Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by TameAntelope 1973 days ago
I'm confused -- what did she do that "reached beyond her grasp" or "dramatized" the number of COVID-19 deaths in Florida?

Edit: You're all over this comment thread, what relationship do you have to this story, if any?

4 comments

No relationship. Just bored on a day off. I am passionate about Covid related topics because I am frankly concerned by the rhetoric around Covid. It boggles my mind that this has become so politicized and opposition is equated with homicidal disregard for human life.

There is also so much sensationalism around Covid that it's impossible to actually discuss. Mask compliance for example. I've heard so many times that if only dumbfuck America would mask up we'd be sitting pretty. Except the US has some oh the highest mask compliance of western nations. People talk about anti-lockdown protests as being pawns for the far right and hating science, yet these protests are not unique to the US or the Right.

Essentially our response to a pandemic has devolved into people shouting memes at one another while 30 million unemployed are liking up at food banks. It's fucking crazy

I think in this case, you're getting back what you put into the conversation. I've never been accused of disregarding human life, and I've had a bunch of conversations here and elsewhere about COVID-19 response.

It feels like you're in what I call a "contrarian headspace" where you believe you've discovered something that's under-reported or under-represented, and you've grabbed firmly onto that belief, riding it into every conversation you can. Here be dragons, especially on HN.

I think, to retain my own sanity, I'm going to bow out of this conversation, but I do suggest you take a good hard look at how your beliefs landed you on the same side as the system crushing Rebekah Jones. What they're doing to her is, regardless of legal technicality, problematic, and if you're not able to see that because of your feelings about COVID coverage, you're in some trouble.

And likewise, you inability to see her as anything but a martyr against an oppressive system is informed by your tightly held belief that the government is for some reason downplaying Covid.

Oh is that not the case? Then don't attribute some armchair psychology to my motives. I in no way think I've "discovered" something underreported. I know full well that millions of people, from credentialed scientists to dumbfuck hillbillies see the same things I rail against.

I've been accused of disregarding human life for my views on Covid response. Which is funny as Covid has touched my family in painful ways.

Humans are complex beings, more so than your coined phrase captures. But I still love you! I hope someday we all can have a calm, reasonable discussion about epidemics. Because this will happen again, so we need to study our response here as much as possible

Please stop posting flamewar comments to HN. What you've been doing on this site is over-the-top excessive and it's time to stop.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Wow, looks like free speech went here to die!

Police are raiding her house, pointing guns at her kids, continuing to come back with technically illiterate and nonsensical reasons to arrest her, because she's said something that someone in politics did not like. Why is this discussion even about covid? This is not an epidemic discussion, this is a political liberties discussion.

Please don't perpetuate flamewars on HN, regardless of how wrong someone else is or you feel they are. It's not what this site is for and the guidelines ask everyone not to do it:

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

The discussion is about covid because that's the only factor informing people's opinions on the matter. If we didn't know anything about her Covid work - if the only information we had was that some random government ex-employee was arrested for allegedly misusing government credentials - nobody would presume to know what the full story is or what's motivating the prosecution.
Beyond your nonsense about free speech..

This is a discussion about Covid because the accused was motivated by Covid. My argument is that the hysteria we've whipped up over this pandemic has caused people to take crazy risks to further a cause which only exists in our hysteria.

I believe Ms. Jones earnestly believes that she had to do these things to save tens of thousands of lives. If those weren't the stakes in her head, would she have downloaded PII and misused an alert system?

Essentially our rhetoric around Covid is mentally dangerous for many people and can cause them to act beyond reason due to their misinformed notion of risk

This:

> But I still love you!

comes off as _super_ disingenuous.

Essentially our response to [every issue] has devolved into people shouting memes at one another...

That is the unfortunate state of public "debate" in the US today. Questions never get settled, and as a result, very little gets done.

If the state’s data is garbage in the first place then the chance of a good-faith debate happening drops even further. I’m more than a little disturbed by the narrative that it’s OK for the state to lie as long as they are advancing a cause that you agree with. The underlying issue (covid) should not matter.
Just because someone is interested in a topic doesn't mean they're connected to the topic.
Has a real interest in only this subject apparently: https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=salmon30salmon
What are you insinuating, exactly?
I’m not the person you’re replying to but I do think anyone who comes to HN to discuss primarily one narrow (and politically contentious) topic isn’t participating in HN in good faith. There’s no effort to “gratify one’s intellectual curiosity” or “have curious conversation” if you’ve arrived with an agenda.
Fair enough, but you don't think we all come to HN with agendas?
Because you know the links I click on. Or maybe, and I know this is crazy, but maybe this isn't my primary account as people have been mobbed and cancelled for having contrarian views on Covid!
He is saying I am either a troll or a pawn.
>He is saying I am either a troll or a pawn.

I didn't interpret that comment the same way at all.

I think the gist of it can be summed up by (purportedly) Winston Churchill:

"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."

If, as you suggest, you're using a semi-throwaway account specifically to discuss COVID, unless other folks know that, your posting history with this account would likely give that impression.

See my response to the parent. Yes, coronavirus gets me all hot and bothered.
Well, in salmon30salmon's defence: the mainstream media are completely and utterly missing in action when it comes to COVID.

They only parrot what the gov tells them and investigate nothing these days.

There are countless credible scientists saying that we are getting this incredibly wrong on so many levels yet mainstream media does not mention anything other than government narrative.

When did you see any news coverage of criticism of the "vaccine"? I mean, on a scientific level, not government ineptitude at rolling it out.

Edit: I can't reply for some reason but here's a video talking about the "vaccine"[0] and here's the Great Barrington Declaration[1]. Here is criticism from the BMJ [2] stating that (according to my maths) it's only 19% effective... in addition, it's designed to TREAT the symptoms, not cure you... what kind of vaccine is that?

[0] - https://www.bitchute.com/video/edombs4NcvQ6/

[1] - https://gbdeclaration.org/

[2] - https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/04/peter-doshi-pfizer-and-...

Which credible scientists? Levitt? Bhattacharya?
That BMJ article he linked is relatively worrying, so much so that I may actually read the FDA reports for the Pfizer vaccine.
I love you and thank you for coming to my defense but please do not link vaccine distrust with my views. I trust the data and the science behind the vaccines and believe we need to be getting them distributed as soon as possible
No worries. Noted.

My point wasn't about vaccine distrust although that's part of it. It's more about not having a competent media that will at least say "we will question everything" and investigating along those lines. COVID is the prime example in my opinion so I provided links when asked.

I think it isn't the media not questioning, I think the media realizes that Covid is the gift that keeps on giving and they won't look that gift horse in the mouth.

It's like the trope about media coverage of plane crashes except instead of being an acute incident the media can play off of our fears day after day

The comments on the blog in [2] rightly criticize his assumption of high false negatives in the symptomatic but excluded arm
So, I went and followed the link (helpfully it goes to the correct table, though you'll need to scroll down a bit).

https://www.fda.gov/media/144245/download#page=18

This is the first point where 300 odd people were excluded from the analysis because of protocol deviations. Worryingly, this number was much higher in the treatment group. While I hope that blinding would have prevented any motivated exclusion, it's still quite concerning.

His second main point (which is actually really interesting), is that there were 3500 cases of symptoms consistent with Covid-19 that weren't revealed by a PCR test. I'm not sure what to think of this (and note that this number swamps the actual numbers of confirmed cases by about 10x), except that it matches with anecdotal evidence I've seen around negative tests in the presence of symptoms.

The details of the second point can be found here: https://www.fda.gov/media/144245/download#page=42

As a meta-point, the world would be a better place if more people clicked on linked and attempted to interrogate the soruces of things.

I was referring to his second main point.
I only see one comment giving out about it, and it reveals an absolutely touching faith in peer-review practices.
> When did you see any news coverage of criticism of the "vaccine"?

There's no credible criticism of the vaccine. Can you point to any?

I suspect what you deem credible is substantially different from what's credible to people who are critical of the covid mrna treatment.
But there is NO criticism at all... credible or not.
What do you mean “credible or not”?

Are you suggesting the media knowingly discuss information they cannot find as credible?

Well there is criticism, it's just not being reported on - but I think that's your point.

Overall the degree to which information is being controlled right now is pretty alarming.

See my edit above... couldn't reply at the time for some reason
The message sent via emergency comms was quite dramatic. Her insistence that the numbers were being cooked with malice to justify reopening is also attributing to conspiracy that which could be explained by differing opinions on how to clean up messy data (if someone tested positive on vacation, will they count in their home state or Florida?)
She was told to turn an 18% to a 10% so more counties would appear ready to reopen, according to the article linked within this one.

I may need some help understanding how that's a "differing opinion" about how to clean up data.

To me that doesn't pass the smell test. In my state, they've just changed the thresholds. "New science is showing XYZ so in response counties can now eat at restaurants if their shits under 20"
Changing a threshold is not changing the underlying data. One is attempting to be rational and iterate through policy, and the other is lying.

Edit: Just to be explicit, yes I'm calling out the false equivalence as a logical fallacy.

Right no shit. What I'm arguing is that people take the path of least resistance and it would have been far easier to announce a policy change than cook the books. I am saying that if opening up was the only reason, I do not believe that's the path they would take. Of course I'm just basing this off of my own feels.
Making a policy change has consequences. “De Santis made a terrible policy change, X people are now dead” is a very different headline than “after the data suggested Florida open up, X people are now dead”.

I don’t know if there is a conspiracy, but your argument regarding motivation is definitely not thorough.