- This topic has 424 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 2 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
“Was 9/11 actually an attack on climate science”. Brilliant!
Dave, look at the brand new denialism, CoVID-19 denialism. People are dropping dead of CoVID-19 around us, and yet there’s a whole swathe of commenters claiming that it’s invented, a hoax. They make no distinction between the scientific community and the corporate media, just as do the Twin Tower demolition theorists.
It’s one thing to be told something by corporate journalism, and quite another to be told by the engineering or scientific communities.
CLARK. Do you realise the validity of your quote that Dave complimented you on? Does Dave?
Clark
Some of the Covid-19 denialists have now aligned themselves imperceptibly with the attitude and the consequences of the attitude taken by Trump ang Johnson by ‘belittleing’ the virus.in other words they have become shills for those most right wing of governments. In so doing they also missed the opportunity to criticise those two governments for gross mishandling of the crisis.But I partially disagree with you that 911 had not been useful for the Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen wars. The usefulness has been twofold, by establishing the machinery for widespread surveillance and by creating a general background fear of state assisted terrorism that paved the way for attacking states. Remember the demonisation of Saddam started with the Anthrax attack after 911 and the attempts to link it to Iraq. Then there was a lot of misinformation that Saddam had secret ties with AQ. As these failed to convince the politically savvy, I am sure there are many in US backwaters who still believe these stories and it created an air of negativity. It also served the blue print for future attacks: multiple accusations are thrown in and hope some will stick.
But the most amazing fact that emerged out of the warped neocon mentality is that the US is now firmly allied through its proxy NATO allies to the same organisation allegedly responsible for 911, in Syria and Iraq.“Some of the Covid-19 denialists have now aligned themselves imperceptibly with the attitude and the consequences of the attitude taken by Trump ang Johnson by ‘belittleing’ the virus.”
Use of the “denialist” word is becoming common among lazy thinkers. Like “conspiracy theorist,” its purpose is to dismiss debate, to suggest that a POV is self-evidently ridiculous, to relieve the accuser of the need to address awkward questions that arise from that POV. It is an effective tactic to influence other lazy thinkers. However it exposes the accuser to ridicule because when pressed, they have to admit that they too are “denialists” and conspiracy theorists.” What they actually mean by those phrases is “people who believe different conspiracy theories to me” and “people who are sceptical about different aspects of an issue to me.”
Let me prove it. SA, please define a “Covid-19 denialist.”
Node
Before we get into definitions we need to establish some basic common grounds:
1. Do we both believe that there is a pandemic caused by a novel corona virus new to man with no immunity to the virus and this is an animal virus that has jumped species?
2. Do we both believe that this virus is highly infectious with an exponential curve of infection resulting in a very quick spread around the world with infections documented in most countries in the world over 2-3 months?
3. Do we both believe that this virus can cause death, Although this lethality is more commonly associated with older individuals and those with other co-morbidities?
4. Do we both believe that although the above is true, that some younger people are also severely affected and that there have been many deaths in healthcare workers and bus drivers and others who were previously healthy?
5. Do we both believe that even if the mortality rate from this virus may not be more than 1%, there is still a high number of people suffering from the disease at the same time that this is likely to swamp healthcare systems? Examples occur in Italy and Spain and probably now in US although there are other problems there too which obscure the real situation and there is a threat of it happening here.
6. Finally do we both believe that there is still little understanding of various aspects of this virus, including that many infections may cause no symptoms and that unfortunately we do not have tests for immunity? Do we both believe that we do not know whether individuals infected with the virus will have immunity against reinfection?If one of us does not believe in this set of statements, then we can begin to try to understand what it is that may or may not constitute a denialist. I agree it is a crude term because even in the 911 truthers there are various degrees of denialists. By the way, I do not think there is anything wrong with putting forward a conspiracy theory and I am sorry the term has been weaponised. For example I hold the belief that the last election was rigged on many different levels, and that I think is a good conspiracy theory worth pursuing. It really is a question of degrees of contortion required to try and prove the unprovable at each step that I find becomes a conspiracy theory too far.
I should have added, Brilliant Ha Ha! I’m just amazed how Clark can promote heroic amounts of intelligent nonsense in defence of official narratives, without it eating away his soul. No wonder he’s always playing the victim card, as if this offers some salvation!
Re Covid-19. According to Office of National Statistics the average overall death rate this year is below the preceding 5 years and the number of corona-virus deaths are being inflated by confusing died WITH, as opposed died FROM corona-virus. So clearly the great panic isn’t about the virus!
Paul P at 01:19 – sorry, I don’t understand your question; please rephrase.
SA at 02:41 – “The usefulness has been twofold, by establishing the machinery for widespread surveillance and by creating a general background fear of state assisted terrorism that paved the way for attacking states.”
I agree. But this doesn’t satisfy “que bono”; it indicates nothing about who the perpetrators may have been, since any authoritarians could, and have, made such use of 9/11.
“Before we get into definitions we need to establish some basic common grounds”
What I believe is irrelevant to the point I made about the use of “denialist,” with its connotations of Holocaust denial, to shut down discussion. If the meaning isn’t evident without discussion, you shouldn’t use it. But since you you have recognised the validity of my point with your remarks about conspiracy theorists, I will answer your questions.
1. Do we both believe that there is a pandemic ….
Yes, all flu viruses spread throughout the world and are therefore pandemics.
… caused by a novel corona virus new to man with no immunity to the virus …
Yes, all viruses mutate into varieties that are novel to their hosts. That’s what viruses do, mutate to new forms which their hosts don’t have antibodies to fight, thus the virus prospers and spreads until enough of the host has immunity at which point it would die out if it didn’t mutate into a novel variation, then the whole cycle repeats. All viruses have done this for a billion+ years.
… and this is an animal virus that has jumped species?
Don’t know. I’m not an expert. As I understand it : viruses mutate by mix-and-matching the DNA in the cells they invade … they can do this in animal and plant cells … if the mutation did involve DNA from an animal cell, this wouldn’t be unusual and wouldn’t necessarily make the virus more dangerous.
2. Do we both believe that this virus is highly infectious with an exponential curve of infection resulting in a very quick spread around the world with infections documented in most countries in the world over 2-3 months?
Yes, I believe if you tracked any viral infection in real time, you would see it spread as you describe.
3. Do we both believe that this virus can cause death, Although this lethality is more commonly associated with older individuals and those with other co-morbidities?
Yes, in that respect this virus acts like any flu virus.
4. Do we both believe that although the above is true, that some younger people are also severely affected and that there have been many deaths in healthcare workers and bus drivers and others who were previously healthy?
Yes, a very small number of younger people are severely affected, same as other flus. For all ages, death nearly always involves pre-existing conditions. For example, in Italy, only 0.8% of the deceased had no pre-existing chronic illnesses.
5. Do we both believe that even if the mortality rate from this virus may not be more than 1%, there is still a high number of people suffering from the disease at the same time that this is likely to swamp healthcare systems?
Yes, our NHS has been run down to the point where it has no spare capacity for anything. Our health services have prioritised a routine problem – vulnerable people catching flu – and thrown far more resources than they would do normally at every case. That is why the services are overwhelmed.
Examples occur in Italy and Spain and probably now in US although there are other problems there too which obscure the real situation and there is a threat of it happening here.
Yes, for the same reasons – no health system can cope if you demand huge resources are thrown at a very common health problem.
6. Finally do we both believe that there is still little understanding of various aspects of this virus …
Yes, as is the case for every new variation of a virus. Until we get the data – how it spreads, mortality rate, symptoms, recurrence rate, etc – we don’t know what we’re dealing with or how dangerous it is. In the case of Covid-19, we took unprecedented extreme measures before we had this data.
…. including that many infections may cause no symptoms …
Yes, the vast majority will have no symptoms, or very mild ones, as is is typical with flu.
… and that unfortunately we do not have tests for immunity?
I don’t understand what you mean. We haven’t tested widely for infection, therefore we don’t the total infected, therefore we don’t know the mortality rate.
Do we both believe that we do not know whether individuals infected with the virus will have immunity against reinfection?
Yes, recurrence is possible with all flus.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now, I’ve fully answered all your questions. Please answer one of mine:
Do you believe the figures released as coronavirus deaths in the UK and many other countries, including the ones you mentioned – Italy, Spain, Germany, the USA – are deliberately and hugely exaggerated?
Node at 11:18 – every statement is a generalisation to some extent. Nouns themselves group things with differences under a single label; I can think of no way of avoiding this.
However, denial is a genuine psychological phenomenon. We can spot it in others quite easily, but our own is of course hidden from us by its very nature.
There are various ways to theorise eg. scientifically, rationally, politically, superstitiously, religiously etc. These are not rigidly defined; rather, they are characterisations, and there is considerable overlap between most of them.
Conspiracy theory seems best characterised by its use of appeal to an assumed motive of some poorly defined group. You can see above in my April 10, 23:52 that I refer to the “mainstream conspiracy theory”, in which 9/11 was arbitrarily attributed to the motives of “Muslims”. There are plenty of others, blamed on, say “Russia”.
Denialism is similar to but the opposite of sensationalism; promoting certain facts while ignoring or dismissing others, and the slanting of language and use of rhetoric, primarily to convince others that a matter of concern is purely imaginary.
When you suggest that all theories are conspiracy theories, you’re like someone unable to smell their own fart.
So Clark are you a “changes in climate” denialist?
Node at 13:58 – our comments crossed and I hadn’t seen this reply to SA when I wrote my description of denialism. You wrote:
– “Do you believe the figures released as coronavirus deaths in the UK and many other countries, including the ones you mentioned – Italy, Spain, Germany, the USA – are deliberately and hugely exaggerated?”
Well I don’t. You’re indulging in denialism; constantly going on about the ways that the figures might be over-counted, while consistently ignoring the ways they get undercounted. It’s also conspiracy theory: “…deliberately and hugely exaggerated” – yeah, by virtually every national scientific institution, university, health authority and government in the world – a motive of some poorly defined group.
Dave at 12:23 – “Clark can promote heroic amounts of intelligent nonsense in defence of official narratives“
As I wrote April 11 at 19:32, you make no distinction between the corporate media narrative and the scientific / technical narrative.
There isn’t even a monolithic “official narrative”, from government or governments. eg. part of the 9/11 Commission Report was redacted, and the neocon administration tried to prevent the 9/11 Commission from happening at all. The term “official narrative” clouds thought, and conspiracy theorists use it a lot.
Dave at 14:24 – “So Clark are you a “changes in climate” denialist?”
Of course not; there have been massive changes in climate, millions of years before humans existed. But that fact is misused by non-rational propagandists. It’s like saying “asteroids have hit Earth before, so one hitting us now wouldn’t be so bad”.
Another feature of conspiracy theory is that conspiracy theorists assign almost superhuman powers to the conspiracy. We have an example on this page:
J, April 6, 01:50 – “The sound of the charges and the flash as they go off has always removed by some pixel jockey in every video close enough to record it what actually happened.”
Conspiracy theorists very rarely challenge each other on this sort of thing. So long as a claim differs from “the official narrative”, it draws no challenge from other conspiracy theorists, no matter how diverse their theories. On the other hand, criticising such a claim often elicits howls of “supporting the official narrative”, often accompanied by very unpleasant accusations that the critic is promoting war or authoritarianism or whatever. It is this sort of gang enforcement that encourages distortion of the facts among conspiracy theorists; it is anti-sceptical, yet conspiracy theorists would rather be called sceptics.
The purpose of the ‘corona-crisis’ is to tank the economy to stop Brexit and sink Trump. Boris initially advocated a proportionate response, but folded quickly and went into hiding, but the indomitable Trump is doing better and has got ahead of the plot and hopefully will lift the deep state restrictions before too much harm is done, giving Boris a chance to re-emerge and do the same.
So what do humans have to do to stop another asteroid hitting?
CLARK. Where to begin? how about a secret treaty between the US and Saudi Arabia drawn up in 1972.This treaty stated that if China or Russia try to invade the Middle East then Saudi Arabia would invite the US to the Holy land to repel them. There were conditions, promising to buy military equipment from US etc. G. Bush snr. in 91 mugs Saddam Hussein into invade Kuwait, whilst at the same time convincing the Saudis that they were next.Who should he send to convince the Saudis to envoke this Treaty of 72, Mr Cheney no less.Cheney almost pulls it off but Saudi intel are onto him and offer an alternative to inviting the US to the Holy land. That alternative was named Osama Bin Laden. On hearing of this Cheney sweetens his deal by offering to protect the Saudi leadership from their own citizens and the rest as they say is history. Ha Ha Dave, did you know?
Node, I hope you forgive this very long answer.
“Before we get into definitions, we need to establish some basic common grounds”
What I believe is irrelevant to the point I made about the use of “denialist,” with its connotations of Holocaust denial, to shut down discussion. If the meaning isn’t evident without discussion, you shouldn’t use it. But since you you have recognised the validity of my point with your remarks about conspiracy theorists, I will answer your questions.
Node thank you for your detailed answer, it shows you are willing to engage. The purpose of the detailed question was to know where we have a common ground of understanding and where we may differ but can answer each other rationally. So, to start with I will analyse your answers and see where we may differ in interpretation.
“1. Do we both believe that there is a pandemic ….”
Yes, all flu viruses spread throughout the world and are therefore pandemics.
But this is not a flu virus it is a corona virus; they are different in many ways which we need not go into but suffice it to note that there are major clinical differences between the diseases caused by either. This is what alerted the Chinese doctors to look for other causative agents and they found this virus. The major differences is that SARS-cov2 presents classically with a dry cough and after a period of time of 5-7 days, may progress in some individuals to a severe form of what is called interstitial pneumonia, which is different from what happens in flu. It causes what is known as ARDS where fluid accumulates in the lung, and although ventilation may be used, it is limited in effects and half the patients die. I repeat, this picture rarely occurs in people who die of flu. I labour this point because it is an error to say that it is just another flu.
Not all Flu viruses necessarily cause pandemics or for that matter not all viruses or other infectious agents. A pandemic is an epidemiological definition and it occurs when a highly contagious disease spreads quickly across the world. For example, we have had cholera, or bubonic plague localised outbreaks, but these did not evolve into pandemics. The ease of spread of SARS-Cov2 and the fact that many who transmitted the virus initially had no symptoms, or mild symptoms, and the fact that the aeroplane was an efficient vector of the disease, and the fact that the virus infectivity is high all meant that it had the ability to produce a pandemic.
“… caused by a novel corona virus new to man with no immunity to the virus …”
Yes, all viruses mutate into varieties that are novel to their hosts. That’s what viruses do, mutate to new forms which their hosts don’t have antibodies to fight, thus the virus prospers and spreads until enough of the host has immunity at which point it would die out if it didn’t mutate into a novel variation, then the whole cycle repeats. All viruses have done this for a billion+ years.
There is a difference between say a human flu virus mutating in humans, something that happens regularly, and necessitates the manufacture of new vaccine every year, and where there is a bit of immunity in humans, because only part of the virus has changed, and a non-human virus that has never infected humans, but has for some reason developed the ability to infect humans. There is no background immunity that can deal with the virus, This does not mean that the virus will infect everybody or that everybody will die from it because of individual variability, but it means that effects of infection are unpredictable and immunity in the population may take a long time to naturally develop. In fact, there are still many unknowns about the immunity to this virus.
“… and this is an animal virus that has jumped species?”
Don’t know. I’m not an expert. As I understand it : viruses mutate by mix-and-matching the DNA in the cells they invade … they can do this in animal and plant cells … if the mutation did involve DNA from an animal cell, this wouldn’t be unusual and wouldn’t necessarily make the virus more dangerous.
Not quite how you describe it, it is the virus’ own genetic makeup that mutates. In the case of SARS Cov-2 I think the mutation meant that the virus could attach to a receptor in the human cells which the wild form of bat virus could not do, and this attachment is a prerequisite to infection and multiplication of the virus.
“2. Do we both believe that this virus is highly infectious with an exponential curve of infection resulting in a very quick spread around the world with infections documented in most countries in the world over 2-3 months?”
Yes, I believe if you tracked any viral infection in real time, you would see it spread as you describe.
Not true of all viruses, or at least those that cause identifiable disease.
“3. Do we both believe that this virus can cause death, Although this lethality is more commonly associated with older individuals and those with other co-morbidities?”
Yes, in that respect this virus acts like any flu virus.
Not just like the flu virus, as I indicated earlier.
“4. Do we both believe that although the above is true, that some younger people are also severely affected and that there have been many deaths in healthcare workers and bus drivers and others who were previously healthy?”
Yes, a very small number of younger people are severely affected, same as other flus. For all ages, death nearly always involves pre-existing conditions. For example, in Italy, only 0.8% of the deceased had no pre-existing chronic illnesses.
Yes of course death nearly often involves pre-existing conditions. Every day of the year, between 1200 and 2000 people die in UK. Death is a natural phenomenon, and guess who are those people that die every day? Yes, those who have pre-existing conditions. But they may getting along nicely with their medical conditions, some of them not necessarily lethal in themselves, but this makes them more susceptible to other illnesses such as flu, urinary tract infections, falls, breaking hips and so on and that is what kills them, they do not necessarily die of their diabetes, hypertension or dementia, but if they have these conditions they become more susceptible to the infections, The cause of death is the infection not the co-morbidities. But what we are talking about here is that these people are dying in larger numbers in a shorter period. So, in Italy for example between mid-February and 27th March over 7500 individuals died of Covid-19 in 6 weeks. But it was not just that, the death rate was rising in an alarming fashion until measures were introduced.
As to those who are older and with co-morbidities dying, the whole thrust of modern medicine has been to prolong life and in some cases to artificially do so. The progress has been incremental and through many different ways. But just to give you an example of how prolonging life is treated. Some cancer drugs are very expensive but may prolong life by a few months but inevitably the patient dies. But we as I society do not then say, oh well, its only a few months why spend all this money? No what happens is that the drugs get licensed and used and paid for by the NHS. If this does not happen there is a huge clamour.“5. Do we both believe that even if the mortality rate from this virus may not be more than 1%, there is still a high number of people suffering from the disease at the same time that this is likely to swamp healthcare systems? ”
Yes, our NHS has been run down to the point where it has no spare capacity for anything. Our health services have prioritised a routine problem – vulnerable people catching flu – and thrown far more resources than they would do normally at every case. That is why the services are overwhelmed.
You do have a point here. Our NHS goes through this winter crisis every winter. It is understaffed and under resourced. But generally, the NHS copes coming out every year bruised but not on its knees. This is different not only because of the large numbers but also that these large numbers are occurring over a shorter period of time and actually at the end of winter where some relaxation of these pressures are expected. I am not sure on what basis you make this statement “Our health services have prioritised a routine problem – vulnerable people catching flu – and thrown far more resources than they would do normally at every case. That is why the services are overwhelmed.”
I am afraid this is a rather strange statement, so the health service decided to believe the rumours that there was an extraordinary pandemic, and admitted patients that did not need treatment, thereby overwhelming the service? You obviously have never been near a hospital in your life. In fact, in UK, the government from the start made sure that you had to be very seriously ill before they wanted to know. They even discouraged people from contacting 111. No hospital would admit someone who was not ill enough to be admitted. That is the first point you raise which indicates that you would rather explain the fact that this is extraordinary by just saying that it was perceived to be extraordinary and therefore it became a self-fulfilling prophecy. All of this with no evidence at all. That is beginning to look like a conspiracy theory.“Examples occur in Italy and Spain and probably now in US although there are other problems there too which obscure the real situation and there is a threat of it happening here.”
Yes, for the same reasons – no health system can cope if you demand huge resources are thrown at a very common health problem.
If you want to believe that this is a common health problem then that is conspiracy theory no.2“6. Finally do we both believe that there is still little understanding of various aspects of this virus …”
Yes, as is the case for every new variation of a virus. Until we get the data – how it spreads, mortality rate, symptoms, recurrence rate, etc – we don’t know what we’re dealing with or how dangerous it is. In the case of Covid-19, we took unprecedented extreme measures before we had this data.
Actually, we had a very good example not only for the trajectory of the disease but for how to deal with it with an effective lockdown in China. You do not have to wait for millions of deaths to stop a pandemic.
“…. including that many infections may cause no symptoms …”
Yes, the vast majority will have no symptoms, or very mild ones, as is is typical with flu.
… and that unfortunately we do not have tests for immunity?
I don’t understand what you mean. We haven’t tested widely for infection, therefore we don’t the total infected, therefore we don’t know the mortality rate.
There is no reliable antibody test yet to test if someone has been exposed to the virus and developed antibodies.
“Do we both believe that we do not know whether individuals infected with the virus will have immunity against reinfection?”
Yes, recurrence is possible with all flus.
This is an oversimplification.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now, I’ve fully answered all your questions. Please answer one of mine:
Do you believe the figures released as coronavirus deaths in the UK and many other countries, including the ones you mentioned – Italy, Spain, Germany, the USA – are deliberately and hugely exaggerated?
In answer to your question, the simple answer is No I do not believe the numbers are exaggerated. Why would they be, who gains? Boris Johnson who wanted to do nothing and get herd immunity, Donald Trump, who want MAGA and exceptionalism would inflate figures and highlight the inadequacies of the US health care system? Other countries in Europe? China, Japan, Russia etc.. all countries and major health and scientific organisations involved in this (Conspiracy theory no. 3).
And why? On the contrary, I believe the figures could be much worse. Recently we heard that many deaths of people in care homes were not reported as Covid-19 deaths, and similar stories come out of Spain and Italy.
Since you made this statemen, please tell me why you think all why these governments are seeking to inflate the figures?
Now I will tell you my own conspiracy theories about Covid 19 and these are more serious.
1. The UK (and others) were given 2 months advance notice of an epidemic. They were also given a model successful blueprint of how to deal with the infection once it is established (China) or to prevent its spread (South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong) from early stages but chose not even to prepare by look at basic requirements such as PPE, and limiting flights from infected areas. This was gross negligence, but to make it into a conspiracy theory we need to look at the first official reaction of the government when cases began to accelerate, they just slipped that we are all going to take it on the chin, a few elderly people will die, but no matter, just like Node, we will not overburden the NHS just let us all develop herd immunity. When various organisations rightly did not agree with the government, amongst the Football Association and started cancelling mass events, the government decided to carry on with the policy, not issue PPE and let the NHS take it on the chin and come up with a hardened herd of herd immune Britons. They are still dragging their feet on testing, made no attempts to widely test and isolate milder case, as is the norm with a pandemic making excuses. They keep throwing smokescreens on getting weapon manufacturers to produce ventilators and such fantastic claims but can’t even arrange basic logistics of deliveries of PPE to hospitals, and food to the self-isolating.
2. No doubt the necessary measures for social isolation will be used for nefarious purposes. In the first instance the government has been very ambiguous about what a lockdown or curfew meant. There was sand still is much ambiguity but with all these ambiguities, they want to clamp down on rather trivial exceptions like someone buying a none-essential item from Tesco, or two walkers travelling several miles to the Peak district but not within reach of anyone for miles. But the panic shoppers in the first week after the announcement of the half hearted curfew was probably more instrumental in further dissemination of the disease, and so where measures to curb the number of tube trains in number without curbing builders and others travelling to non-essential work.
3. The suspension of parliament. This is an extremely serious event, much more serious than the prorogation earlier on, at a time of national crisis and the refusal to involve opposition in talks on measures to combat the epidemic. These should be non-party political issues and the fact that all what happens to this country depends on the say so of the likes of Boris Johnson, Dominic Raab, orcgestrated behind=d the scenes by Dominic Cummings is the real conspiracy we should all be united in exposing.
It does not really matter whether we call it Covid-denial. Yes I sort of agree with you it is lazy shorthand, but as you can see from my tediously long post, if you are still reading, life is too short not to use lazy terminology that conveys the meaning succinctly.“But this is not a flu virus it is a corona virus;”
Coronavirus is a flu virus. Flu is just a catch-all term for about 100 viruses that live ‘in the wild,’ causing seasonal illnesses. Many but not all of them have been identified. Glasgow University has been tracking about 10 of the ones they have tests for, recording their fluctuations year to year. Variations of coronavirus have constituted about 10% of the flu viruses for as long as they have been testing. Covid-19 is just one of many variants of coronavirus.
“The major differences is that SARS-cov2 presents classically with a dry cough and after a period of time of 5-7 days, may progress in some individuals to a severe form of what is called interstitial pneumonia, which is different from what happens in flu.”
All flus are liable to cause respiratory problems. The virus lives in the lungs. “one-third of pneumonia cases develop from a respiratory virus, with the flu the most common of those.”
“Not all Flu viruses necessarily cause pandemics or for that matter not all viruses or other infectious agents. A pandemic is an epidemiological definition and it occurs when a highly contagious disease spreads quickly across the world. ”
All viruses spread easily. Depending on the type and symptoms, many will be pandemics, but we don’t usually bother labeling them as such because it is such a common occurrence.
“For example, we have had cholera, or bubonic plague localised outbreaks, but these did not evolve into pandemics.”
Cholera spreads through bacteria not virus, usually through contact with infected feces, it is not airborne. Bubonic plague is also a bacteria, but can be spread through coughs and sneezes – it caused one of the worst pandemics in human history.
I’ve been reading your answer and responding as I go, but now I have reached a point where you are just saying “Covid is not flu therefore I discount Node’s opinion,” and then you become insulting and sarcastic. You stop responding to what I actually said, and instead imagine what a ‘conspiracy theorist’ might believe and respond to that. So much for polite discourse. I’ll leave it there.
A quick search shows that flu viruses are not coronaviruses. Coronaviruses are positive-sense RNA viruses, in which the viral RNA can be translated directly into viral proteins, whereas flu viruses are negative-sense RNA viruses, in which transcription via viral polymerases must occur prior to translation. It’s like in pre-digital chemical photography; the difference between a colour negative for making prints, and “colour reversal film” for slides or cine.
SARS-CoV-2 is a coronavirus, not a flu virus. This is bad news, because no vaccines have been successfully developed against coronaviruses.
I think what Node is referring to is misdiagnosis, in which particularly bad cases of common cold (caused by coronaviruses and/or rhinoviruses) are misdiagnosed as flu.
I suspect it would make more sense to call SARS-CoV-2 a SARS virus rather than a coronavirus, but neither of these are flu viruses.
SA – “That is the first point you raise which indicates that you would rather explain the fact that this is extraordinary by just saying that it was perceived to be extraordinary and therefore it became a self-fulfilling prophecy. All of this with no evidence at all. That is beginning to look like a conspiracy theory.
[…]
– If you want to believe that this is a common health problem then that is conspiracy theory no.2”SA, you seem to use “conspiracy theory” differently from the way I do; I wouldn’t count either mass hysteria, or a mistake, as conspiracy theories. For me, the theory would have to propose some group intentionally spreading mass hysteria or misinformation, for some nefarious purpose; a conspiracy theory has to include covert intent.
But that condition is necessary but not sufficient; it would amount only to a theory about a conspiracy, and conspiracies do occur.
To be genuinely a conspiracy theory in the derogatory sense (which is the only sense in which I use the term), the conspiracy must have almost supernatural power to control the evidence, and/or the accusations of conspiracy must expand without reasonable limit, eg. to 90% or more of everyone in an entire field of science. These 90% must be promoting wrong information not merely because, for instance, they are clinging to an established theory despite a new, better theory attempting to supplant it. They must be doing so despite knowing better, because the all-powerful conspiracy is coercing them by some means, ie. willingly or not, they are “in on it”.
SA, for me, Node descends to conspiracy theory only at your point “conspiracy theory no. 3”, by writing: “Do you believe the figures released as coronavirus deaths in the UK and many other countries, including the ones you mentioned – Italy, Spain, Germany, the USA – are deliberately and hugely exaggerated?”.
At this point Node leaps right past a theory about a conspiracy. Node’s alleged conspiracy here expands beyond reasonable limit, to include swathes of scientists in multiple fields knowingly submitting and peer-reviewing fraudulent papers, huge numbers of doctors and medical staff claiming that their hospitals are overloaded five to twenty times beyond their usual capacity, vast numbers of employees in scores of national and hundreds of local governments knowingly inflating statistics, entire staffs of local newspapers in multiple countries suddenly printing twenty times more obituaries than they normally would, mayors and priests of small towns in Italy, on and on and on, countless thousands of ordinary people who usually just do their jobs but who now suddenly start acting like CIA officers on a mission. Why would they start doing this, or how would the “puppetmasters” force them to?
In a conspiracy theorist’s mind, all these ordinary people are either sheeple, acting this way just because they’ve been told to, or agents of the conspiracy, knowingly manipulating the sheeple around them. Stupid sheeple and lying agents – quite the opposite of honest, upright, perspicacious conspiracy theorists, fearless truth-tellers and guardians of wisdom.
And this is what drives conspiracy theory; feelings of self-superiority over “the masses”.
