Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

EB123456789101112 t1_j3lmpbi wrote

Reply to comment by jayv9779 in A randomized double-blind controlled trial found post-exposure prophylaxis with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) was not advantageous for the prevention of COVID-19 in asymptomatic individuals with high risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection. The incidence of COVID-19 was similar in both the HCQ group and control. by glawgii

Nothing like that good ol spirit of humility to start the day, amiright?

1

jayv9779 t1_j3ln1ed wrote

Feel free to point out where and I will be glad to clarify. Your attempt to help is not currently effective as we do not have any examples.

1

EB123456789101112 t1_j3lnzgh wrote

I was just attempting to have fun w you. I don’t have a dog in the fight. I saw both sides to the argument.

He was essentially arguing something similar to a modern Malthusian argument (the planet can only support so many people before famine, nature, whatever begins to cull them unavoidably). And you countered w but modem meds, tech advances, and natural reproduction patterns show that’s maybe not the case.

Am I understanding both right?

I can see points to both arguments and don’t think either is entirely right or entirely wrong. We just can’t tell yet. The problem is the developing nations are countering the trends of the developed ones. That’s where the real crux lies. Does the overpopulation of India outnumber the under population of Japan, South Korea and Europe? Same with vaxxes, starvation, etc. it’s just too early to tell. But I’d like to be hopeful.

2

jayv9779 t1_j3lohfm wrote

They were suggesting that humans would stop evolving because of a lack of pressures. That humans were better off before modern tech. There is a myth out there that the old world was better but it ignores massive health advances. It is the old everything modern is evil. I could be strawmaning a bit but I think I am close.

2