Rants and WTF are you talking about and Coronavirus!

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2510823]Reading all of his posts or not, we at least know that you read the one being contested. Silly goose.

The thing about the internet, is that there's often a "paper" trail.[/QUOTE]This is your problem, I wrote "pictures" and referred to a specific post, yet you bring fictional videos and a link to some weirdos blog from a different post totally unrelated to what I wrote. Further more the pictures in the blog showed a very normal behavior all across Europe. Are you incredibly dishonest or just stupid? You don't realize the difference between a picture and video based on fiction? It wasn't a documentary if that's what you thought. Your problem is that you're mentally challenged.

I strongly advice you to get a life and a functioning brain instead of stalking me and write untruthful comments.

[QUOTE=Turgid;2510719]Good point. She was definitely within kissing range but I don't think she was flirting with me as she was all business. It was my one and only visit to Scandinavia and I found the girls in Sweden and Denmark very friendly. I went to a public beach in Malmo and most of the women were topless, do they still go topless there? I remember in the afternoon the girls would go to the beach straight from work and change into their bikini bottoms right there on the beach, full nudity for a few seconds. I really liked the Scandinavian girls.[/QUOTE]Not sure Swedish and Danish girls are anymore so pretty than they were in 80's because more mix now rather than blond blue eyes for our past child fantasies. But I confirm few met on holidays and same for German, NL, Swiss or UK girls, were very friendly, UK girls being very welcoming for French guys but not the prettiest faces. Russians are the best looks for me, from blond Siberian with round face and small upturned nose, with fire under ice, to Oural or Tatar Latin beauties with straight nose, a bit like Romanians.

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2510828]Same experience here, although I don't necessarily think that their model is wrong, provided that you define the Swedish model as not instituting mandates and relying on the responsible actions of a reasonable populace. How the pandemic number plays out will determine that.

That's the funny think about being a person of reason, you can find new data and adjust your conclusions. One might even call it the process of science. Go figure.[/QUOTE]I may have implied that Swedish model was wrong in my last post. I am still undecided. Evaluating the model I argue would require a more comprehensive cost-benefit analysis that takes into consideration economic damage, mental health outcomes, long-term health outcomes for CV19 survivors, in addition to deaths. I would argue that we won't know that until maybe a few years after this pandemic is behind us. But my pet peeve is the argument "no lockdown results in less deaths" which based on the current data we have now is simply not true, unless people deliberately use apples-to-oranges comparisons to support this argument.

Looking at the 50 USA states plus territories, if we want to evaluate their performance, I believe we should group them accordingly based on population density and geography. For instance, I would group Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, and South Dakota together. Per square mile these four states have between six and eleven people. North Dakota has had the worst health outcome so far among the four. It has double the deaths per capita of Montana and almost triple the deaths per capita as Wyoming. These four states should not be compared to NJ which has 120 times more people per square mile of ND. Geography also plays a role. We can clearly see the deaths per capita being low in the geographically isolated states like Hawaii, Alaska and PR. Once flights became limited, you had very little inter-state and international travel.

[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_and_territories_of_the_United_States_by_population_density[/URL]

[URL]https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109011/coronavirus-covid19-death-rates-us-by-state/[/URL]

[QUOTE=ShooBree;2510165]All the pictures you've posted [b]links[/b] to are from Finland.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=ShooBree;2510941]This is your problem, I wrote "pictures" and referred to a specific post, yet you bring fictional videos[/QUOTE]Wrong again. Lookie here at the word "link".

It's sad that I'm better at your dumb game than you are. How embarrassing.

[QUOTE=ShooBree;2510941]It wasn't a documentary if that's what you thought. Your problem is that you're mentally challenged.[/QUOTE]Trailer: [URL]https://youtu.be/hLgzDKL9T4s[/URL].

Full Documentary English subtitles: [URL]https://youtu.be/0UfkSthddCE[/URL].

Let's add frequency of travel and timing of the spread to this argument. These rural states that lack high volumes of international travel were also spared the initial surge that was seen in NYC and Jersey in March. The virus spread through these dense populations without much of a public health response back in February and March. End result, deaths up to 1000 people per day. Fast forward to the recent surge and their death tolls and hospitalization rates remain much lower than all of these rural American states. In fact, NYC is doing better than most European countries.

[QUOTE=McAdonis;2510988]I may have implied that Swedish model was wrong in my last post. I am still undecided. Evaluating the model I argue would require a more comprehensive cost-benefit analysis that takes into consideration economic damage, mental health outcomes, long-term health outcomes for CV19 survivors, in addition to deaths. I would argue that we won't know that until maybe a few years after this pandemic is behind us. But my pet peeve is the argument "no lockdown results in less deaths" which based on the current data we have now is simply not true, unless people deliberately use apples-to-oranges comparisons to support this argument.

Looking at the 50 USA states plus territories, if we want to evaluate their performance, I believe we should group them accordingly based on population density and geography. For instance, I would group Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, and South Dakota together. Per square mile these four states have between six and eleven people. North Dakota has had the worst health outcome so far among the four. It has double the deaths per capita of Montana and almost triple the deaths per capita as Wyoming. These four states should not be compared to NJ which has 120 times more people per square mile of ND. Geography also plays a role. We can clearly see the deaths per capita being low in the geographically isolated states like Hawaii, Alaska and PR. Once flights became limited, you had very little inter-state and international travel.

[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_and_territories_of_the_United_States_by_population_density[/URL]

[URL]https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109011/coronavirus-covid19-death-rates-us-by-state/[/URL][/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2510841]Otherwise, weak argument hanging on by a thread for sure. The funny thing about drinking and drug habits is that labs values and diagnostics don't lie even when the patient does. Liver function and renal function, the ER works that up as soon as the patient enters the hospital. During covid times, nearly all undiagnosed comorbidities are found within the first 48 hours.[/QUOTE]Looks like stupids are now growing in the trees. They are now believing that when people are admitted to a hospital with Covid and die there, the hospital is telling the news "Hey news mama, 25 Covid patients died here today, out of them 10 were heavy drinkers and drug users, we found in their ER works lab diagnostics. We also sent this information with details to CDC". The same stupids also think that it didn't help Trump in getting well sooner by not drinking alcohol and not using drugs. Apparently to them, heavy drinking and using drugs do not make lungs, hearts and overall health weaker. How gullible can these stupid sheeple be? LOL.

North Dakota with only bears, was down under covid not long ago, not only NYC, but San Francisco and California also not long ago. Thanksgiving will be a real killer. Strong US is real number 1, when they don't even know among more than 10 millions illegals and around 50 millions with no insurance, so they can't know about 60 millions of their people, France population. Wish Biden / Harris will make them improve for social and image in front of the world.

[QUOTE=Gino02;2511030]Looks like stupids are now growing in the trees. They are now believing that when people are admitted to a hospital with Covid and die there, the hospital is telling the news "Hey news mama, 25 Covid patients died here today, out of them 10 were heavy drinkers and drug users, we found in their ER works lab diagnostics. We also sent this information with details to CDC". The same stupids also think that it didn't help Trump in getting well sooner by not drinking alcohol and not using drugs. Apparently to them, heavy drinking and using drugs do not make lungs, hearts and overall health weaker. How gullible can these stupid sheeple be? LOL.[/QUOTE]And you know this how?

Fuck man, your shoobree is showing.

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2510994]Wrong again. Lookie here at the word "link".

It's sad that I'm better at your dumb game than you are. How embarrassing.[/QUOTE]Your problem is that you don't know what you're talking about. You're without better than me at being dishonest and stupid. I honestly don't even know why I respond to your irrelevant and pointless lies.

Levity, ribbing and nonsense aside, it is amusing to imagine a couple of mongers (aka sex tourists) casting judgment, especially for Mursenary who should know better, throwing stones in glass houses. I am not going to transgress accepted social mores or by being shallow, cowardly, petty or ungrateful. I'll leave you both in an infinitely recursive, eristile dialogue given that this forum is pretty much just the two of you.

I'm off to enjoy some real, warm, living, fun NON- P4 P female company rather than a keyboard.

[QUOTE=PahllusMaximus;2511152]Levity, ribbing and nonsense aside, it is amusing to imagine a couple of mongers (aka sex tourists) casting judgment, especially for Mursenary who should know better, throwing stones in glass houses. I am not going to transgress accepted social mores or by being shallow, cowardly, petty or ungrateful. I'll leave you both in an infinitely recursive, eristile dialogue given that this forum is pretty much just the two of you.

I'm off to enjoy some real, warm, living, fun NON- P4 P female company rather than a keyboard.[/QUOTE]Buh bye. Enjoy fucking ugly chicks!

[QUOTE=ShooBree;2511129]Your problem is that you don't know what you're talking about. You're without better than me at being dishonest and stupid. I honestly don't even know why I respond to your irrelevant and pointless lies.[/QUOTE]Translation: "I'm taking my ball and I'm going home."

You got beat, accept it like a man.

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2511007]Let's add frequency of travel and timing of the spread to this argument. These rural states that lack high volumes of international travel were also spared the initial surge that was seen in NYC and Jersey in March. The virus spread through these dense populations without much of a public health response back in February and March. End result, deaths up to 1000 people per day. Fast forward to the recent surge and their death tolls and hospitalization rates remain much lower than all of these rural American states. In fact, NYC is doing better than most European countries.[/QUOTE]On last weeks, not 1000 but more than 2000/2500 deaths per day for US, and spreading everywhere, even in cold rural North Dakota. Maybe only Alaska to be safe. They rush starting Pfizer on next week, under panic, when effects in UK. But vaccine don t prevent from getting and giving to others, maybe just avoiding to die, if not killing too many. I think pharma and medical will make big business about vaccines and to cure bad effects.

[QUOTE=Turgid;2510719]Good point. She was definitely within kissing range but I don't think she was flirting with me as she was all business. It was my one and only visit to Scandinavia and I found the girls in Sweden and Denmark very friendly. [/QUOTE]Scandinavian countries are "feminist". If a Swedish woman wants to flirt aggressively and occasionally have a one-night stand, society is less judgmental and there is less shaming. However, just because you click platonically or romantically on the first night you meet a Scandinavian, does not necessarily mean that they will open up to you (allow you into inner circle, meet regularly).

Nordics responding to stereotypes about them [URL]https://youtu.be/BpuiQk_v9mY[/URL]: "Nordics are very shy, reserved, and unemotional. Until they get drunk, they like to get drunk to an extreme" (1 min7's to 3 min13). Scandinavians agreed with both parts of this stereotype. A Swedish guy makes a response which is informative: "If you meet someone like super drunk and you have hilarious fun for five hours, if you meet them the next day, you won't say Hello". Swedish girl nods in agreement. This anecdote demonstrates two things: (1) Scandinavians have a harder shell or barrier to break past when moving from acquaintance to friend, and (2) Scandinavians don't stop to engage in small talk (what logically follows after a greeting). Like all people, they require social contact to survive, but they seem to not need it as much as other cultures. They are just socially more independent (as the documentary I posted suggests). And the fact that more Swedes live alone than the rest of the world reinforces the value that they place on this independence.

Interviewing people on street: "Are Swedes hard to get to know": [URL]https://youtu.be/sTXuQLfuMsg[/URL].

Survey of 15000 participants for worst country to make friends, Scandinavia dominates: [URL]https://www.iamexpat.nl/expat-info/dutch-expat-news/netherlands-ranked-one-worlds-worst-countries-making-friends[/URL].