Thinking you have the innate mental capacity to comprehend a conversation about something re: medicine, let alone something about infectious diseases because you perused some articles and have some medical "professionals" in your circle of friends is laughable. I'm not trying to refute anything about comorbidities, statistically or medically because I'm not qualified to. Neither are you. Only one of us realizes it.
ReserveTank wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 9:33 pmThere's your first problem--Excessive credentialism. It's the wall you hide behind when you want to "win" an argument and "mic drop." Everyone's working with the data that they've been given---isn't that how you formed your view on it? Where's your credentials to have an opinion if that isn't so?kgb531 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 4:15 pm So zero educational background on the subject matter then. You should know better. An opthamologist/GP/pathologist/cardiologist/stats PhD has no credentials to speak on the subject but you're somehow analyzing and proffering an opinion as though your education has any relevance because you took intro stats?
Thanks for your online studies.
ReserveTank wrote: ↑Mon Jan 03, 2022 2:53 pm
Nice try. I have a master in Language and Aeronautical Science. I have also earned certificates (at one of the best aviation universities on the planet) in air crash investigation and aeromedical factors. It's a bad look to project your own inadequacies on to others. If your expectations for yourself are low, that's not my problem--and it doesn't take away from my line of questioning.
Discussing statistical anomalies and ethics are basic concepts which are covered in year 1. The given data doesn't distribute normally. What specifically about that are you refuting? Did you try it yourself?
What regarding comorbidities are you refuting? Since 2020 has something changed with people who live an unhealthy lifestyle?
Now about intubation, it's not as if it were some magic.
I indicated that the stats don't follow ethics. You can run it on your Excel if you have a moment. Those numbers were from the gov't, not from some "internet whacko." I am well studied in stats, and far beyond intro, thanks. You could have simply refuted it with some other principle but decided to go for the weak credentials route.
Where did you form your opinions again? I am fortunate enough to have medical professionals in my circle of friends and acquaintances. It nets a whole lot more than simply reading online. I don't subscribe to medical journals, and my aeromedical certification is obviously limited to my field. But, it doesn't mean that only experts can know things. Do you need a physics expert to determine heat transfer every time you put warm beer in the fridge, or do you know it's going to get cold? When you take an ice cold Molson out of the fridge, do you call an MBA to tally it up, or do you trust that you've learned enough through reading, common sense, and practice to do the minus one?online studies
Besides, you should pay closer attention, because dissenting views (on covid, c19 policy, etc.) are few and far between on the net these days. "Online studies" against the mainstream view is dead, IMO.
Again, what about the comorbidities are you refuting?
