zlacker

[return to "Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah"]
1. csours+kk[view] [source] 2025-09-10 20:48:54
>>david9+(OP)
History books can tell you facts that happened, but they can never truly tell you how it feels.

I feel we're riding a knife's edge and there's a hurricane brewing in the gulf of absurdity.

====

Incidentally, I feel like this is why it is so hard to actually learn from history. You can read about the 1918 'Spanish' Flu, but you think "we're smarter now". etc.

◧◩
2. ttoino+Rq[view] [source] 2025-09-10 21:16:22
>>csours+kk

  You can read about the 1918 'Spanish' Flu, but you think "we're smarter now". etc.
Interesting how this quote can be interpreted in fully opposite ways depending on what "side" you were on during covid
◧◩◪
3. ndsipa+uU[view] [source] 2025-09-10 23:40:51
>>ttoino+Rq
> depending on what "side" you were on during covid

It's bizarre that there should be "sides" for how to deal with a public health issue. I can understand differing approaches, but it's the extreme polarisation that flabbergasts me.

◧◩◪◨
4. firest+0V[view] [source] 2025-09-10 23:44:44
>>ndsipa+uU
[flagged]
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. comput+s01[view] [source] 2025-09-11 00:24:37
>>firest+0V
Hmm, the number found online is that Covid killed 1.2 million in the US, so guessing the shutdown and vaccines probably saved millions. But your take is different. Guessing you disagree with the the 1.2m deaths figure? (not trying to be pushy, just curious on your take)
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. engint+7R1[view] [source] 2025-09-11 08:52:17
>>comput+s01
Some would argue that the deaths by covid are the same as every year deaths by other pulmonary infectious diseases. I've read a ton of books and analysis done by statisticians. So I doubt we should have went crazy like we did.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. comput+l33[view] [source] 2025-09-11 17:18:26
>>engint+7R1
Interesting. Just looked into it and it seems like there are some researchers who estimate the lockdowns saved a lot of lives, but the economic toll and subsequent deaths from this toll may not have been worth it (as you mentioned). But they also said that now, "we have more tools to battle the virus. Vaccines and therapeutics are available, as are other mitigation measures." Implying we wouldn't have to do lockdowns in future pandemics.

https://record.umich.edu/articles/lockdowns-saved-lives-but-...

So yeah, I do see your point in the lockdowns were probably unnecessary, but as others have mentioned, pandemics were new to the US at the time, and we didn't have the knowledge and procedures on how to best deal with it. Yeah, we did probably go overboard, but what happened is understandable given how deadly Covid was.

We know now that social distancing and masks (for those that are willing) would probably have been enough, as other countries used to pandemics already know, like South Korea.

[go to top]