@matthewshaw1111 Infectious diseases can’t just be evaluated in terms of acute death. There are many long-term health impacts that need to be factored into decision making around infection prevention.
@KerenLL@LindsaySkipper It does sound like woke word salad. Not exactly a fan of the term. But perhaps still need a way to differentiate text book/professional knowledge from personal anecdote. Neither side has an absolute monopoly on the truth.
@Biff234523 I think you underestimate how many scientists are currently just strategists serving an agenda. Typically to support a pre-determined outcome—i.e. that pesticide is safe, that virus totally didn’t come from GOF research, sugary drinks are an OK part of a balanced diet.
@KerenLL@LindsaySkipper I’m guessing it’s to differentiate it from educational / work experience—which, while useful, is generally treated as the only relevant experience in medical circles.
@BarryHunt008 Bring a CO2 monitor. I bet you’ll find they have poorly ventilated building spaces promoting spread of infectious disease and workers going off on sick time.
@boriquagato Parental age at conception I suspect is a big factor that has seen a marked uptick in western society in recent decades. Similarly, dietary shifts away from nutritious food. Upticks since 2020 are mostly COVID-related immune system suppression.
@LazarusLong13 ..also often used as a band-aid solution for crappy social situations (poverty, isolation) and lousy working conditions (B&H, stress). But I think you see that.
@LazarusLong13 Psychology plays a very tricky role in the medical system. It has often served as a dumping ground for patients with organic medical conditions that the diagnostic sciences have yet to catch up with. Pretty rage inducing to be told a real illness is “all in your head”.
@AlanLevinovitz You definitely needed to be more inquisitive. We’re learning more every day about the wide range of delayed sequelae from many viral infections—COVID has made it impossible to continue to ignore. The science / diagnostics is still catching up, but these are real conditions.
@SMpwrgr@1goodtern Exactly. Excess death is only useful to measure a change or perturbation from normal. It says nothing about whether that “normal” is good or bad. And once bad becomes normal, that’s the new baseline
@Globalbiosec@morgfair There’s no real evidence. It’s a dogmatic belief of many IPAC and safety practitioners that people take greater risks if they feel more protected. But people don’t jump in front of forklifts because they’re wearing a high vis vest. People are all prone to complacency though.
@tryna_do_rite I think PHAC stepped up once the bureaucratic administrator in charge was turfed—not perfect, but pretty good guidance. But PHAC is strictly an advisory body. The provicial health authorities actually had to ACT to control spread. And thats where the politics comes in.
@michael_hoerger Remember—excess mortality measures “changes” from “normal”. When cowvid hit, total mortality increased from 5% to 10%. For 5 years you’ve been losing 10% of your cows—that is now the normal. So excess mortality says that if you lose 10% of your cows now, everything is normal.