MarkMcElman
1.8K posts
one person unfollowed me // automatically checked by fllwrs.com
English
@8MariaChristina @simplesarahbear Which entails there was some study that suggested the figure might be as high as 50%.
Unless this simply an uninformed opinion.
English
Do people realize that COVID permanently disables people at a rate of between 5-50%? There is a a whole array of symptoms and severity.
This is why parents are asking for masking in schools. Not only are the kids at risk, but their families they come home to. Empathy is dead.
English
@HOntarian @TheCDNGrizz @simplesarahbear I heard the rate of Covid disability is between 0% and 100%.
Big if true…
English
@TheCDNGrizz @simplesarahbear If Covid could disable her account we would be in a better place.
English
@8MariaChristina @simplesarahbear Geeze - that’s quite a difference between our two circles.
My data is based on observing people who are clearly not disabled by their Covid cases (going to work, being happy, etc.). Seems pretty objective.
Perhaps your group involves some psychosomatic dynamic?
English
@simplesarahbear About half the people I know have have Covid, and none of them have been disabled. This includes many elderly relatives. One in their late 70’s had some difficultly for about 6 weeks, but now claims to be fully back to normal.
Where did you get the 50% disability figure?
English
@johnsgunn The IFR for vaccinated people is more like 0.2%. You seem to be off by a factor of 10.
English
Antivaxx logic:
1 in 50 dying of covid is no big deal.
But 1 in 100,000 MDs “concerned” about vaccines means vaccines are evil.
English
@KLamrock Which isn’t to suggest that I trust alternative media sources or, god forbid, the ranting seems of individuals on social media or whatever.
It is possible to find insight in these sources, it’s just that verifying this is even more important than with traditional media.
English
@KLamrock Media literacy must now be coupled with an awareness of the topics on which even reputable outlets will now reliably mislead you (such as Covington, Rittenhouse, etc.).
I trust the NYT to accurately report on many subjects, but I verify any topics related to social justice.
English
We now come to the nominees for “Face You Most Want To Hit With A Shovel. The nominees are.....just this little shit in the MAGA hat.”
Fredericton, New Brunswick 🇨🇦 English
@KLamrock I agree 100%. And this narrative consistency was allowed to develop despite being contradicted by readily available video evidence.
The day I realized this is the day I lost faith in the media. Anything less than a statement against interest must be independently verified.
English
@markmcelman I agree. My reaction was based on so many similarities with so many stories that did check, and the pattern seemed familiar. But it wasn’t. And I made the same error many made.
English
@KLamrock about the errors in the coverage of Rittenhouse, because these were exposed by the evidence presented during the trial.
But the error in Covington wasn’t really acknowledged except at the individual level, such as this:
S.E. Cupp@secupp
Hey guys. Seeing all the additional videos now, and I 100% regret reacting too quickly to the Covington story. I wish I’d had the fuller picture before weighing in, and I’m truly sorry.
English
@KLamrock My initial reaction to the incident was pretty similar to yours, until I realized that the narrative created by the news coverage had almost nothing to do with the actual events as they occurred (and which were fully recorded on video).
I think there has been acknowledgement…
English
@KLamrock I came across this old tweet and thought it was worth noting that the several of the new outlets that libelled the Covington kid have now paid up.
Nicholas Sandmann@N1ckSandmann
At this time I would like to release that NBC and I have reached a settlement. The terms are confidential.
English
@FurnessColin @tincanfire @bleasdalefamily @80ssummercamp You mentioned false positives while Cardy was speaking of false negatives. Isn’t that an important distinction?
I was under the impression that currently the rapid test do produce a lot of false negatives.
English
@bleasdalefamily @80ssummercamp That's flat-out ignorant and irresponsible, IMO.
Shame on Mr. Cardy and those who encourage him.
English
@nb_covid_info @bleasdalefamily @Gov_NB I think there are 2 possibilities here; either (1) people already know that Covid is airborne or (2) they simply don’t care.
English
@bleasdalefamily If anyone has any ideas how we can inform ALL NBers that #COVIDisAirborne, because *everyone* deserves to know, please let us know! I have been hoping since October that @Gov_NB would tell NBers and have been contacting people in health and gov't since then but not a peep!
English
There really truly are good people in this province doing amazing work, and taking time - totally uncompensated - to try to inform and help people. Thank you to those folks, and to everyone else working so hard who can't speak out. #COVIDisAirborne - it moves like smoke - #MaskUp
English
@johnsgunn Are you suggesting the the IFR for Covid in NB is over 2%? Is that reasonable given background knowledge?
Isn’t the attached data simply a result of a significant undercounting of the cases/recoveries in NB?
English
Here are some fun comparisons.
Contracting Covid-19 in NB during 2022's "Great Barrington Declaration" model, your risk of dying is only slightly less than contracting influenza in 1918.
Base jumping is 5x safer though.
#nbpoli
English
@72ravenblue @andrewwaugh13 The vaccine reduces the risk they are taking, doesn’t it?
English
@Isabellekleger Hello Isabelle- I’m wondering if you might be interested in this situation:
MarkMcElman@markmcelman
@MPWayneLong @WayneLongSJ My 98 year-old grandfather lives in a local LTC residence for veterans, a benefit of his service in to Canada during WWII He is not yet scheduled to receive the Covid vaccine. Given the federal jurisdiction over veterans, would it be possible for them to access federal supplies?
English
Confirmed: There will be a live provincial update on COVID-19 in New Brunswick today at 2:30 p.m. AT
English