Jump to content

Coronavirus & Other Sports


Demonland

Recommended Posts

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
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
Link to comment
Share on other sites


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
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
Link to comment
Share on other sites

~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!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Demonland Forums  

  • Match Previews, Reports & Articles  

    2024 Player Reviews: #31 Bayley Fritsch

    Once again the club’s top goal scorer but he had a few uncharacteristic flat spots during the season and the club will be looking for much better from him in 2025. Date of Birth: 6 December 1996 Height: 188cm Games MFC 2024: 23 Career Total: 149 Goals MFC 2024: 41 Career Total: 252 Brownlow Medal Votes: 4

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 8

    2024 Player Reviews: #18 Jake Melksham

    After sustaining a torn ACL in the final match of the 2023 season Jake added a bit to the attack late in the 2024 season upon his return. He has re-signed on to the Demons for 1 more season in 2025. Date of Birth: 12 August 1991 Height: 186cm Games MFC 2024: 8 Career Total: 229 Goals MFC 2024: 8 Career Total: 188

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 5

    2024 Player Reviews: #3 Christian Salem

    The luckless Salem suffered a hamstring injury against the Lions early in the season and, after missing a number of games, he was never at his best. He was also inconvenienced by minor niggles later in the season. This was a blow for the club that sorely needed him to fill gaps in the midfield at times as well as to do his best work in defence. Date of Birth: 15 July 1995 Height: 184cm Games MFC 2024: 17 Career Total: 176 Goals MFC 2024: 1 Career Total: 26 Brownlow Meda

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 7

    2024 Player Reviews: #39 Koltyn Tholstrop

    The first round draft pick at #13 from twelve months ago the strongly built medium forward has had an impressive introduction to AFL football and is expected to spend more midfield moments as his career progresses. Date of Birth: 25 July 2005 Height: 186cm Games MFC 2024: 10 Career Total: 10 Goals MFC 2024: 5 Career Total: 5 Games CDFC 2024: 7 Goals CDFC 2024: 4

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 6

    2024 Player Reviews: #42 Daniel Turner

    The move of “Disco” to a key forward post looks like bearing fruit. Turner has good hands, moves well and appears to be learning the forward craft well. Will be an interesting watch in 2025. Date of Birth: January 28, 2002 Height: 195cm Games MFC 2024: 15 Career Total: 18 Goals MFC 2024: 17 Career Total: 17 Games CDFC 2024: 1 Goals CDFC 2024:  1

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 15

    2024 Player Reviews: #8 Jake Lever

    The Demon’s key defender and backline leader had his share of injuries and niggles throughout the season which prevented him from performing at his peak.  Date of Birth: 5 March 1996 Height: 195cm Games MFC 2024: 18 Career Total: 178 Goals MFC 2024: 1 Career Total: 5

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 1

    2024 Player Reviews: #13 Clayton Oliver

    Lack of preparation after a problematic preseason prevented Oliver from reaching the high standards set before last year’s hamstring woes. He carried injury right through the back half of the season and was controversially involved in a potential move during the trade period that was ultimately shut down by the club. Date of Birth:  22 July 1997 Height:  189cm Games MFC 2024:  21 Career Total: 183 Goals MFC 2024: 3 Career Total: 54 Brownlow Medal Votes: 5

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 17

    BLOODY BLUES by Meggs

    The conclusion to Narrm’s home and away season was the inevitable let down by the bloody Blues  who meekly capitulated to the Bombers.   The 2024 season fixture handicapped the Demons chances from the get-go with Port Adelaide, Brisbane and Essendon advantaged with enough gimme games to ensure a tough road to the finals, especially after a slew of early season injuries to star players cost wins and percentage.     As we strode confidently through the gates of Prin

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 3

    2024 Player Reviews: #5 Christian Petracca

    Melbourne’s most important player who dominated the first half of the season until his untimely injury in the Kings Birthday clash put an end to his season. At the time, he was on his way to many personal honours and the club in strong finals contention. When the season did end for Melbourne and Petracca was slowly recovering, he was engulfed in controversy about a possible move of clubs amid claims about his treatment by the club in the immediate aftermath of his injury. Date of Birth: 4 J

    Demonland
    Demonland |
    Melbourne Demons 21
  • Tell a friend

    Love Demonland? Tell a friend!

×
×
  • Create New...