence in government
> > >>>> institutions. That last
> > >>>> one might be the clincher.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Here's a study for you:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> From
> > >>> https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220204/lockdowns-covid-deaths-study
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> "The findings, which have not been peer reviewed, conflict
> > >>> with previous studies that found lockdowns worked."
> > >>>
> > >>> And: "Reaction to the paper’s release has been mixed. Many
> > >>> conservatives have seized on the paper to argue that
> > >>> lockdowns never worked and to criticize governments that
> > >>> implemented them. Other experts, meanwhile, point to what
> > >>> they see as major flaws in the report.
> > >>>
> > >>> “Smoking causes cancer, the earth is round, and ordering
> > >>> people to stay at home (the correct definition of lockdown)
> > >>> decreases disease transmission,†Seth Flaxman, associate
> > >>> professor in the Department of Computer Science at the
> > >>> University of Oxford, said in a statement. “. None of this
> > >>> is controversial among scientists. A study purporting to
> > >>> prove the opposite is almost certain to be fundamentally
> > >>> flawed.â€
> > >>>
> > >>>> Currently infant formula is unavailable at 43% of the
> > >>>> normal retail
> > >>>> locations, are you in favor of that?
> > >>>
> > >>> I've always favored natural breast feeding. And no rational
> > >>> person thought that COVID rules and responses would be free
> > >>> of negative effects. But ever since the virus appeared, some
> > >>> irrational right-wingers have been pretending all would have
> > >>> been perfect if we had just let COVID run its course unabated.
> > >>>
> > >>> As it was, we've had a million deaths (no matter what Tom
> > >>> says) despite serious defense measures. Without measures,
> > >>> those deaths might have doubled. Are you in favor of that?
> > >>>
> > >>>> Lockdowns are plainly untenable. But if you want to
> > >>>> remove yourself
> > >>>> from human circulation, save for the occasional usenet
> > >>>> posting, zoom
> > >>>> call, or grocery drone delivery, then I wish you well.
> > >>>> Just don't try
> > >>>> to enforce that on the rest of us.
> > >>>
> > >>> You ignore the fact that the infected and ignorant put not
> > >>> only themselves at risk. They impose their ignorant choices
> > >>> on others.
> > >>>
> > >>> I'm reminded of the woman who, during the "masks are
> > >>> required" phase, stormed barefaced into our local pharmacy
> > >>> yelling "Freedom! Freedom! Freedom!" and stormed back out.
> > >>> SO impressive! SO convincing!
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> > "You ignore the fact that the infected and ignorant put not
> > >> > only themselves at risk. They impose their ignorant choices
> > >> > on others."
> > >> People who have survived the Wuhan bioweapon virus put no one at
> > >> risk.
> > >
> > > Perhaps so, once their bout with the virus has ended. But while the
> > > virus is still active in their bodies, it's a different story.
> > >
> > > Have you somehow missed the phrase "super-spreader event"?
> > I read that the most recent White House Correspondents' dinner was
> > one. Fancy that.
> Frank, on his smartest day is stupid. He insists that the CDC is lying to him and Lord Fauci is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.. This is why I have repeatedly quoted the CDC statistics page which shows that at the end of 2020 instead of telling us how many covid-19 deaths there were, they counted "excess deaths for all reasons" and left it to the exceedingly brilliant low achievers like Frank to jump to the conclusion they all died from that deadly covid-19. Since this pandemic started, in the USA, there have been 300,000 excess deaths from Fentanyl but Frank will scream that they all died of covid-19 because he has worked in real research jobs so much.
>
> Well, I showed that some 8,000 people actually died from undefined respiratory diseases of which civid-19 was only ONE of them. When you have fools telling you how smart they are, and you SHOW them that the dead absolutely tracked the numbers of vaccinated that they might just catch a clue. But not Frank

https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#datatracker-home
Total Deaths
996,653 from Covid-19.

Tommy, you keep referring to the CDC webpage. And when I go to the CDC webpage, it says Covid is killing lots and lots of people.

On Fri, 13 May 2022 14:45:43 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>I would suggest again that Frank is a complete fool but let these doctors tell him: https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-pty-browser_wavebrowser&ei=UTF-8&hsimp=yhs-browser_wavebrowser&hspart=pty&param1=20220306&param2=a3dff400-f8fe-4521-9725-96179c4bf5a4&param3=wav%7EUS%7Eappfocus1%7E&param4=d-cp15084693744-lp5-hh6-obgc-wav-vuentp%3Aon-igzJjxmEGkmkmNamDWVfzg-ab36-w64-brwsr-ntb-ntp%7EChrome%7Eyoutube+covid+mistakes%7EB2D7D7656EB4E5153688637C8FBF7B49%7EWin10&p=youtube+covid+mistakes+Scott+Atlas&type=A1-brwsr-%7E2022-11%7E#id=147&vid=5f8a1a6c26f32acdf9193f064e22ddfa&action=view

Ummm... Looking at the tracking information string that you helpfully
provided, I noticed that you were using "Wavebrowser", which is
malware or a PUP (potentially unwanted program):

"What Is Wave Browser? Should I Remove It?"
<https://www.technewstoday.com/wave-browser/>
"Wave browser is potentially malicious software in the form of a
browser that comes with many security risks."

I've found it on two of my (former) customers machines in the last
week. I suggest that you uninstall it. The uninstalls left some
files and registry entries behind. I had to use Rivo Uninstaller to
completely purge the computer of WaveBrowser:
<https://www.revouninstaller.com/products/revo-uninstaller-free/>

When you're done, you might want to install and run MalwareBytes to
remove any additional malware:
<https://www.malwarebytes.com/solutions/free-antivirus>

You're welcome.

Also, it's easier and better to point directly the YouTube video
search than to post the entire Yahoo search string. I think this is
what you wanted to post:
<https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=covid+mistakes+Scott+Atlas>
Note that Scott Atlas is a radiologist, not a medical doctor.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 8:30:52 PM UTC-5, Radey Shouman wrote:
> "russell...@yahoo.com" <ritzann...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 2:12:11 AM UTC-5, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >> On Thursday, May 12, 2022 at 7:34:15 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
> >> > On 5/12/2022 4:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
> >> > > "russell...@yahoo.com" <ritzann...@gmail.com> writes:
> >> > >
> >> > >> On Tuesday, May 10, 2022 at 10:21:11 AM UTC-5, Radey Shouman wrote:
> >> > >>> Joy Beeson <jbe...@invalid.net.invalid> writes:
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>> On Sun, 8 May 2022 16:12:54 -0400, Frank Krygowski
> >> > >>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>>> The only object overhead might, I suppose, have been a meteor. And
> >> > >>>>> really, his biggest chance of a head injury would have been while
> >> > >>>>> driving the truck, unless he tripped on exit. But apparently no
> >> > >>>>> regulation said to wear a helmet while driving or exiting.
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>> The main purpose of hard hats on open-air jobs is to make it easy to
> >> > >>>> tell the workmen from spectators who need to be shooed out of the
> >> > >>>> workzone.
> >> > >>> +1. A hard hat says "I belong here, I know the rules and follow them".
> >> > >>> Finer gradations are possible -- visitors get semi-disposable "bump
> >> > >>> caps", possibly in an odd color. Management have spotless hard hats.
> >> > >>> Actual workers have dingy looking hard hats, in the winter they've got
> >> > >>> ear warmers on them. Those that wish to stand out can procure
> >> > >>> OSHA-approved cowboy style hard hats.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> But why rag on hard hats when we've just seen most of the world forced
> >> > >>> to learn a new pointless performative PPE dance? Walk up to the door of
> >> > >>> the pub, drag a minimal face rag out of your pocket, put it on, walk to
> >> > >>> your table, take it off and put it in your pocket. Eat, drink, and be
> >> > >>> merry until you have to stand up and walk to the john, then put the
> >> > >>> nasty contaminated face rag on until you get back to the table. Sit
> >> > >>> down, take it off ...
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> --
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Agree. We should re-implement the policies used in the mid and later
> >> > >> 2020. Stop all gatherings and close restaurants, bars, meeting
> >> > >> places. That would help to stamp out the Covid epidemic. But USians
> >> > >> value human life very little. So we are happy to tolerate a couple
> >> > >> hundred thousand extra dead people each year. 350,831 Covid deaths in
> >> > >> 2020 per the CDC. 323 deaths each day according to the CDC right now.
> >> > >> That only amounts to 118,000 dead each year. A pittance.
> >> > >
> >> > > I really can't tell whether you're trying to be serious.
> >> > >
> >> > > Fortunately governments all over the world, with the exception of the
> >> > > CCP, have finally realized what lunacy that is. Perhaps it's only
> >> > > temporary, as we're plainly living through one of the more extreme
> >> > > episodes of popular delusions and the madness of crowds.
> >> > >
> >> > > The tiny or illusory benefits of lockdowns are plainly outweighed
> >> > > by the damages to industry, commerce, education, non-COVID health care,
> >> > > civil liberties, and confidence in government institutions. That last
> >> > > one might be the clincher.
> >> > >
> >> > > Here's a study for you:
> >> > >
> >> > > https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf
> >> > >
> >> > > Currently infant formula is unavailable at 43% of the normal retail
> >> > > locations, are you in favor of that? How about introducing another
> >> > > first grade class to school at the boring end of a computer screen,
> >> > > assuming their parents have the wherewithal to provide broadband access?
> >> > > Or another years toll of the sick, tired, and old dying in nursing homes
> >> > > and hospitals without the comfort and support of even one visit from
> >> > > family or friends?
> >> > >
> >> > > Lockdowns are plainly untenable. But if you want to remove yourself
> >> > > from human circulation, save for the occasional usenet posting, zoom
> >> > > call, or grocery drone delivery, then I wish you well. Just don't try
> >> > > to enforce that on the rest of us.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >> These were the leading causes of death in the USA in 2020. Heart
> >> > >> disease: 696,962, Cancer: 602,350, COVID-19: 350,831, Accidents
> >> > >> (unintentional injuries): 200,955, Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases):
> >> > >> 160,264, Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 152,657 (Tommy thinks
> >> > >> Covid should be included in this category), Alzheimer’s disease:
> >> > >> 134,242, Diabetes: 102,188, Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,544 (or maybe
> >> > >> Tommy thinks this is Covid), Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and
> >> > >> nephrosis: 52,547. Not sure why CDC has 2020 deaths and not 2021
> >> > >> deaths. Government is not too up to date on their websites.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> But Covid killing only 118,000 per year at the current rate. That
> >> > >> would be only 7th best killer. We can ignore it now.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#datatracker-home
> >> > >> https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm
> >> > >
> >> > The Swedes, amazingly, were the un-lemmings on that suicide
> >> > mission. Took everyone else (except the Middle Kingdom of
> >> > Xi) 2 years to wake up and smell the coffee.
> >> > --
> >> > Andrew Muzi
> >> > <www.yellowjersey.org/>
> >> > Open every day since 1 April, 1971
> >> I assume you are referring to Sweden going against the worldwide
> >> methodology of lockdowns and restrictions for Covid. At least
> >> initially in 2020 and through part of 2021. Everyone except Shanghai
> >> is wide open now. Was Sweden successful?
> >>
> >> Sweden population 10.2 million Covid deaths 18,824 Infections 2.5 million
> >> Finland pop. 5.5 million Covid deaths 4,150 Infections 1.05 million
> >> Norway pop. 5.5 million Covid deaths 3,061 Infections 1.4 million
> >> Denmark pop. 5.8 million Covid deaths 6,260 Infections 3.1 million
> >>
> >> Sweden has double the population of all of its nordic neighbors. So
> >> you have to double the deaths and cases to get comparisons with its
> >> nordic neighbors. If you do that then Sweden had 50% more Covid
> >> deaths than Denmark. 200% more than Norway. 125% more than
> >> Finland. Success?
> The argument wasn't that Sweden did better than any other country, or
> even better than they would have with lockdowns and masks, it was that
> they didn't do *worse*. We see around the world a range of results,
> some worse, some better. There are those that claim to know why, I'm
> not one of them. If you compare Sweden to their neighbors Poland and
> the Baltic states, they look better.

But Sweden did WORSE than its neighbors. Sweden shares a long border with Finland and Norway. Hundreds or thousand miles with each. I am sure they are all the exact same people. They might speak different languages in each country. But other than that, you could pick people from all three countries and throw them down in one of the other countries and they would be just as happy. They are all identical people. So that is the only correct comparison to make. And Sweden did worse with its approach.

On Saturday, May 14, 2022 at 1:20:23 AM UTC-5, jeff.li...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Fri, 13 May 2022 14:45:43 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I would suggest again that Frank is a complete fool but let these doctors tell him: https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-pty-browser_wavebrowser&ei=UTF-8&hsimp=yhs-browser_wavebrowser&hspart=pty&param1=20220306&param2=a3dff400-f8fe-4521-9725-96179c4bf5a4&param3=wav%7EUS%7Eappfocus1%7E&param4=d-cp15084693744-lp5-hh6-obgc-wav-vuentp%3Aon-igzJjxmEGkmkmNamDWVfzg-ab36-w64-brwsr-ntb-ntp%7EChrome%7Eyoutube+covid+mistakes%7EB2D7D7656EB4E5153688637C8FBF7B49%7EWin10&p=youtube+covid+mistakes+Scott+Atlas&type=A1-brwsr-%7E2022-11%7E#id=147&vid=5f8a1a6c26f32acdf9193f064e22ddfa&action=view
> Ummm... Looking at the tracking information string that you helpfully
> provided, I noticed that you were using "Wavebrowser", which is
> malware or a PUP (potentially unwanted program):
>
> "What Is Wave Browser? Should I Remove It?"
> <https://www.technewstoday.com/wave-browser/>
> "Wave browser is potentially malicious software in the form of a
> browser that comes with many security risks."
>
> I've found it on two of my (former) customers machines in the last
> week. I suggest that you uninstall it. The uninstalls left some
> files and registry entries behind. I had to use Rivo Uninstaller to
> completely purge the computer of WaveBrowser:
> <https://www.revouninstaller.com/products/revo-uninstaller-free/>
>
> When you're done, you might want to install and run MalwareBytes to
> remove any additional malware:
> <https://www.malwarebytes.com/solutions/free-antivirus>
>
> You're welcome.
>
> Also, it's easier and better to point directly the YouTube video
> search than to post the entire Yahoo search string. I think this is
> what you wanted to post:
> <https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=covid+mistakes+Scott+Atlas>
> Note that Scott Atlas is a radiologist, not a medical doctor.
>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
> PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
> Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Jeff, I did not view the Scott Atlas video you linked. But I did notice it was recorded on June 18, 2020. Amazing this bright individual already knew how effective lockdowns and social distancing would be a mere three months into the Covid pandemic. Here it is over two years later and we are still battling Covid. I wonder how this Scott Atlas genius was able to ascertain the efficacy after only three months from the start of Covid. Or do you think maybe he was just giving speeches to whomever paid him to say what they wanted to hear.

On Fri, 13 May 2022 23:10:07 -0700 (PDT), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 4:37:30 PM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 1:47:14 PM UTC-7, Radey Shouman wrote:
>> > Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>> >
>> > > On 5/13/2022 2:45 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> > >> On 5/13/2022 10:02 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> > >>> On 5/12/2022 5:21 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> The tiny or illusory benefits of lockdowns are plainly
>> > >>>> outweighed
>> > >>>> by the damages to industry, commerce, education, non-COVID
>> > >>>> health care,
>> > >>>> civil liberties, and confidence in government
>> > >>>> institutions. That last
>> > >>>> one might be the clincher.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Here's a study for you:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> From
>> > >>> https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220204/lockdowns-covid-deaths-study
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> "The findings, which have not been peer reviewed, conflict
>> > >>> with previous studies that found lockdowns worked."
>> > >>>
>> > >>> And: "Reaction to the paper’s release has been mixed. Many
>> > >>> conservatives have seized on the paper to argue that
>> > >>> lockdowns never worked and to criticize governments that
>> > >>> implemented them. Other experts, meanwhile, point to what
>> > >>> they see as major flaws in the report.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> “Smoking causes cancer, the earth is round, and ordering
>> > >>> people to stay at home (the correct definition of lockdown)
>> > >>> decreases disease transmission,†Seth Flaxman, associate
>> > >>> professor in the Department of Computer Science at the
>> > >>> University of Oxford, said in a statement. “. None of this
>> > >>> is controversial among scientists. A study purporting to
>> > >>> prove the opposite is almost certain to be fundamentally
>> > >>> flawed.â€
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> Currently infant formula is unavailable at 43% of the
>> > >>>> normal retail
>> > >>>> locations, are you in favor of that?
>> > >>>
>> > >>> I've always favored natural breast feeding. And no rational
>> > >>> person thought that COVID rules and responses would be free
>> > >>> of negative effects. But ever since the virus appeared, some
>> > >>> irrational right-wingers have been pretending all would have
>> > >>> been perfect if we had just let COVID run its course unabated.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> As it was, we've had a million deaths (no matter what Tom
>> > >>> says) despite serious defense measures. Without measures,
>> > >>> those deaths might have doubled. Are you in favor of that?
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> Lockdowns are plainly untenable. But if you want to
>> > >>>> remove yourself
>> > >>>> from human circulation, save for the occasional usenet
>> > >>>> posting, zoom
>> > >>>> call, or grocery drone delivery, then I wish you well.
>> > >>>> Just don't try
>> > >>>> to enforce that on the rest of us.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> You ignore the fact that the infected and ignorant put not
>> > >>> only themselves at risk. They impose their ignorant choices
>> > >>> on others.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> I'm reminded of the woman who, during the "masks are
>> > >>> required" phase, stormed barefaced into our local pharmacy
>> > >>> yelling "Freedom! Freedom! Freedom!" and stormed back out.
>> > >>> SO impressive! SO convincing!
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >> > "You ignore the fact that the infected and ignorant put not
>> > >> > only themselves at risk. They impose their ignorant choices
>> > >> > on others."
>> > >> People who have survived the Wuhan bioweapon virus put no one at
>> > >> risk.
>> > >
>> > > Perhaps so, once their bout with the virus has ended. But while the
>> > > virus is still active in their bodies, it's a different story.
>> > >
>> > > Have you somehow missed the phrase "super-spreader event"?
>> > I read that the most recent White House Correspondents' dinner was
>> > one. Fancy that.
>> Frank, on his smartest day is stupid. He insists that the CDC is lying to him and Lord Fauci is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. This is why I have repeatedly quoted the CDC statistics page which shows that at the end of 2020 instead of telling us how many covid-19 deaths there were, they counted "excess deaths for all reasons" and left it to the exceedingly brilliant low achievers like Frank to jump to the conclusion they all died from that deadly covid-19. Since this pandemic started, in the USA, there have been 300,000 excess deaths from Fentanyl but Frank will scream that they all died of covid-19 because he has worked in real research jobs so much.
>>
>> Well, I showed that some 8,000 people actually died from undefined respiratory diseases of which civid-19 was only ONE of them. When you have fools telling you how smart they are, and you SHOW them that the dead absolutely tracked the numbers of vaccinated that they might just catch a clue. But not Frank
>
>https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#datatracker-home
>Total Deaths
>996,653 from Covid-19.
>
>Tommy, you keep referring to the CDC webpage. And when I go to the CDC webpage, it says Covid is killing lots and lots of people.

See there you don't know nothing. You take the number of reported
Covid deaths and then divide by Fauci's salary and it ain't hardly
anything at all.

Then you get on the Internet and wave your arms, jump up and down, and
shout LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME!

And sure enough someone will reply to your post and then you can walk
around with your shoulders "rared back".... and brag, "See there Mom,
somebody noticed me!
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Saturday, May 14, 2022 at 2:20:23 AM UTC-4, jeff.li...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Fri, 13 May 2022 14:45:43 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
> <cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I would suggest again that Frank is a complete fool but let these doctors tell him: https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-pty-browser_wavebrowser&ei=UTF-8&hsimp=yhs-browser_wavebrowser&hspart=pty&param1=20220306&param2=a3dff400-f8fe-4521-9725-96179c4bf5a4&param3=wav%7EUS%7Eappfocus1%7E&param4=d-cp15084693744-lp5-hh6-obgc-wav-vuentp%3Aon-igzJjxmEGkmkmNamDWVfzg-ab36-w64-brwsr-ntb-ntp%7EChrome%7Eyoutube+covid+mistakes%7EB2D7D7656EB4E5153688637C8FBF7B49%7EWin10&p=youtube+covid+mistakes+Scott+Atlas&type=A1-brwsr-%7E2022-11%7E#id=147&vid=5f8a1a6c26f32acdf9193f064e22ddfa&action=view
>
> Ummm... Looking at the tracking information string that you helpfully
> provided, I noticed that you were using "Wavebrowser", which is
> malware or a PUP (potentially unwanted program):
>

This is precisely why I never click links from him or jute - They have no idea how this interweb thingie works

On 5/14/2022 2:10 AM, russellseaton1@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 4:37:30 PM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> Well, I showed that some 8,000 people actually died from undefined respiratory diseases of which civid-19 was only ONE of them. When you have fools telling you how smart they are, and you SHOW them that the dead absolutely tracked the numbers of vaccinated that they might just catch a clue. But not Frank
>
> https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#datatracker-home
> Total Deaths
> 996,653 from Covid-19.
>
> Tommy, you keep referring to the CDC webpage. And when I go to the CDC webpage, it says Covid is killing lots and lots of people.

Tom will never believe that.

I wonder if he's mentioned in this book?
https://www.workman.com/products/off-the-edge/hardback

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 5/13/2022 9:30 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
> "russellseaton1@yahoo.com" <ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> Did Sweden WIN by not locking down? Their GDP dropped similar to
>>> their neighbors. So no economic win. They had a lot WORSE death rate
>>> than their neighbors. I think deaths is kind of important. And their
>>> sick/infections was similar to Finland and Norway so cost of people
>>> going to the hospital was about the same. Denmark was an outlier
>>> with sick people so throw them out.
>>>
>>> If the goal was to kill people with no economic benefits, then
>>> Sweden won by not locking down and having no Covid
>>> restrictions. Yeah Sweden. Kill em, kill em, kill em.
>
> The world economy is all tied together these days. At work I'm
> constantly reminded of things that are very hard to buy any more because
> of troubles in China. When your trading partners' economies suffer,
> yours will tend to suffer as well.
>
> But, it's really not all about the GDP. Consider the children and young
> people that have missed educational and employment opportunities they
> can never really make up -- they and their country will be somewhat
> worse off for as long as they live.
>
> Consider health care. My neighbor died of cancer during the covid
> fiasco. Normally she would have been in hospital taking chemotherapy,
> but that was not allowed. Her husband certainly believes that was
> responsible for her death, and I suspect he's right. Cancer and high
> blood pressure screening, psychiatric care, routine vaccinations like
> measles, polio, and chickenpox all declined markedly during the covid
> NPIs; far from being swamped, hospitals laid off workers and lost a lot
> of money. If you believe medical care does any good, you can see that
> this is a bad thing. Measles or chickenpox in a naive population would
> make covid look like a walk in the park. Drug overdose deaths, the
> panic du jour before covid, are also way up.

How are we to judge those problems? One simple way is body counts, no?
The increased deaths due to drug overdoses or delayed chemo are nowhere
near the COVID body counts. Psych care, vaccinations etc. were delayed,
not prohibited forever.

And some, perhaps most, of the delayed procedures were voluntary choices
made by individuals. I currently have one good friend in serious need of
bypass surgery. He's delayed for many months, against his doctor's
advice. Part (not all) of his reasoning is a fear of catching COVID in
the hospital. His doctor and another physician who's a mutual friend say
that's a negligible risk compared to his heart attack potential, but
still he delays. He somehow ignores the risk he's incurring daily.

>
> Then there is the normal enjoyment of life. How much is it worth to be
> able to attend a wedding, a graduation, a funeral? How much to be able
> to hold a new grandchild? Be with a dying parent? How about just
> riding down to the local coffee house to have a coffee, or the one four
> towns and a state over, if you feel like it? That's worth something to
> me.
>
> How much do you suppose you would have to pay Mr. Krygowski to give up
> religious services and playing music with his friends for a year? I'll
> bet it's a check I don't want to write.

You've lost that bet already. We stayed away from church during the
worst of the pandemic. We had no music gigs, and our informal sessions
were extremely sparse and held only when we could play outdoors,
distanced from each other.

> How about Mr. Muzi, to remain
> celibate, assuming he's not allowed out of the house? That's what got
> Neil Ferguson, he couldn't stay away from his mistress all the while he
> was telling everyone in the UK they had to stay home. For that matter,
> how much would you have to pay the median well-coiffed individual to
> give up hair cuts for a year?

A friend of mine has a term for those horrors. He calls them "First
World Problems" as in, "This coffee isn't as quite as good as the $6 cup
from my favorite artisan roaster. I want my money back!"

Compare that with a Third World Problem: "How will we get any water today??"

I'm deeply sorry about people who may have missed their pedicures, or
whatever frivolities they consider necessary for life. But we enjoyed
riding roads that were nearly empty of traffic, bicycling areas that
were normally much less accessible. (One local golf course was closed,
so we rode every golf cart track and while there spotted bird species we
seldom see.) It was nice to see a greatly increased number of locals
bicycling or walking around neighborhoods, and to chat with them. I
pulled out vinyl albums I hadn't played for years and refreshed those
memories. I finished a years-long sundial project and had an article
about it published. I learned to play a new musical instrument. Oh, and
we never once ran out of toilet paper.

Perhaps you have more exacting standards for what constitutes a good
life. But again, remember that low standards are the key to happiness.

--
- Frank Krygowski