Coronavirus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by binneu

I did not speak of 1930, but of the DDR in East Germany.

And if they want to have proof for the abolition of the basic rights then I can send them gladly the German "Infektionsschutzgesetze"... almost all basic rights were abolished.

---

You said you saw a dismantling of basic rights at a rate never before seen in history. Can you share some of these hardships with us. I'm sure some of us would be sympathetic if we knew more about the kinds of restrictions that have been imposed on you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by broncofan

You said you saw a dismantling of basic rights at a rate never before seen in history. Can you share some of these hardships with us. I'm sure some of us would be sympathetic if we knew more about the kinds of restrictions that have been imposed on you.

---

Law on the Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases in Humans (Infection Protection Act - IfSG)
§ Section 32 Issue of statutory ordinances

The governments shall be authorized, subject to the conditions governing measures under Sections 28, 28a and 29 to 31, also to issue by ordinances corresponding requirements and prohibitions for the control of communicable diseases. Governments may delegate this power to other bodies by ordinance. The fundamental rights of physical integrity (first sentence of Article 2(2) of the Basic Law), freedom of the person (second sentence of Article 2(2) of the Basic Law), freedom of movement (Article 11(1) of the Basic Law), freedom of assembly (Article 8 of the Basic Law), inviolability of the home (Article 13(1) of the Basic Law) and secrecy of correspondence and postal correspondence (Article 10 of the Basic Law) may be restricted in this respect.

https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/ifsg/__32.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by broncofan

Binneu also suggests quality of medical care doesn't matter because ventilators often don't save lives (30% of people put on ventilators survive though). Most people put on ventilators do not survive but what about people who are hospitalized and given condensed oxygen without mechanical assistance? Anyone who goes to the hospital with decreased oxygen saturation is given concentrated oxygen. Places that don't have enough hospital beds or who run out of oxygen would probably see higher death rates.

---

In fact, the places that experienced the highest death rates have generally been the places where intensive care capacity has been overwhelmed by the number of serious cases. This is the point he ignores in trying to pretend that nothing would have changed had the virus been allowed to spread uncontrolled.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by binneu

Just to make something clear! Your side of the Corona-believers wants to turn the whole world upside down (constant tests, vaccinations, lockdowns, green-passes...)! You have to prove meticulously that this is necessary and there are no other possibilities, NOT ME!

---

Neat trick for you. Other people must prove anything you demand, but you never have to explain anything that is inconsistent with your arguments. Not only that, but you get to ignore their explanations when it suits you. For example, you ignored broncofan's explanation about how R0 is estimated - obviously you could easily check it yourself by googling if you wanted to.

You are the one claiming that the Covid crisis is a vast conspiracy by the medical and political establishment, so why should the onus of proof not be on you? It is classic conspiracy theorist thinking to demand that others must disprove the conspiracy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by binneu

......Oh, so does the state have to? Who says that? I did not ask him for it! Should the state now eliminate any risk in life and protect you from everything that could threaten you?
That is not the task of the state! The state has to make sure that the health care system works, that's what I pay it for with my taxes. That the state nowadays forbids me to leave my apartment at night is just presumptuous...

---

You did implicitly ask him(the state) to do it because as a citizen you expect as you say that the state will ensure the health system works for all the citizens. However if there is a rapidly transmissible disease that can produce a sudden influx of patients who need intensive care you would have to consider special measures of some sort to prevent the system being overwhelmed and compromised in its ability to deliver health care across the board.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by binneu

And what exactly is their conclusion now? There is a German coronavirus and a more dangerous English one?

---

According to your logic, there was no dangerous virus in Germany until November 2020, then it became deadly for about 6 months, but ceased from May 2021. What is your explanation for this, given you claim that neither control measures nor vaccines are effective?
https://www.worldometers.info/corona...untry/germany/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by binneu

- Germany is a country with a relatively high average age
- Germany is located in the middle of Europe (in contrast to England, for example).
- The measures were almost everywhere in Europe the same (in Germany rather mild)
- Which medical measures were there in 2020 then go Corona? (artificial respiration helps little and is partly counterproductive, medicines there was/are not, otherwise we would need neither lockdowns nor vaccinations)

Why are there only a) and b)?
In your world this may be so, but I can also imagine c), d), etc!

---

You can imagine other possibilities, but you can't state what they are?

Here is a graph showing Covid death rates for European countries. https://www.statista.com/statistics/...pe-by-country/
This is not a random pattern. Death rates are clearly correlated geographically, at least between countries that are relatively similar.
- The highest death rates are in Eastern Europe and the Western European countries that were initially worst-affected (eg Italy, Spain, France, UK).
- The lowest death rates are in Scandinavia (with the notable exception of Sweden) and a few other countries on the outskirts of Europe.
- The intermediate group is Germany and similar neighbouring countries (eg Netherlands, Austria, Switzerland).

That suggests that there are probably logical explanations for differing death rates.

Your argument also misses the obvious point that countries with worse outbreaks are also likely to impose more severe restrictions. It doesn't prove that restrictions are ineffective, any more than higher death rates among seriously ill people prove that treatments are ineffective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by binneu

Because my numbers do not fit into your world view, you prefer not to talk about it.
I am still waiting for a conclusive answer (which you probably will not provide).

I have already admitted that I do not know the truth... But you and your Corona believers are obviously in possession of the only truth. And if something doesn't fit this truth (Germany over-mortality) then it is simply ignored away instead of the narrative or the course.

---

Have you ever studied any statistics at all? If you had you would know that statistic models don't work by explaining a single data point (one country in one year). They work by finding the explanation (or model of the world) that best fits the full range of data. In fact, it is mathematically impossible to fit any model to a single data point. Whether a single data point fits the explanatory model proves absolutely nothing. Your continued insistence that people must explain Germany 2020 and nothing else matters shows that you have no idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

In fact, the places that experienced the highest death rates have generally been the places where intensive care capacity has been overwhelmed by the number of serious cases. This is the point he ignores in trying to pretend that nothing would have changed had the virus been allowed to spread uncontrolled.

---

In NYC they talking about 12% at the beginning... https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2765184

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

Neat trick for you. Other people must prove anything you demand, but you never have to explain anything that is inconsistent with your arguments. Not only that, but you get to ignore their explanations when it suits you. For example, you ignored broncofan's explanation about how R0 is estimated - obviously you could easily check it yourself by googling if you wanted to.

You are the one claiming that the Covid crisis is a vast conspiracy by the medical and political establishment, so why should the onus of proof not be on you? It is classic conspiracy theorist thinking to demand that others must disprove the conspiracy.

---

This is not a trick... your site wants to turn the world upside down. So she has to justify it.... not you personally, but your known representatives.

I have not seen any link from him that would have shown that I misunderstood anything. Never before has an R0 of a disease been determined via PRC mass testing... the values are not comparable (from what I could find).