General / Off-Topic The safest place

[Ian Skippy]

The Covid debate is based on information taken from a large number of different sources, some have their own agenda and some don't. I mean just look at the difference between CNN and FOX. Both have realized that creating a concern, and a possible resolve can and will increase their ratings which increase their bottom line. Both have their own agenda which isn't reporting the news anymore, it's their bottom line. Only by viewing and listening to both can one really come up with a valid opinion.

The notion you can only come up with a 'valid opinion' by watching different flavors of biased information is just silly. You can watch as much cable news as you want, your opinion will never end up being worth much. The real covid debate is held by scientists, based on peer-reviewed scientific studies. The random incoherent yelling of various ignorant people on whatever cable channel you prefer is not part of any serious debate, it is just background noise for those easily entertained.

If the data is based on a test and the test procedure isn't 100 accurate. Then the number's can be misconstrued and reported on as anyone's particular agenda wishes.

Virtually no test on the planet is 100% accurate, and any number can be misconstrued regardless of how it is obtained. Again: every single step of your reasoning is just a bit silly, and that leaves your conclusion in a bit of an awkward place.

That's exactly what I am referring to, if one doesn't see everything as the status que does.

Just a small suggestion: if you insist on mentioning status quo as often as you do, you might want to at least spell it correctly as someone tried to tell you with a bit more tact a few posts ago. .

 

[Robin of Spiritwood]

( Eric) Trump added: "What my father's done on the vaccine front, no one could have done. No one could have done... My father literally started day one creating this vaccine. He worked to push this vaccine and now my father just took it! And you see how well he got over it and I think it's an inspiration. As Americans, we should be very proud of that."
"Can you clarify that?" Karl asked. "You say your father just took a vaccine?"
"Meaning, when he was in Walter Reed," Trump responded. "The medicines that he was taking."
"The therapeutics," Karl observed.
"I think it goes to show the power of medicine in this country and how far we've come on COVID," Trump opined.

There is no emoticon for this.
Maybe there is a German word?

 

[Morbad]

I did get a second test done, an hour ago received the results. And again the results showed a false positive.

How do you know it's a false positive at this point? Even with the crappy rapid antibody tests two false positives in a row are extremely unlikely, without some grievous procedural error. False negatives are much more common. So, unless you've somehow had hundreds of tests and only two of them came back positive, it sounds like you are probably infected with SARS-CoV-2 and probably have a, thus far, mild case of COVID-19. At the very least you should probably get a real test at another location to confirm.

Are you just assuming you're negative because your symptoms resemble past flu/colds?

If the data is based on a test and the test procedure isn't 100 accurate. Then the number's can be misconstrued and reported on as anyone's particular agenda wishes.

No test is 100% accurate, but they don't need to be to paint an accurate picture of what's going on, because once error rates are known, they can be factored in.

This is your problem; you seem to be unable to distinguish between degrees of error, magnitudes of problems, or what you do and do not have control over. You appear to believe that some people dying from a vaccine is the same as some people dying from the virus being vaccinated against...despite the fact that there are invariably many orders of magnitude separating 'some' in these cases. You appear to believe that any uncertainty in the data implies that any interpretation of that data is equally valid.

 

[metatheurgist]

Covid reinfection: Man gets Covid twice and second hit 'more severe'

The report raises questions about how much immunity can be built up to the virus and how long it may last.

www.bbc.com

More good news for those with "immunity". Guy's 25 too, good thing he's not some old, obese, unhealthy 75 year old.

 

[Patrick_68000]

Covid reinfection: Man gets Covid twice and second hit 'more severe'

The report raises questions about how much immunity can be built up to the virus and how long it may last.

www.bbc.com

More good news for those with "immunity". Guy's 25 too, good thing he's not some old, obese, unhealthy 75 year old.

Yes I saw that this morning.

It seems there have been 15 cases worldwide since the start of the epidemic.

It's not a lot, but there is the difficulty of spotting re-infections with certainty, especially if the patients are symptom-free.

So there are certainly more.

 

[Robin of Spiritwood]

Covid reinfection: Man gets Covid twice and second hit 'more severe'

The report raises questions about how much immunity can be built up to the virus and how long it may last.

www.bbc.com

More good news for those with "immunity". Guy's 25 too, good thing he's not some old, obese, unhealthy 75 year old.

This is not the only report, but it seems quite uncommon. From the Lancet article:

Similar to observations with the reinfection case in Ecuador, our patient showed increased symptom severity in their second infection, whereas the cases from Belgium and the Netherlands and Hong Kong did not show a difference in severity of symptoms

It raises questions about vaccine effectiveness. There is a possible risk that the vaccine covers a common mild variant, which permits a less successful but more virulent version to emerge. Given the sparse numbers of confirmed reinfections, this is not likely to be a big problem?

Got to note this case got only 5 days between infections. Likely caught the second version from a health care source.

 

[Factabulous]

I was listening to the (UK) radio this morning and they had a virologist on saying that the people he talks to in two different vaccine programmes were not expecting their vaccines to be ready before mid-2021 - a bit longer that I was expecting (though I guess still fast for normal vaccines). I wonder if more countries will start to try for Elimination (NZ/S.Korea) rather than Containment(Europe etc).

 

[Ian Skippy]

I was listening to the (UK) radio this morning and they had a virologist on saying that the people he talks to in two different vaccine programmes were not expecting their vaccines to be ready before mid-2021 - a bit longer that I was expecting (though I guess still fast for normal vaccines). I wonder if more countries will start to try for Elimination (NZ/S.Korea) rather than Containment(Europe etc).

I dont think European countries can go for eradication on their own.

 

[Factabulous]

I dont think European countries can go for eradication on their own.

If the EU went for it maybe. Though I think probably that horse has bolted as the virus is everywhere by now.

I find it interesting that the UK doesn't seem to have even considered 'doing a NZ' and trying to get rid of all cases (surely easier for islands). I think we're a victim of positive thinking 'maybe this will all go away, and we'll have a vaccine soon' rather than 'let's get rid of this now'.

 

[metatheurgist]

If the EU went for it maybe. Though I think probably that horse has bolted as the virus is everywhere by now.

I find it interesting that the UK doesn't seem to have even considered 'doing a NZ' and trying to get rid of all cases (surely easier for islands). I think we're a victim of positive thinking 'maybe this will all go away, and we'll have a vaccine soon' rather than 'let's get rid of this now'.

If by "positive thinking" you mean protect rich people's income at all costs.

 

[Leper Messiah]

Why can't people understand this is WAY worse than the normal flu? Do they think the stressed out Doctors and Nurses in covid wards are lying? Covid 19 is MORE virulent than the flu, there's MORE chance of catching it. And if you get it and get it bad you DIE ALONE. Comparing this cloister buck of a pandemic to the "flu" is cretinous beyond belief.

If I go into a cage with 10 rabid dogs tied up, slather ketchup on my "manly bits" and walk into the cage and taunt the dogs so that they are straining like mad to get at the "tasty morsel" betwix my legs am I daft? Statistically it's unlikely one of the dogs will break free, but NOT statisticaly impossible. Thing is what Covid 19 denyers are doing is surviving and then putting someone ELSE in the cage who has been busting a gut to NOT go in the cage, and one of the dogs get free.

I mean if this is our attitude to hundreds of thousand of people dying why do we care if war breaks out in some country? OR Famine, just let them all die they'll die anyways at some point right? After all it's just a reltively low number dying....thing is that number is someones beloved Grand Mother, Grand Father, Mother, Father, Brother, Sister, Aunt, Uncle. But when it's "someone elses" loved one it's ok?

 

[Stigbob]

If the EU went for it maybe. Though I think probably that horse has bolted as the virus is everywhere by now.

I find it interesting that the UK doesn't seem to have even considered 'doing a NZ' and trying to get rid of all cases (surely easier for islands). I think we're a victim of positive thinking 'maybe this will all go away, and we'll have a vaccine soon' rather than 'let's get rid of this now'.

We missed the chance early on while we were pushing herd immunity as a strategy, by the time we were forced to change tack it was already established.

Given the virus doesn't survive on it's own we could try for elimination but it would mean a genuine very strict lockdown plus more testing and tracing than we can do. We'd also need to get serious at ports and airports.

It's not impossible, but I think it is beyond us realistically speaking.

 

[PRORABBIT67]

 

[ianw]

We missed the chance early on while we were pushing herd immunity as a strategy, by the time we were forced to change tack it was already established.

Given the virus doesn't survive on it's own we could try for elimination but it would mean a genuine very strict lockdown plus more testing and tracing than we can do. We'd also need to get serious at ports and airports.

It's not impossible, but I think it is beyond us realistically speaking.

I'm pretty sure if a strictly authoritarian state like China couldn't do it then we have zero chance.

 

[Stigbob]

I'm pretty sure if a strictly authoritarian state like China couldn't do it then we have zero chance.

NZ managed it.

 

[ianw]

NZ managed it.

Yes - but they had nothing like the level of infection we've had here and they have a small population by comparison.

Plus they probably have significantly lower proportion of idiots who for whatever reason can't or won't follow very simple precautions - that apparently work - to hugely slow down the rate of infection.

Without a vaccine we have zero chance of getting close to eradication - all we can do is pause it a bit now and again.

 

[Stigbob]

Yes - but they had nothing like the level of infection we've had here and they have a small population by comparison.

Plus they probably have significantly lower proportion of idiots who for whatever reason can't or won't follow very simple precautions - that apparently work - to hugely slow down the rate of infection.

Without a vaccine we have zero chance of getting close to eradication - all we can do is pause it a bit now and again.

They had a lower level of infection because they were faster with testing and lockdowns while we wasted time against the scientific advice. They also took the idea of contact tracing and testing at ports and airports far far more seriously than we ever have.

It's not can't it's won't.

 

[ianw]

They had a lower level of infection because they were faster with testing and lockdowns while we wasted time against the scientific advice. They also took the idea of contact tracing and testing at ports and airports far far more seriously than we ever have.

It's not can't it's won't.

Well I disagree in so far as it is can't now - not won't.

They certainly got caught with their pants down on both PPE, testing and general preparedness at the start. That allowed it to establish itself to the point where eradication has become impossible.

I think they've made a massive hash of a lot of things - I'm certainly not trying to defend their record - especially on the testing thing which still seems to be below par. But I think saying that we are where we are because they decided they weren't going to stop it - even though they both knew how and had the means to stop it - is a bit of stretch.

But I suspect we won't find agreement on this.

And there is still the idiot factor that can't be dealt with without draconian measures which simply won't happen here.

 

[Stigbob]

Well I disagree in so far as it is can't now - not won't.

They certainly got caught with their pants down on both PPE, testing and general preparedness at the start. That allowed it to establish itself to the point where eradication has become impossible.

I think they've made a massive hash of a lot of things - I'm certainly not trying to defend their record - especially on the testing thing which still seems to be below par. But I think saying that we are where we are because they decided they weren't going to stop it - even though they both knew how and had the means to stop it - is a bit of stretch.

But I suspect we won't find agreement on this.

And there is still the idiot factor that can't be dealt with without draconian measures which simply won't happen here.

They openly and publicly backed herd immunity as the UK's initial strategy. The whole idea behind that is that you let it spread.

Herd immunity is a phrase normally used when large numbers of children have been vaccinated against a disease like measles, reducing the chances that others will get it. As a tactic in fighting a pandemic for which there is no vaccine, it is novel – and some say alarming.

It relies on people getting the disease – in this case Covid-19 – and becoming immune as a result. Generally it is thought that those who recover will be immune, at least for now, so they won’t get it twice.

13/3/2020

Herd immunity: will the UK's coronavirus strategy work?

Ministers look to have given up on containment in favour of a novel approach some experts are wary of

www.theguardian.com

 

[Factabulous]

And there is still the idiot factor that can't be dealt with without draconian measures which simply won't happen here.

There are idiots everywhere - both NZ and Oz had outbreaks caused by people breaking quarantine. I wouldn't put NZ or Oz near the top of my 'most draconian authoritarian governments' list, yet they're both doing better than most (NZ especially).

While the UK does have higher populations it also has vastly more resources it could have used - if it had the will. I'm more interested in the fact that I don't even recall it being discussed as an option (unlike Herd Immunity, which certainly was). Maybe I need to go see if all the Sage notes were ever released, I find it hard to believe it wasn't even considered.

But as people say (me included) rather a moot point now as that horse has definitely left the stable.