Coronavirus Outbreak [COVID-19]

SwollenGoat

Deicide
May 17, 2013
62,956
22,418
The House that Peterbilt
You're only looking at it from one side. What you're still not understanding is that the WHO could and should have investigated this thoroughly, rather than quoting the Chinese government. If this was in a western country, they would have investigated this with more transparency but because it was the Chinese government, which they've shown undue bias towards, they ended up quoting Chinese official statements, despite knowing it wasn't true. Individual WHO officials knew it wasn't true and yet the WHO as an organisation was still supporting the idea that human to human transmission wasn't proven...purely because they didn't want to contradict the Chinese government.

Did the WHO do enough? No. Did they do as much as they would if the virus was first reported in Canada? No. Therefore, they must be held accountable for that and justify why they did so little and just parroted the official Chinese line. Repeating Chinese lies is a crime in itself for an independent, apolitical organisation.
:rofl

good lord man
 
Jun 3, 2013
1,635
1,324
You're only looking at it from one side. What you're still not understanding is that the WHO could and should have investigated this thoroughly, rather than quoting the Chinese government. If this was in a western country, they would have investigated this with more transparency but because it was the Chinese government, which they've shown undue bias towards, they ended up quoting Chinese official statements, despite knowing it wasn't true. Individual WHO officials knew it wasn't true and yet the WHO as an organisation was still supporting the idea that human to human transmission wasn't proven...purely because they didn't want to contradict the Chinese government.

Did the WHO do enough? No. Did they do as much as they would if the virus was first reported in Canada? No. Therefore, they must be held accountable for that and justify why they did so little and just parroted the official Chinese line. Repeating Chinese lies is a crime in itself for an independent, apolitical organisation.
Back in January there was a huge international fuss kicked up by the WHO and many western governments because the Chinese were not allowing a team of independent experts into Wuhan.

You have stated yourself that China weren't playing ball. So what was the WHO supposed to do? Tell the world that human to human transmission was happening even though they themselves couldn't know that for fact or go with the information they were being given by the government that was dealing with the new virus?

What could they realistically have done better?
 

SwollenGoat

Deicide
May 17, 2013
62,956
22,418
The House that Peterbilt
Back in January there was a huge international fuss kicked up by the WHO and many western governments because the Chinese were not allowing a team of independent experts into Wuhan.

You have stated yourself that China weren't playing ball. So what was the WHO supposed to do? Tell the world that human to human transmission was happening even though they themselves couldn't know that for fact or go with the information they were being given by the government that was dealing with the new virus?

What could they realistically have done better?
all this has been explained to him,more than once

all the info was in the video I posted that debunks the WHO scapegoat shit

he doesnt care because his mind was made up months ago

its the WHOs fault because some news stories said so and thats where it ends for him
 
Reactions: Redzer

Jack

P4P Star
Jul 29, 2012
9,344
3,854
Back in January there was a huge international fuss kicked up by the WHO and many western governments because the Chinese were not allowing a team of independent experts into Wuhan.

You have stated yourself that China weren't playing ball. So what was the WHO supposed to do? Tell the world that human to human transmission was happening even though they themselves couldn't know that for fact or go with the information they were being given by the government that was dealing with the new virus?

What could they realistically have done better?
Well, the WHO officials knew that it could be spread from human to human, so why not temper the advice? Why not say "The Chinese government has not confirmed human to human transmission but this has yet to be verified by the WHO"? They could have focused on the uncertainty more than they did.

This might sound like semantics, and it is to an extent, but when WHO officials thought that it wasn't true, the WHO shouldn't have just repeated the information that they knew was propaganda from the Chinese government. They should have been more reserved and not just repeated the official Chinese line, and in doing that, they weren't being independent. You see this same thing happening now, with vague, weak criticism of Uyghur treatment, it's not enough.

This isn't a big issue to me though and its not something I'd have raised, but does it show that the WHO weren't truly apolitical or independent? I think so. That doesn't mean that governments around the world still didn't fuck up though, I just don't think the WHO should be portrayed as innocent in all of this.
 
Reactions: Bachafach^^^

SwollenGoat

Deicide
May 17, 2013
62,956
22,418
The House that Peterbilt
Well, the WHO officials knew that it could be spread from human to human, so why not temper the advice? Why not say "The Chinese government has not confirmed human to human transmission but this has yet to be verified by the WHO"? They could have focused on the uncertainty more than they did.

This might sound like semantics, and it is to an extent, but when WHO officials thought that it wasn't true, the WHO shouldn't have just repeated the information that they knew was propaganda from the Chinese government. They should have been more reserved and not just repeated the official Chinese line, and in doing that, they weren't being independent. You see this same thing happening now, with vague, weak criticism of Uyghur treatment, it's not enough.

This isn't a big issue to me though and its not something I'd have raised, but does it show that the WHO weren't truly apolitical or independent? I think so. That doesn't mean that governments around the world still didn't fuck up though, I just don't think the WHO should be portrayed as innocent in all of this.
Its worse than semantics Jack

its you ignoring the facts,even after theyve been presented to you



and you are full of shit

see the video for more




YOUR OWN FUCKING ARTICLES EXPLAIN WHY YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT

Like the SHIT where you say they said there was 'no proof of human to human transmission'

BULLSHIT

a fake narrative used by shitbag rightists who want to shift the blame to ANYBODY but their own failures

what was ACTUALLY said,AT THE TIME,was 'no CLEAR evidence'

and it was true at the fucking time

the FULL statement was 'no clear evidence of human to human transmission has been found BUT WE CAN NOT EXCLUDE THE POSSIBILITY OF HUMAN TO HUMAN TRANSMISSION


this was JAN 14




on Jan 9 they released a statement saying 'ALL SPECIMENS SHOULD BE REGARDED AS INFECTIOUS'

and,further,'THOUGH THE MODE OF THE CAUSATIVE AGENT IS NOT ESTABLISHED HCW SHOULD ASSUME THE POTENTIAL FOR RESPIRATORY SPREAD



do shut up jack

its like you make an effort to be wrong,all the fucking time
so,yeah,stop already
 
Reactions: steviebruno

Jack

P4P Star
Jul 29, 2012
9,344
3,854
Its worse than semantics Jack

its you ignoring the facts,even after theyve been presented to you

so,yeah,stop already
I've just addressed that :lol: I'm well aware of what the WHO did or didn't say. As I said, it's an issue of semantics and I think they should have been clearer on their part rather than parroting thd Chinese government lies, which their own officials were well aware of at the time.

I'm not sure why you think repeating what I've acknowledged several times proves your point.
 
Aug 6, 2020
204
160
I've just addressed that :lol: I'm well aware of what the WHO did or didn't say. As I said, it's an issue of semantics and I think they should have been clearer on their part rather than parroting thd Chinese government lies, which their own officials were well aware of at the time.

I'm not sure why you think repeating what I've acknowledged several times proves your point.
30 million cases and 1 million deaths (only progressive numbers) isn't about semantics, isn't about opinion, isn't about whether you side with the left or right. It is about real people getting very sick and dying. Millions of them, and no amount of hot air, ignorance, deflection or denial brings a single one of them back or spares the next one.

When you go quiet on this we will know someone close to you has become affected and all of a sudden this whole thing got real to you.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Wordup

Jack

P4P Star
Jul 29, 2012
9,344
3,854
30 million cases and 1 million deaths (only progressive numbers) isn't about semantics, isn't about opinion, isn't about whether you side with the left or right. It is about real people getting very sick and dying. Millions of them, and no amount of hot air, ignorance, deflection or denial brings a single one of them back or spares the next one.

When you go quiet on this we will know someone close to you has become affected and all of a sudden this whole thing got real to you.
It's not Covid which is semantics, it's the discussion about the WHO conduct.

As for the severity of the virus, it's not something I'm understating. Far from it, I'm not one of these people who go to pubs or anything like that, I've not done any of those things for a long time now, I always wear a mask and I've avoided seeing some people. There is, however, a difference between accepting that something is real and accepting every nonsense hyperbolic argument about the virus. There's a lot of hysteria and fearmongering which shouldn't be accepted.

The threat is real but it's been overstated. It's killed a lot of people and will kill more, but the fact is, since June in the UK, flu has been killing more people than the coronavirus - so whilst the threat is real, there's a lot of hysteria that has lost sight of the threat it actually poses. By the time the crisis is over, we'll likely have an IFR of around 0.15-0.2%, a very low number considering the extreme reaction to it.
 

SwollenGoat

Deicide
May 17, 2013
62,956
22,418
The House that Peterbilt
I've just addressed that :lol: I'm well aware of what the WHO did or didn't say. As I said, it's an issue of semantics and I think they should have been clearer on their part rather than parroting thd Chinese government lies, which their own officials were well aware of at the time.

I'm not sure why you think repeating what I've acknowledged several times proves your point.
no jack

you are trying to move yer goalposts now

EARLIER you accused the WHO of saying 'there is no proof of human to human transmission'

thats not what they said and I corrected you with the actual quotes

NOW you are saying "they should have been more clear'

they were as exactly clear as they could be,at the time,given the information they had and ONLY people interested in trying to shift the blame to them are using the same debunked shit you've been using

YOU WERE WRONG and you didnt acknowledge it and now yer trying to pivot to something you see as more defensible and its ALL part of the same silly bullshit fountain you spray all over this thread and its fucking lame
 
Aug 6, 2020
204
160
It's not Covid which is semantics, it's the discussion about the WHO conduct.

As for the severity of the virus, it's not something I'm understating. Far from it, I'm not one of these people who go to pubs or anything like that, I've not done any of those things for a long time now, I always wear a mask and I've avoided seeing some people. There is, however, a difference between accepting that something is real and accepting every nonsense hyperbolic argument about the virus. There's a lot of hysteria and fearmongering which shouldn't be accepted.

The threat is real but it's been overstated. It's killed a lot of people and will kill more, but the fact is, since June in the UK, flu has been killing more people than the coronavirus - so whilst the threat is real, there's a lot of hysteria that has lost sight of the threat it actually poses. By the time the crisis is over, we'll likely have an IFR of around 0.15-0.2%, a very low number considering the extreme reaction to it.
Though you find it convenient to ignore, there are nonsensical arguments coming from both directions about the COVID virus and sadly, way too many of these are based on smoke and mirrors.

30 million cases and 1 million deaths are facts. Real people getting sick. Real people dying. No smoke. No mirrors. Not opinions. No false bravado. Just facts.

As for trying to divert the discussion to flu deaths. If flu deaths are high the message is surely that more people should be having flu shots. You don't get that?
 

Jack

P4P Star
Jul 29, 2012
9,344
3,854
Though you find it convenient to ignore, there are nonsensical arguments coming from both directions about the COVID virus and sadly, way too many of these are based on smoke and mirrors.

30 million cases and 1 million deaths are facts. No smoke. No mirrors. Not opinions. No false bravado. Just facts.

As for trying to divert the discussion to flu deaths. If flu deaths are high the message is surely that more people should be having flu shots. You don't get that?
Oh, absolutely. There are many idiots who have an issue with things like masks or social distancing that I just don't get. The worst things that are created by masks and social distancing is just an inconvenience, it's obviously not something we'd do in regular times and it's not fun to socially distance but my answer to that is...so what? Does that inconvenience outweigh the fact that whilst that person may be ok, the next person they breathe into has a vulnerable person in their bubble who they may be about to indirectly infect with the virus? To me, it's just the height of selfishness, that just because individuals find something inconvenient for themselves, they don't want to protect others. We should all want to protect as many lives as possible; I may not know the next person who I walk past in the street, but I don't want anyone to die from this, which is why I wear a mask. It's not a sacrifice at all, it's just your duty as a civilian and anyone who neglects that is selfish.

Flu deaths aren't high though, that's the thing, that reflects how low Covid deaths are. We're not even in the season for getting flu jabs yet, that won't be until October 1st (I think) until December and it's to prevent the flu season until March having a significant effect. The fact more people are dying from flu now than Covid is a good thing, potentially really good actually. If this trend continues for another three or four weeks and flu deaths remain higher than Covid deaths, as has been the case since June, then that's brilliant news for everyone.
 
Dec 13, 2013
2,659
588
Oh, absolutely. There are many idiots who have an issue with things like masks or social distancing that I just don't get. The worst things that are created by masks and social distancing is just an inconvenience, it's obviously not something we'd do in regular times and it's not fun to socially distance but my answer to that is...so what? Does that inconvenience outweigh the fact that whilst that person may be ok, the next person they breathe into has a vulnerable person in their bubble who they may be about to indirectly infect with the virus? To me, it's just the height of selfishness, that just because individuals find something inconvenient for themselves, they don't want to protect others. We should all want to protect as many lives as possible; I may not know the next person who I walk past in the street, but I don't want anyone to die from this, which is why I wear a mask. It's not a sacrifice at all, it's just your duty as a civilian and anyone who neglects that is selfish.

Flu deaths aren't high though, that's the thing, that reflects how low Covid deaths are. We're not even in the season for getting flu jabs yet, that won't be until October 1st (I think) until December and it's to prevent the flu season until March having a significant effect. The fact more people are dying from flu now than Covid is a good thing, potentially really good actually. If this trend continues for another three or four weeks and flu deaths remain higher than Covid deaths, as has been the case since June, then that's brilliant news for everyone.
Can you just get mad at someone and call them cunts or something
 
Reactions: Redzer
Aug 6, 2020
204
160
Oh, absolutely. There are many idiots who have an issue with things like masks or social distancing that I just don't get. The worst things that are created by masks and social distancing is just an inconvenience, it's obviously not something we'd do in regular times and it's not fun to socially distance but my answer to that is...so what? Does that inconvenience outweigh the fact that whilst that person may be ok, the next person they breathe into has a vulnerable person in their bubble who they may be about to indirectly infect with the virus? To me, it's just the height of selfishness, that just because individuals find something inconvenient for themselves, they don't want to protect others. We should all want to protect as many lives as possible; I may not know the next person who I walk past in the street, but I don't want anyone to die from this, which is why I wear a mask. It's not a sacrifice at all, it's just your duty as a civilian and anyone who neglects that is selfish.

Flu deaths aren't high though, that's the thing, that reflects how low Covid deaths are. We're not even in the season for getting flu jabs yet, that won't be until October 1st (I think) until December and it's to prevent the flu season until March having a significant effect. The fact more people are dying from flu now than Covid is a good thing, potentially really good actually. If this trend continues for another three or four weeks and flu deaths remain higher than Covid deaths, as has been the case since June, then that's brilliant news for everyone.
The bottom line is people are now devaluing the worth of human life.

If there is a mine collapse for example, it is a case of all hands on deck and to hell with the cost involved in saving those trapped below the earth.

Yet a few first world inconveniences are too high a price to pay for hundreds of thousands of lives.