Jump to content

Coronavirus & Other Sports

Demonland
Demonland
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

3 hours ago, Demonland said:

3 months ?

 

Morrison was saying 6 months at his press conference today 

 
 

1 hour ago, DubDee said:

An excellent article.

Yeah nah, that article is cherry picking at it's finest. Opinion is one thing, facts are another. Can we please stop comparing it to the flu? 

We don't know the case/ fatality rate, but no-one is pretending that we do. What we do know with absolute certainty is that allowing the virus to spread unchecked will result in a lot of preventable deaths.

Yes the mortality rate is low for young, healthy people. But if you're talking about millions of potential infections, a low mortality rate is still a disturbingly high number of deaths. That's not hysteria, that's just maths. 

Right now, we've really got 2 choices. Option 1: stay in lockdown and hope for the best. Option 2: relax restrictions, watch the number of cases increase exponentially, then say "Oh [censored], we shouldn't have done that!", and then go back to lockdown, now with overflowing hospitals and morgues.  

If we get to choose between the New York and South Korea options, why on earth would you choose New York?

 

    • Like 9
    10 hours ago, Accepting Mediocrity said:

    Yeah nah, that article is cherry picking at it's finest. Opinion is one thing, facts are another. Can we please stop comparing it to the flu? 

    We don't know the case/ fatality rate, but no-one is pretending that we do. What we do know with absolute certainty is that allowing the virus to spread unchecked will result in a lot of preventable deaths.

    Yes the mortality rate is low for young, healthy people. But if you're talking about millions of potential infections, a low mortality rate is still a disturbingly high number of deaths. That's not hysteria, that's just maths. 

    Right now, we've really got 2 choices. Option 1: stay in lockdown and hope for the best. Option 2: relax restrictions, watch the number of cases increase exponentially, then say "Oh [censored], we shouldn't have done that!", and then go back to lockdown, now with overflowing hospitals and morgues.  

    If we get to choose between the New York and South Korea options, why on earth would you choose New York?

     

    Didn't even have to read it, saw it was a Murdoch rag and new what the gist would be - " all this government spending is unsustainable, we have to think about the economy!! So what if a few old people die, they're almost dead anyway and will help the issue of funding the aged pension"

    Something like that

    • Like 4
    1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

    Didn't even have to read it, saw it was a Murdoch rag and new what the gist would be - " all this government spending is unsustainable, we have to think about the economy!! So what if a few old people die, they're almost dead anyway and will help the issue of funding the aged pension"

    Something like that

    wow, what an ideologue you are, gonzo. you can belittle an opinion without even reading it.

    exactly what's wrong with political discourse in this country

    • Like 2
     
    1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

    wow, what an ideologue you are, gonzo. you can belittle an opinion without even reading it.

    To be fair, Gonzo's summary of the article is more or less spot on. 

    All media is biased to some degree, but the anti-science bile spewed out by the Murdoch press is, generally speaking, disturbingly predictable. 

    • Like 2
    19 hours ago, Accepting Mediocrity said:

    Yes the mortality rate is low for young, healthy people

    I know someone (brother of a good mate) who's a "young healthy" person. He got it. From his telling, I wouldn't' wish it upon anyone. He speaks of disconnecting his oxygen and hauling himself off his hospital bed in an attempt to write a goodbye letter to his young daughters after his doctor refused to give him a guarantee that he would make it.

    • Sad 1

    19 hours ago, Accepting Mediocrity said:

    What we do know with absolute certainty is that allowing the virus to spread unchecked will result in a lot of preventable deaths.

    Allowing an unstoppable virus like this to spread unchecked would also lead to the collapse of the economy.

    • Like 1

    If you have the time (hahaha!) this is interesting listening from a doctor on the front line in one of NYC's best hospitals

     

    7 hours ago, Accepting Mediocrity said:

    To be fair, Gonzo's summary of the article is more or less spot on. 

    All media is biased to some degree, but the anti-science bile spewed out by the Murdoch press is, generally speaking, disturbingly predictable. 

    Just out of curiosity what media organizations do you read or listen to?

    14 hours ago, drysdale demon said:

    Just out of curiosity what media organizations do you read or listen to?

    Like I said, all media is biased (some more than others), and I'm the same as everyone else - I tend to read things that reflect my existing opinions.

    But science should stand for itself - I think it's important to bypass opinions as much as possible and get facts from the source - either from researchers themselves, or from good science communicators. It's very easy for a journo with an agenda to misinterpret evidence, cherry-pick a few facts and reach an incorrect conclusion to get clicks - the Murdoch press has turned this into an art form. 

    The context is food nutrition, but I think this article does a pretty good job at highlighting how easily 'facts' can be misinterpreted to suit any agenda: https://www.thinkingnutrition.com.au/broccoli-bad-for-you/. 

    Sadly, I think the Betoota Advocate is about the most objective source of news going these days.

     

     

    On 4/5/2020 at 10:19 PM, Accepting Mediocrity said:

    Yeah nah, that article is cherry picking at it's finest. Opinion is one thing, facts are another. Can we please stop comparing it to the flu? 

    We don't know the case/ fatality rate, but no-one is pretending that we do. What we do know with absolute certainty is that allowing the virus to spread unchecked will result in a lot of preventable deaths.

    Yes the mortality rate is low for young, healthy people. But if you're talking about millions of potential infections, a low mortality rate is still a disturbingly high number of deaths. That's not hysteria, that's just maths. 

    Right now, we've really got 2 choices. Option 1: stay in lockdown and hope for the best. Option 2: relax restrictions, watch the number of cases increase exponentially, then say "Oh [censored], we shouldn't have done that!", and then go back to lockdown, now with overflowing hospitals and morgues.  

    If we get to choose between the New York and South Korea options, why on earth would you choose New York?

    If only it were this simple. We will need to make hard calls soon. if we relax restrictions it will lead to some people dying but we can't stay like this forever and how long with a vaccine take? 

    I'm glad we are so isolated in Australia, we should be able to manage this (with some damage caused) over time.  Staying in lockdown all year is not the answer in my opinion 

    • Like 1

    2 hours ago, Accepting Mediocrity said:

    Like I said, all media is biased (some more than others), and I'm the same as everyone else - I tend to read things that reflect my existing opinions.

    But science should stand for itself - I think it's important to bypass opinions as much as possible and get facts from the source - either from researchers themselves, or from good science communicators. It's very easy for a journo with an agenda to misinterpret evidence, cherry-pick a few facts and reach an incorrect conclusion to get clicks - the Murdoch press has turned this into an art form. 

    The context is food nutrition, but I think this article does a pretty good job at highlighting how easily 'facts' can be misinterpreted to suit any agenda: https://www.thinkingnutrition.com.au/broccoli-bad-for-you/. 

    Sadly, I think the Betoota Advocate is about the most objective source of news going these days.

     

     

    It is not only the murdoch press who does this, from my experience all media outlets are masters of it. As far as that artile is concerned I have posted before in various threads about people stupidly believing what they read on social media sites.

    Edited by drysdale demon
    correction

    21 minutes ago, DubDee said:

    We will need to make hard calls soon. if we relax restrictions it will lead to some people dying but we can't stay like this forever and how long with a vaccine take? 

    I absolutely agree with you - we can't live like this forever. At some point, in the absence of a vaccine, we might be faced with some brutal decisions about the death toll we are willing to tolerate in order to resume some sense of normality with our lives. There may come a time when those conversations need to be had. 

    My problem with the article wasn't for suggesting those things. Those decisions have enormous ramifications - they need to be based on good science and not misguided ideology. My problem with the article was that it used extremely selective 'facts' to suit a predetermined ideological agenda.

    For example:

    - "It's just the flu" (simply not true - it's demonstrably far worse, and far more contagious)

    - On asymptomatic cases: "A disease that doesn't make you ill? Terrifying." (That's a major reason why it spreads so easily)

    - "We lost 20 people to the disease in March. We lost 13,000 to other ailments, but let's not worry about them." (The reason the death toll is currently so low is precisely because of the draconian social distancing measures)

    - "The data is fundamentally flawed... If we don't know how many have been infected, we don't know the mortality rate" (Literally no-one is pretending that we do know the exact mortality rate. The number of fatalities is also a gross underestimate, because in many places the official figures are limited to deaths in hospitals, and other countries are almost certainly deliberately under-reporting)

    - "If 1 in 1,200 dies, 99% of them already gravely ill, it's not so frightening" (OK, now you're just pulling numbers out of your [censored])

    End rant :) 

     

     

     

    • Like 1
    2 hours ago, Accepting Mediocrity said:

    - "If 1 in 1,200 dies, 99% of them already gravely ill, it's not so frightening" (OK, now you're just pulling numbers out of your [censored])

    This is a real furphy. They are not gravely ill in the sense that they are about to die. Even with fairly serious lung disease, you can still have years of life ahead.

    As for the 99%, it's just a fabrication, there are plenty without comorbidities that are falling to Covid.

    5 hours ago, DubDee said:

    if we relax restrictions it will lead to some people dying

    We could just cut the middle man here and go straight for human sacrifice.

    • Like 1
    2 hours ago, Accepting Mediocrity said:

    I absolutely agree with you - we can't live like this forever. At some point, in the absence of a vaccine, we might be faced with some brutal decisions about the death toll we are willing to tolerate in order to resume some sense of normality with our lives. There may come a time when those conversations need to be had. 

    My problem with the article wasn't for suggesting those things. Those decisions have enormous ramifications - they need to be based on good science and not misguided ideology. My problem with the article was that it used extremely selective 'facts' to suit a predetermined ideological agenda.

    For example:

    - "It's just the flu" (simply not true - it's demonstrably far worse, and far more contagious)

    - On asymptomatic cases: "A disease that doesn't make you ill? Terrifying." (That's a major reason why it spreads so easily)

    - "We lost 20 people to the disease in March. We lost 13,000 to other ailments, but let's not worry about them." (The reason the death toll is currently so low is precisely because of the draconian social distancing measures)

    - "The data is fundamentally flawed... If we don't know how many have been infected, we don't know the mortality rate" (Literally no-one is pretending that we do know the exact mortality rate. The number of fatalities is also a gross underestimate, because in many places the official figures are limited to deaths in hospitals, and other countries are almost certainly deliberately under-reporting)

    - "If 1 in 1,200 dies, 99% of them already gravely ill, it's not so frightening" (OK, now you're just pulling numbers out of your [censored])

    End rant :) 

     

     

     

    even leading scientists are pulling figures out of their arrrz. there is more unknowns than knowns. it's still unchartered territory.

    if life or death choices are made in the future it will not just be science based......science. ethics, economics and politics will all play a part.  we've all read about aktion t4 based on science and medicine with a good taste of ideology thrown in. and that went down well didn't it.


    11 minutes ago, bing181 said:

    We could just cut the middle man here and go straight for human sacrifice.

    Surely we've been pre-programmed with enough zombie movies in the past to know exactly what we all must do.

    Edited by Neil Crompton

    In breaking news: children have been ordered to stay at least 1.5m away from George Pell 

    • Haha 1

    NRL island just sounds brilliant.

    It needs to be a reality show as well.

    How many poos in shoes would there be?

    Bubblers? lets get Todd Carney back!

    The place would be demolished within a week.

    Roy and HG would have to commentate and be part of the programming team as well.

     

     

    • Haha 2
     
    2 hours ago, Brownie said:

    NRL island just sounds brilliant.

    It needs to be a reality show as well.

    How many poos in shoes would there be?

    Bubblers? lets get Todd Carney back!

    The place would be demolished within a week.

    Roy and HG would have to commentate and be part of the programming team as well.

     

     

    And how many John Hopoate's 

    • Like 1

    ~1200 cases in Victoria. more than half have recovered. The curve is flattening for sure (although don't tell the general public).  I reckon Andrews has done pretty well in a tough spot.

    hopefully things will be turn around for us soon!


    Guest
    This topic is now closed to further replies.
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • GAMEDAY: West Coast

      It's Game Day and the Demons have a chance to notch up their third consecutive win — something they haven’t done since Round 5, 2024. But to do it, they’ll need to exorcise the Demons of last year’s disastrous trip out West. Can the Dees continue their momentum, right the wrongs of that fateful clash, and take another step up the ladder on the road to redemption?

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 39 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • FEATURE: 1925

      A hundred years ago today, on 2 May 1925, Melbourne kicked off the new season with a 47 point victory over St Kilda to take top place on the VFL ladder after the opening round of the new season.  Top place was a relatively unknown position for the team then known as the “Fuchsias.” They had finished last in 1923 and rose by only one place in the following year although the final home and away round heralded a promise of things to come when they surprised the eventual premiers Essendon. That victory set the stage for more improvement and it came rapidly. In this series, I will tell the story of how the 1925 season unfolded for the Melbourne Football Club and how it made the VFL finals for the first time in a decade on the way to the ultimate triumph a year later.

        • Love
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREVIEW: West Coast

      Saturday’s election night game in Perth between the West Coast Eagles and Melbourne represents 18th vs 15th which makes it a tough decision as to which party to favour. The Eagles have yet to break the ice under their new coach in Andrew McQualter who is the second understudy in a row to confront Demon Coach Simon Goodwin who was also winless until a fortnight ago. On that basis, many punters might be considering to go with the donkey vote but I’ve been assigned with the task of helping readers to come to a considered opinion on this matter of vital importance across the nation. It was almost a year ago that I wrote a preview here of the Demons’ away game against the Eagles (under the name William from Waalitj because it was Indigenous Round).  I issued a warning that it was a danger game, based on my local knowledge that the home team were no longer easybeats and that they possessed a wunderkind generational player in Harley Reid who was capable of producing stellar performances playing among men a decade and more older than he.  At the time, the Eagles already had two wins off the back of a couple of the young man’s masterclasses and they had recently given the Bombers a scare straight after their Anzac Day blockbuster draw against the then reigning premiers.

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 1 reply
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • NON-MFC: Round 08

      Round 08 of the 2025 AFL Season kicks off on Thursday with a must-win game for the Bombers to stay in touch with the top eight, while the struggling Roos seek a morale-boosting upset. Friday sees the Saints desperate for a win as well if they are to stay in finals contention and their opponents the Dockers will be eager to crack in to the Top 8 with a win on the road. Saturday kicks off with a pivotal clash for both sides asthe Bulldogs look to solidify their top-eight spot, while Port seeks to shake their pretender tag. Then the Crows will be looking to steady their topsy turvy season against a resurgent Blues looking to make it 4 wins on the trot. On Election Night a Blockbuster will see the ladder-leading Pies take on the Cats, who are keen to bounce back after a narrow loss. On Sunday the Sydney Derby promises fireworks as the Giants aim to cement their top-eight status, while the Swans fight to keep their season alive. The Hawks, celebrating their centenary, will be looking to easily account for the Tigers who are desperate to halt their slide. The Round concludes on Sunday Night with a top end of the table QClash with significant ladder implications; both Queensland teams are in scintillating form. Who are you tipping this week and what are the best results for the Demons?

      • 160 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: West Coast

      The Demons hit the road in Round 8, heading to Perth to face the West Coast Eagles at Optus Stadium. With momentum building, the Dees will be aiming for a third straight victory to keep their season revival on course. Who comes in and who goes out?

        • Thanks
      • 563 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Richmond

      The fans who turned up to the MCG for Melbourne’s Anzac Day Eve clash against Richmond would have been disappointed if they turned up to see a great spectacle. As much as this was a night for the 71,635 in attendance to commemorate heroes of the nation’s past wars, it was also a time for the Melbourne Football Club to consolidate upon its first win after a horrific start to the 2025 season. On this basis, despite the fact that it was an uninspiring and dour struggle for most of its 100 minutes, the night will be one for the fans to remember. They certainly got value out of the pre match activity honouring those who fought for their country. The MCG and the lights of the city as backdrop was made for nights such as these and, in my view, we received a more inspirational ceremony of Anzac culture than others both here and elsewhere around the country. 

        • Love
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 0 replies
      Demonland
      Demonland
    View All