horsechoker
The Caf's Ezza.
Brexit, IranCan anyone remember what we used to talk about before covid-19 went mainstream?
Brexit, IranCan anyone remember what we used to talk about before covid-19 went mainstream?
WW3 when the Iranian general got fecked? Australian wildfires?Can anyone remember what we used to talk about before covid-19 went mainstream?
Can anyone remember what we used to talk about before covid-19 went mainstream?
I agree, a lot of older people I know are feeling very upset about it and that’s on top of the fear they have. This is not a good time to feel old and vulnerable.
This is insane. UK is signing a Holocaust on its own people. To make things even worse, no one is able to answer any of these questions:
1) Are we sure that the disease won’t return?
2) Are we sure that the fatality rate won’t be higher than 1-3% (it is currently 7% in Italy)?
3) Are we sure that the virus won’t mutate on something more deadly?
4) Are we sure that there won’t be long-term consequences (in worst case HIV-like) for the survivals?
No one has any clue to answer any of these questions, but somehow they’re ok with 50 million people catching it within the year.
This is beyond madness!
I think the gist was that the symptoms disappeared but the virus was still present or something.
Here are 2 reddit threads discussing it:
1.
2.
China is doing it, and their entire economy is production based. This could be easily the equivalent of WW2, I think we can sustain some economic hardships.And how do you propose to shutdown society for the 18 months its touted to get a vaccine into circulation? I mean in economic and social terms?
I am surrounded by lunatics. One side thinks this is only a flu and the other ones are buying food for a year and are predicting the end of the world. People are so irrational.
You’d be a pretty shit Hitler if this was your means of genocide.
1) The virus is likely systemic now. It isn’t going anywhere unless a miracle is found. That’s why we need a vaccine.
2) Yeah, we’re certain. Higher mortality rates will only occur if the health system collapses and those who develop complications don’t get the timely interventions they need. Most will self treat and brush it off, or be quite ill but still recover.
3) We don’t know, but we’re going to have to deal with that problem anyway. We already vaccinate against mutating viruses annually.
4) The stigma of being HIV+ is far worse than the reality of living with it, provided you follow treatment. People live a full life nowadays. This is a completely different type of disease regardless.
Have you seen the poverty in China?China is doing it, and their entire economy is production based. This could be easily the equivalent of WW2, I think we can sustain some economic hardships.
I still don't understand this logic.
Let's say he's right - after all, he's a professor - and herd immunity is the only way now. But what until we achieve that? Simply letting the virus explode all over the health systems of various countries will have devastating consequences and a staggering death count. Surely, surely, measures that delay that explosion and grant health services time to prepare, to amass more resources and such are necessary and good?
Because this UK idea seems to be simply that the most vulnerable should have the decency to die quickly, the rest should preferably not seek medical attention but wait until it passes. It's all-round weird.
If you calculate the fatality rate by means of the amount dead and the total confirmed infected cases, you are using a very flawed assumption that the government knows of every infected case. The infected portion of the population that doesn't get severe symptoms or is completely asymptomatic to the infection will never be in that known cases amount the government is reporting.This is insane. UK is signing a Holocaust on its own people. To make things even worse, no one is able to answer any of these questions:
1) Are we sure that the disease won’t return?
2) Are we sure that the fatality rate won’t be higher than 1-3% (it is currently 7% in Italy)?
3) Are we sure that the virus won’t mutate on something more deadly?
4) Are we sure that there won’t be long-term consequences (in worst case HIV-like) for the survivals?
No one has any clue to answer any of these questions, but somehow they’re ok with 50 million people catching it within the year.
This is beyond madness!
This is insane. UK is signing a Holocaust on its own people. To make things even worse, no one is able to answer any of these questions:
1) Are we sure that the disease won’t return?
2) Are we sure that the fatality rate won’t be higher than 1-3% (it is currently 7% in Italy)?
3) Are we sure that the virus won’t mutate on something more deadly?
4) Are we sure that there won’t be long-term consequences (in worst case HIV-like) for the survivals?
No one has any clue to answer any of these questions, but somehow they’re ok with 50 million people catching it within the year.
This is beyond madness!
I'm not a doctor but this seems obvious to me. I can't see how other people can't see it.His curves not being correct was in the context of him using a normal distribution, which is not necessarily the case for infections. However, under some assumptions when independent random variables are added, they tend to converge towards a normal distribution. So, while his curves are not correct, they can serve as modeling.
However, his point is totally correct. If you have millions of sick people at the same time, but you can offer ventilators to only a few thousand, then a lot of sick people will die (with 5% of infected people needing oxygen ventilators).
Timothy Gowers (one of the most famous respected mathematicians in the world) came to the same conclusions.
There is none.I still don't understand this logic.
According to epidemiologists in Belgium, a new virus will never mutate into something more deadly since it’s basically “a teenage virus which hasn’t learned to live with its human yet”. If it would become more deadly, it would kill its carrier thus be ineffective as it actually needs its human carrier to survive itself. Or something like that. Anyway according to multiple experts here - if it’ll mutate it’ll be for the better.
I’m currently in Jordan with a return flight to Amsterdam scheduled tomorrow night. Jordan has suspended all air travel as from Tuesday so I’m really hoping my flight goes through or I could be stuck here for a very long time which I really don’t fancy right now. Just wanna be fecking home again even if it’s way worse there atm.
China is doing it, and their entire economy is production based. This could be easily the equivalent of WW2, I think we can sustain some economic hardships.
Irish government has created a field hospital in a football stadium in Dublin. Surprisingly proactive.
From what I have read pregnant woman are as vulnerable as other woman with all other factors being the same (besides children the least vulnerable group). It isn't passed on to the fetus. Not sure which pdf I read that in but somewhere on https://www.who.int/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/14/newborn-baby-tests-positive-for-coronavirus-in-londonNewborn baby tests positive for coronavirus in London
And we should take the poverty option if it saves tens of millions of lives worldwide.Have you seen the poverty in China?
WW3 when the Iranian general got fecked? Australian wildfires?
There is none.
If you calculate the fatality rate by means of the amount dead and the total confirmed infected cases, you are using a very flawed assumption that the government knows of every infected case. The infected portion of the population that doesn't get severe symptoms or is completely asymptomatic to the infection will never be in that known cases amount the government is reporting.
A silicon valley entrepreneur who has written a book about Star Wars, no less.
Which ones the correct one?
Would you be buying from a supermarket if you needed it for a business though? Seems like you'd have such a low profit margin on it.When I see this I can only assume that they either A. Run a business or B. Are hedging their bets and intend to sell it in a few weeks time.
I know that. At the same time, there are many cases which yet we do not know their epilogue, so the number of deaths might increase. There are ways of having better estimates, it looks like in Italy and Iran (overwhelmed but still functional medical system) it is converging around 4%. That is very bad.If you calculate the fatality rate by means of the amount dead and the total confirmed infected cases, you are using a very flawed assumption that the government knows of every infected case. The infected portion of the population that doesn't get severe symptoms or is completely asymptomatic to the infection will never be in that known cases amount the government is reporting.
Have you seen the prices on eBay?Would you be buying from a supermarket if you needed it for a business though? Seems like you'd have such a low profit margin on it.
Only villains or ignorants can possibly think there is any logic in that.And the worst part is that you are already busy, you already have patients in critical conditions that needs your attention and there will people that will be in critical conditions for reasons none related to Covid-19. It's not simply illogical, it's just staggeringly stupid.
In german paper its been reported that Iran made something like 7,5mio tests in the past few days and the result was 175,000 positive on Corona.
That's kinda what's confusing me about their approach too.
The countries who are attempting to minimize the spread of the disease as much as possible face a real risk of being overwhelmed. So how does a country which isn't attempting to minimize the spread of the disease to the same degree avoid being overwhelmed?
This is a break down of the UK govt approach in simple terms by someone qualified.
Professor Ian Donald
@iandonald_psych
Psychologist:Social, & Environmental research, & behavioural factors in Anti-Microbial Resistance. Emeritus Professor, University of Liverpool. Typos all my own
The idea that essentially the WHO approach is reactive and only delaying an inevitable storm at a greater social and economic cost overall.
Well I think scientists are expecting this disease to become endemic but by then we will have a vaccine and antibodies from being naturally exposed to it.
I'm fearing the CFR will be higher in UK. I think Italy has more ICU beds than UK and CFR is 5.4% of the known cases.
I think it would be actually better for the virus to mutate into something more deadly paradoxically as it doesn't have the ability to transmit as a low mortality rate strain. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong on that.
And from what I read there is not enough data to know if it causes any permanent damage to the immune system or lungs etc.
Anyway I'm sure someone like @berbatrick @Pogue Mahone or @Arruda can answer in greater detail and much more eloquently.
I know that. At the same time, there are many cases which yet we do not know their epilogue, so the number of deaths might increase. There are ways of having better estimates, it looks like in Italy and Iran (overwhelmed but still functional medical system) it is converging around 4%. That is very bad.
Imagine the numbers with a totally non functioning medical system (which is gonna happe
Which ones the correct one?