News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
I'm of the opinion that COVID is no longer news worthy beyond the minority it impacts. No different to the flu or various other low risk (to the vast majority) common community transmitted illnesses. It just is now. We don't get news articles written and publicised at this level for a new flu variant or vaccine, so I don't see the point for COVID.
Edit: some good discussion in the responses to this. But also some utterly dog shit ad hominem and trying to put words in my mouth. If only they bothered to actually read what I wrote.
The covids have unexpected health consequences that are way beyond the scope of the flu, including heart conditions, and chronic respiratory problems.
Yeah, long COVID seems to hit people randomly, and it seems even vaccination status doesn't make a huge difference.
And before you know it you've spent a year in bedcare.
It seems that way if you don't know anything, yes.
It's not totally random. I've noticed it affects self-centered and narcissistic people more frequently, almost like it's one more justification to be a perpetual victim.
Didn't think I'd see the "disabled people are just looking for attention" card being played on Lemmy but here we are.
I think they're saying that unvaccinated people are more likely to get more severe cases of covid and therefore are more likely to get long covid.
I read it as anti-vaxxers, COVID conspiracy idiots, and maybe conservatives in general, not disabled people.
Why would anti-vaxxers or COVID conspiracists be talking about having Long COVID? They're more likely to represent it as a minor cold, not talking publicly about being disabled by illness.
Because once it actually significantly affects them they're more likely to suddenly care about it.
You know what's wild? My alzheimer's patients almost always have the most healthy bodies and rarely complain about pain. They're not overweight. They don't get CHF. They pass through COVID and other illnesses with mild symptoms.
Your simplified strawman contains a seed of truth.
Ah yes. Your tiny sample size.
From a disabled person. Fuck off. COVID sucked and continues to affect me.
You don't know my sample size. I promise it's much bigger than your twitter samples.
Source- Trust me bro
Oh, that's not the only thing they are confused about 🙄
I responded to your comment.
Twitter. The heck makes you think I use Twitter. 😹 Try again. Asshole.
tiny sample size. The heck makes you think I have a tiny sample size. 😹 Try again. Asshole.
This conversation is incredibly stupid and tedious. I will continue to reflect the quality of the posts you send me.
I feel sorry for your patients who have you as their caregiver.
They love me because it's my job to help them reach acceptance.
Oh sweetheart. Unless you account for a heck of a lot of people. Hundreds to thousands isn't a very large sample size when you take into account the amount of people with disabilities there is in the world. And you also have to account for figures of people with undiagnosed disabilities too.
So yes. Your sample size is akin to your IQ.
Low.
My sample size is larger than most studies you could cite.
You keep saying you have a large sample size but you won't say how large. Why should anyone believe you?
I don't care if you believe me.
Then why are you bothering?
If you look back, the people addressing me have been arguing about why I shouldn't believe my sources, and they're using nothing but degrading insults and authoritarian arguments to try to sway me. My responses have all been appropriate. Nobody has asked for clarification or explanation. They just read my claims and reacted with their own narcissistic responses. I don't care if you all remain ignorant of the truth.
"I have a huge sample size but I'm not even going to say how large" is not an appropriate response.
Allow me to rephrase for people like you. "I am confident in my research and experience, and I have no desire to explain years of work to the willfully ignorant."
All kinds of people are confident despite being very wrong. Confidence is not a substitute for evidence. Neither is insulting people.
Yeah, that applies to every response in this thread.
Does it? You insulted me by calling me willfully ignorant. I didn't insult you or make it personal at all, so that sounds like it applies to your responses, not mine. And how is insulting me appropriate when you claim all of your responses are appropriate when I did not do you the same discourtesy?
You are willfully ignorant. You only have the very vaguest idea of the dynamic of the mind body interaction I briefly described, and now you're devoting all of your will to painting me as an antagonist simply because I responded to hostility and ignorance with the same instead of patiently spoon feeding you information that you'll promptly disregard or manipulate to reinforce your existing beliefs of who and what you think you've encountered.
See, you think I owe it to other people to drag them kicking and screaming to what I know is the truth, and I know that's pointless. All I can do is communicate with people on the level they project onto me. If you wanted to ask questions and have a constructive conversation, you'd have done that from the beginning.
What are you even talking about now? I didn't say anything about the mind body interaction. I didn't bring it up or discuss it. How is that me being willfully ignorant?
I meant if you want to talk about ignorance, you seem to be totally ignorant of what I've said to you so far since you think it involves something I never even mentioned.
You didn't say anything about it, correct. I did in the very first post. I know what you've said so far, and you don't seem to realize that it's irrelevant because we're having two different conversations. You've been a pedantic and condescending asshole since your arrival, and I've been responding. You THINK you're correcting me, but you've yet to consider what you're correcting because you're arguing more with your assumptions than you are with me.
Okay, you've used up your two insult limit. Time to block you. I will not tolerate Reddit behavior on Lemmy. Goodbye.
"I only hear about things from people who talk about things"
It's true that the narcissists love to post about their long COVID too. It's like being a celebrity.
This seems to be mostly debunked, at least regarding to heart conditions:
https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/11/8/2219
The original strain, yes. The current COVID is extremely weak and most humans have adapted to it. It's become a minor cold to the vast majority of the human population.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41431-022-01141-7
Did you post the wrong link?
You can't just say some bullshit then post a link and think it backs up what you've said. That paper explores the genetic predisposition to COVID susceptibility and not:
Is there like one sentence in that paper you've latched onto that you think justifies your bad take?
I don't think you read enough of the report. It goes into showing those genetic markers of that patents of covid. That means that those groups are who should be far more careful than groups without those genetics.
And you originally posted:
You're jumping to your own incorrect conclusions as that is NOT what the posted article says.
You are correct in regards to 6% of the human population. I'm talking about the 94%.
Did you read the article you posted? I read the overview and intro and really didn't seem to support your statement.
They say the same thing for every variant, but of the 300 deaths a day 90% are 65 and older. It's on par with the flu now.