If you want to stop the covid virus, then use healthy immune people. — Roger Gregoire
How do you suppose we get immune people? That's the whole point of the vaccination drive. — Echarmion
A healthy immune system will not stop the virus from reproducing and spreading. — Echarmion
Absolutely False. — Roger Gregoire
I think I am going to trust actual scientists over your opinion on this. — Echarmion
C1 does not follow from P1, P2, and P3.Echarmion and InPitzotl do you agree or disagree with this overly simplistic logic? — Roger Gregoire
C1 wouldn't follow if you granted all three premises. It's worse than unsound... it's invalid.Your P2 and P3 are false, thereby making your conclusion unsound (logically flawed). — Roger Gregoire
Science tells us healthy immune systems destroy infected cells (via white blood cells; leukocytes) and prevent virus replications (via interferon proteins). — Roger Gregoire
Ech, I think we agree here. It is those with weak and compromised immune systems that we need to worry about. Those with healthy immune systems will be just fine.Viruses which are unable to reproduce in the face of a healthy immune system will die out. It's the successful viruses we need to worry about. — Echarmion
Roger, you're literally saying that if we don't increase the virus growth, then the virus growth will increase out of control. That goes against all logic, common sense, and science.If we don't let our healthy population engage in mask-less social activities very soon (within the next month or two), we will reach the point-of-no-return. This is the point where the virus growth exceeds man's ability to stop this growth. — Roger Gregoire
But you're saying, we need to prevent burning the forest down, so let's make the fire spread more.Keeping firefighters away from a fire does not stop the fire, it only allows the fire to grow. — Roger Gregoire
What? No! If you aren't infected, you don't die from infection.Keeping white blood cells away from an infection does stop the infection, ...it only insures certain death to the body. — Roger Gregoire
If we don't let our healthy population engage in mask-less social activities very soon (within the next month or two), we will reach the point-of-no-return. This is the point where the virus growth exceeds man's ability to stop this growth. — Roger Gregoire
Roger, you're literally saying that if we don't increase the virus growth, then the virus growth will increase out of control. That goes against all logic, common sense, and science. — InPitzotl
Keeping firefighters away from a fire does not stop the fire, it only allows the fire to grow. — Roger Gregoire
But you're saying, we need to prevent burning the forest down, so let's make the fire spread more. — InPitzotl
Keeping white blood cells away from an infection does stop the infection, ...it only insures certain death to the body. — Roger Gregoire
What? No! If you aren't infected, you don't die from infection. — InPitzotl
Infections are the problem. More infections means more deaths. — InPitzotl
It's a false analogy. My white blood cells will fight infections that I have, if they recognize the infection. But my white blood cells are not going to fight your infection; they aren't launched into the air to seek and destroy viruses, and they don't hop into your blood stream. So from the inter-body analog to the inter-personal analog, immune people are not analogous to white blood cells.This is an analogy. In other words, no reputable doctor would ever recommend you fight an infection by keeping your white blood cells away from a bodily infection. — Roger Gregoire
Ignoring your mixed appeal to authority fallacy and true scottsman fallacy, those two things aren't analogous.In other words, no reputable doctor would ever recommend you fight an infection by keeping your white blood cells away from a bodily infection. And likewise, no reputable scientist would recommend we fight an infection to a segment of this planet, by keeping the healthy segment away from the infection. — Roger Gregoire
I've already discussed that before. The infections stop themselves. That fire will burn the tree, after which it's a burnt tree and the fire goes out. The main problem in a forest fire is that trees that are in the process of burning have flames on them, and those flames can jump to nearby trees. Socially distancing is analogous to building distance between the trees, such that the fire on trees that are currently burning doesn't jump to other trees. That analogy breaks down because trees are fixed in place, but we can move (nevertheless building distance between a thing to protect and the trees that are on fire is a bona fide firefighting technique).Correct! ...and how do you stop an infection??? — Roger Gregoire
But that's irrelevant... why do you think the white blood cells in your blood stream would fight viruses on other people?do you keep your "healthy" cells; white blood cells away from it? — Roger Gregoire
I think that there are a lot of hidden aspects of life not being addressed under the guise of the importance of social distancing. One major aspect is that the whole notion of some people being more vulnerable to the virus is being used to make everyone feel guilty about being allowed to do absolutely anything at all. — Jack Cummins
There are concerns that the vaccine is not as effective as previously thought. I believe that it is highly unlikely that the pandemic will end for the next couple of years, at least. — Jack Cummins
There are many thousands of worldwide top scientists and medical experts (e.g. such as those that have signed the Great Barrington Declaration) that see the same logical error and catastrophic results (that I illustrate in this post), but yet, they are being labeled as "misinformed quacks" and effectively "silenced" (cancelled) by the mainstream media and those others that cannot see the logical implications of our current policies. — Roger Gregoire
I don't think so. If I were missing the point, that can be fixed by explaining your point. But I think I understand your point, and just think you're wrong.InPitzotl, you are missing the point. — Roger Gregoire
That doesn't fit.If you view this planet as a singular body
Your question is fundamentally flawed; this time because you're carrying your horrible strategy into the non-analogous immune system.What would you do if an infection was invading your (personal) body? -- would you keep the healthy white blood cells away from the infection? — Roger Gregoire
The planet is not infected; people are. Infected people crank out viruses, because that's how viruses reproduce. And we don't kill sick people like immune systems kill sick cells; that's directly against your stated goal.If not, then why keep the healthy cells (healthy people) away from the planetary infection? — Roger Gregoire
How so? This violates even your own premises. Did you not stipulate that healthy people who become infected become immune? What does any healthy person have to fear, immune or no, from the virus? If they're not immune and get exposed, they'll just get immune, per your premise. If they are, they just are immune. Where is this certain death coming from?Keeping healthy cells (healthy people) away from the infection = certain death, ...in either respect. — Roger Gregoire
I am pretty certain we're dealing with someone with some kind of mental illness. — Echarmion
But more interestingly, why was it called Parler rather than Parlour? — Banno
...is this correct? — Roger Gregoire
healthy people (those with good immune systems) in general, don't die from covid, — Roger Gregoire
Empirical data tells us otherwise. — Roger Gregoire
the "fear mongering" media, — Roger Gregoire
The articles that you link only further increase the "fear mongering" — Roger Gregoire
In seems that you are promoting that we do nothing to stop this virus. — Roger Gregoire
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.