Comment by wegs | Hacker News Reader

Comment by wegs | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Welps, let's look over the evidence. You say:

"Because that disagrees not only with the common sense of seeing what is happening in front of us, but also with all the other evidence I've seen"

This statement suggests you haven't looked at (m)any scientific articles. I've read dozens of scientific articles about long COVID. If you posted a reasonable rebuttal to some of these, it'd be one thing. But simply stating you've never seen any evidence? That's a statement about your own level of knowledge, not about COVID19.

Aside from that, I do look at "that idiot's Twitter feed" from time to time. Your comments mirror the things he posts downplaying COVID19. Perhaps you look at secondary sources based on his Twitter feed? Or the same sources he does? I'm not quite sure.

As an aside, I'd advise everyone to read "that idiot's Twitter feed," much as I advise everyone to read international news source, left-wing news sources, and right-wing ones. You don't need to agree with someone to read what they write.

I find Twitter borderline unusable, and looking just now I can't find an RSS or similar way to receive his posts, so there's too much pain in following his Twitter feed for me. Alternative solutions would be welcomed.

The chronology of this subthread goes:

1) You claimed that COVID-19 is 10x more likely to kill an under-40-year-old than the flu. To me, having read many scientific papers (they are my primary source of information about the current pandemic), and also observing the world around me in several countries both in Asia and Europe (admittedly not the US), with a variety of approaches to the pandemic, including regular conversations with frontline medical staff due to my work, this appears to be a fantastical claim.

2) You provided an image of a graph as evidence, with only vague indication of the source data, making it virtually impossible to verify.

3) I asked for a more compelling source to back up what I perceive to be a fantastical claim.

4) You responded by pivoting to US politics (which I know very little about and don't consider particularly relevant to the topic at hand) and ignored my request for more evidence.

Edit: I have only just noticed that the poster of the graph and the you are not one and the same person. I apologise for making that assumption. While it was thus not a "pivot", I still think the US politics angle is ad hominem.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com