SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
I actually understand very well your argument, it is just that I completely disagree with it. Look at for example, the infographic posted above, which shows quite clearly that the closure of mass gatherings was the next step - not a u-turn. You seem very focused on the fact that it was only a day between each step, which is not really relevant.
Your argument would only have been valid if the original plan had not given any indication of limiting mass gatherings.
wonder if there's something like a ccr5 delta32 for this receptor too.
Last edited:
I get that it helps morale but honest to god I'd sooner march down to the ICU and start licking people's faces than be stuck at home listening to that racket.
I'd want a nice, quiet lockdown where I can read books and chill.
I actually hate them. It's no wonder the world is a mess when it's full of people like this who are allowed to vote.
Learn from an older civilisation
Arsewipes save their own kind.
This must be some kind of Bond-movie plot by a toilet paper baron to stoke demand and raise profits.
Right now, the Andrex puppy is rolling in bitches.
Right now, the Andrex puppy is rolling in bitches.
We all want that. It's called a cabin in the woods.
The staff will be using those puppies soon to clean their own asses.
My sentiments exactly.
Quite brilliant, the mashup & the overall scene.
Honestly don't know enough about the subject. But we'll be seeing far too many papers, contradicting each other, that's for sure! Over time it will be sorted out though.
Oh yeah, the music and heat is not my scene at all, but it's good that people find ways to keep their spirits up.
Its pretty relevant because it's been clear for weeks that services are going to be under a huge strain due to the virus. This governments seems to be last one to have acted on what has been known by everyone else for some time. Yet apparently this is all going according to plan
So the health minister just called my fiancee asking about the athletes village which was built for last year's pan American games. Capacity is 2000 and they want to use it for isolated patients.
I'd imagine they'd be very reluctant to do anything like that. As their science guy said, a lot of dealing with a situation like this comes down to behavioural science too as you try to coax the population through different measures at different stages of the crisis. Laying out the modelling would by necessity lay out the various potential future measures to the public, which may itself skew how they react.
Or it more blunt terms, if the public actually knew what could be coming they might panic, which doesn't help anyone's plans.
I don't know enough about virology to determine whether this is feasible, but I'd like to see the powers-that-be test every single 65+ year old, and then quarantine the negative ones into closed off accommodation for 8 weeks whilst the rest of the country gains herd immunity (with anyone who tests positive receiving immediate intensive care).
Once herd immunity is achieved for the under 65s, the people in quarantine can integrate back with the rest of society. Then, going forward, the government can maintain relatively tight borders to ensure the infection doesn't return.
Would this kind of targetted response not be better than the one every nation seems to be taking? It helps the vulnerable who need it most, it speeds up the nation's overall recovery, and it keeps the economy afloat.
It's probably just the sheer numbers preventing it from happening. But I tend to think it's an efficient way of doing things if the population is small enough.
I don't know. I'm tired as shit.
Once herd immunity is achieved for the under 65s, the people in quarantine can integrate back with the rest of society. Then, going forward, the government can maintain relatively tight borders to ensure the infection doesn't return.
Would this kind of targetted response not be better than the one every nation seems to be taking? It helps the vulnerable who need it most, it speeds up the nation's overall recovery, and it keeps the economy afloat.
It's probably just the sheer numbers preventing it from happening. But I tend to think it's an efficient way of doing things if the population is small enough.
I don't know. I'm tired as shit.
Well they could definitely have it peer reviewed without revealing the details to the public. I don't think anyone is expecting the detailed, potentially sensitive information to be given to public.
This is absolutely terrifying. It essentially puts the mortality rate near that number, if millions of people get infected at the same time and so the system collapses.
I proposed something very similar yesterday. Great minds think alike and all that.
It might be efficient but it'd also be practically impossible.
One of the main points of the UK government's argument (which has some merit) is that you have to manage the people themselves in terms of what measures they'll accept and how long they'll accept them for. It isn't a totalitarian state where anything goes. Aside from the practical issues of doing it, I'm fairly sure "round up all over 65s in the country and lock them away for 8 weeks" falls very firmly into the list of measures they don't think will wash with the public. I mean even as is they're fretting about how isolation might make keeping the elderly socially distant from their families a problem.
Yeah but what about herd immunity?
Great idea but impossible to implement as @sullydnl pointed out. Heard about this on tv a couple of days ago. Starts at 30 seconds but really worth watching the whole video.
Really good video, thanks for sharing.
Regarding his point about school closures, that goes back to timing doesn't it?
One of the arguments I've seen in favour of school closures is exactly that it drags parents out of work and back into the home for a few weeks, which in itself aids in slowing the spread down. However for that to work you have to time it so that a) the virus has spread enough for the measure to have worthwhile impact, b) the virus hasn't spread so much that large numbers of kids will be infecting people at home and c) essential services aren't under such strain that the loss of these parents from the workforce will cause serious harm.
His take on the dangers of kids spreading the virus to grandparents seems to assume that a large number of them will already be infected when the measure is introduced. Whereas one imagines that the countries who are actually closing schools believe they are doing so before that's a major issue.
Also worth noting that, following the logic of their "herd immunity" plan, they desperately need a lot of kids to get sick. As a large group of people who are both highly likely to spread the illness and highly likely to survive it, they're an ideal part of the herd. But that's a rather difficult message to sell so....
Last edited:
It's like a scientists game of werewolf in here sometimes.
With the time being only 24hrs earlier
Is that worse than having it in the lungs?
Brilliant, absolutely brilliant.
I'm not sure what to do on schools to be honest. There has been no recorded deaths for children which obviously puts them at lowest risk. So maybe we shouldn't close schools at all and have younger teachers taking classes or at least minding them. I'm just spit balling here so no idea how viable it actually is. There seems to be no point in closing schools in my opinion as kids will get bored and will want to get together and stuff. Also, there have been a lot of reports that kids don't exhibit many symptoms at all and are pretty much asymptomatic, so it is possible that parents would take them to their grandparents thinking that they were not infected. It's a possibility. Kids are notorious at spreading viruses. I mean, correct me if I'm wrong but school closures happen due to kids infecting parents who then have to take days off work rather than kids being very sick with the flu.
Keeping children and teenagers in school is the obvious choice. Problem is, that they might infect their parents anyway, who are in the older age bracket and/or have comorbidities. The healthy parents will infect their parents because someone has to look after them. It's definitely a puzzle.
Regarding timing, I think closing restaurants, pubs, museums - mass gatherings - should be implemented as soon as possible. The less people congregate - the better, in my opinion, as I think any measure that delays the spread is a necessary measure now. Again, that professor talks about ideally having a longer epidemic which means any measures to stop this spread now would be beneficial, that's at least how I'm interpreting it.
Only Singapore, Hong Kong and to a lesser extent Japan have managed to lower the curve. Everywhere else that has half reliable figures seems to be failing to slow the spread significantly. To little to late in most cases
You forgot China. They are having less than 50 new cases per day this week (only 11 today). Probably going to reach 0 in the next 2 weeks.