|
|
|
|
|
|
by tremon
1656 days ago
|
|
|
You stated that "We've gone from 0% vaccinated, to 60-70% with no discernable dip in infection counts". This is called making misleading claims. There's numerous confounding factors in these numbers that you conveniently ignore, and that you keep ignoring even when they're pointed out to you. This is called doubling-down on an indefensible position. Then, instead of defending why your use of those numbers is scientifically sound, you accuse others of having "firmly held beliefs". This is called a personal attack. And lastly, instead of doing the hard work to show why your conclusion is scientifically sound, you expect the other party to disprove your argument for you. This is called trolling. |
|
|
All you've done is is ad hominem and provide no data. I am at least referencing factual data. Looks like I'm following the science and you're not.
Explain the confounding factors for how Texas ended up very similar to NY, despite obesity and comorbidities being much higher in the south. I can tell you from living in both places through the pandemic, that the populace of Texas doesn't care at all about covid and largely takes no precautionary measures vs New York residents who are much more diligent about masking and protocols.
You won't do it because the data doesn't exist to do it. The differences between states with vastly different policies are super marginal. If there was any strong effect, you would see an obvious disparity in outcome.
Does everybody staying inside reduce transmission? Yes, in the short term. Does it do anything in the longer term? No, absolutely not. Unless the draconian lockdown is done in perpetuity, which has devastating consequences.