Covid-19 News

  • If they were only risking their own lives I would be much less upset. It is a free country and if you want to smoke cigarettes or go "free soloing" cliff climbing without ropes, that's your business. It is like the difference between driving without wearing a seat belt (risking only yourself), and driving drunk (risking innocent drivers in other cars)

    Yes, it is interesting that this tension between individual freedom and societal safety is a classic left/right thing. In the case of seatbelts - after a law change in the UK - everyone settled down to doing the thing that saves ones own (and passengers, if they wear them) lives pretty quickly. No real enforcement needed, just a few adverts pointing out how bad you'd feel if you killed your wife / child / etc. But, without that law, no-one would have done it. Now everyone except a few idiots accepts seatbelts as being sensible safety, and no-one quarrels with the law.


    I'd guess that in the US (at least some states) there would be a big fuss about freedom if there were such a law. And less justification for it too, because the state pays less when people have auto accidents - but it still pays because ERs are free.


    Now consider wearing masks or social distancing. There is much more reason to make wearing these mandatory, because they have a much larger effect on other people's health - and also on the economy. While COVID rates stay high, one way or another, the economy will not flourish. If everyone wears masks R is lower and the measures needed to keep rates low are less severe.


    And yet, in the US, there is strong resistance to removing people's freedom not to wear masks. Not surprising, there is similar resistance to removing people's freedom to kill each other with guns despite massive evidence that you are less safe from criminals in societies with guns (where home-owner and criminals have and use them, but criminals often win) than in countries without guns, where few criminals (certainly not the common or garden burglars) have them. Guns, as defence, are good only if others don't have them. As in many non-zero-sum games, if everyone has guns, then everyone is worse of. And societies without widespread gun use, where using guns in act of robbery etc vastly increases sentences, have fewer deaths. It is still a horrible experience being burgled - but not a fatal one.


    In microcosm we see the same formula here at schools with knives. Children are put under a lot of pressure to carry knives "for defence". And they do it because they are scared. Yet, it is well known, when a child is attacked by another child with a knife, by far the safest position to be in is not to have a knife yourself. Not easy to convince children of that, but it is possible.


    Anyway, just as freedom to carry knives or guns goes with a tragedy of the commons, where if everyone does it society becomes more violent, and rightly everyone feels less safe, so freedom not to wear masks impacts the whole of society including the wearer if done by most people.


    And it is the same equation with vaccination. If enough people get vaccinated everyone becomes much safer. Yet individually, if everyone else is vaccinated, and therefore the disease level is low, there is little risk to not being vaccinated.


    So there is a balance between freedom and safety in any society, and you can understand people will naturally and properly have different positions in how much they value the two things and therefore what they think is the proper balance. The right wing arguments tend to ignore these "tragedy of the commons" arguments where what everyone does has such a big effect, even though the individual effect is more difficult to see.


    In the case of masks, as many members of the White house are now realising, even on an individual level wearing masks can be pretty obviously important.


    Trump's rallies without masks or distancing are not a good example of people exercising their right to God-given freedom. They are a sign of people so misunderstanding cause and effect that they do something individually and collectively very harmful. rather like people running around shooting bullets at each other. Maybe they will all miss. Much more likely, if the crowd is big, not. you'd need the median age of Trump ralliers and a few other things to work out how many bullets in this case are likely to hit.


    if we could somehow quarantine all Trump supporters on an island it would matter only to them, they could have a super-spreading event, 0.5% would die, and that would be that. Alas they live in the community and here the bullet analogy breaks down. those wounded but not obviously so go on firing invisible bullets into the people around them for about a week.


    I'm quite interested; do we have anyone here who would justify holding such events?


    THH


    THH

  • What does this mean? Here is how I parse it. This is what I suppose these people think:

    COVID-19 is not real, or the threat of it is exaggerated. It is fake news.

    Masks and social distancing are not needed. Masks don't even work. That is what Trump himself said.

    People who want us to wear masks are "haters," because they know that masks don't work and their real goal is to curtail our freedom.


    This is true. I was in a builders merchants two months back, and some contractor guy starts ranting all of the above at me. His opening gambit was “Wot u wearing that mask for?”


    On the way out I realised the correct answer would have been “So people don’t mistake me for an idiot”.

  • In the case of seatbelts - after a law change in the UK - everyone settled down to doing the thing that saves ones own (and passengers, if they wear them) lives pretty quickly. No real enforcement needed, just a few adverts pointing out how bad you'd feel if you killed your wife / child / etc. But, without that law, no-one would have done it. Now everyone except a few idiots accepts seatbelts as being sensible safety, and no-one quarrels with the law.


    I'd guess that in the US (at least some states) there would be a big fuss about freedom if there were such a law.

    Seatbelts are mandatory in the U.S. everywhere but New Hampshire and Washington DC. When the laws were introduced, there was some grumpling, but not much. I think because there has never been enforcement with teeth. In Georgia the fine for not wearing them is $15. The reaction to the laws was similar to what you describe in the UK. People grumbled at first but they gradually got into the habit of wearing them. Many older people never did. Or they would drive for a few blocks and then put them on . . . sometimes while in motion, as I remember.


    Years ago I read a fascinating document from the 1950. I wish I could find a copy. It was about automobile safety and surviving accidents. It said something like: 'the best way to survive an accident would be to have the passengers wear seatbelts, but of course the public would never stand for that.'


    Now consider wearing masks or social distancing. There is much more reason to make wearing these mandatory, because they have a much larger effect on other people's health - and also on the economy. While COVID rates stay high, one way or another, the economy will not flourish. If everyone wears masks R is lower and the measures needed to keep rates low are less severe.

    Here is what I do not understand about the opposition. This is only temporary. After a vaccine is deployed, in 6 months to a year, the pandemic will probably end and we will not need masks any more. If you had to wear a mask for the rest of your life, I could understand why people are so upset, but it is only for a short time.


    There was some opposition to wearing masks in 1918, but the local governments did not put up with it. They passed emergency laws fining people and even sending them to jail for not wearing masks. Society was more authoritarian back then. Indeed, it has been more authoritarian for all of U.S. and Colonial history. During the colonial period, the government would take your children away if you did not teach them how to read by age 6, or if you let them become juvenile delinquents. (See the Massachusetts Bay school law, 1642.) We are now living in the golden age of personal freedom in the U.S. We have had less government control over our lives than ever before. People imagine it is the other way around, because people are ignorant and have not read history. Or lived through it.


    The thing that really floors me is the Great Barrington Declaration (https://gbdeclaration.org/) published recently that says we should give up fighting the pandemic and go with herd immunity. Here we are months -- maybe weeks! -- from getting a vaccine and these lunatics want to swamp the hospitals with sick people, kill a million or two, and leave millions more with brain damage. Why?!? It makes no sense to me.

  • I was in a builders merchants two months back, and some contractor guy starts ranting all of the above at me. His opening gambit was “wot u wearing that mask for?”

    I would have said: "So I don't end up dead or brain damaged. Plus, I was hospitalized with pneumonia 20 years ago. Once is enough." Which is functionally the same as your response: Because I am not an idiot.


    People seem to have no idea what it is like being gravely ill. Maybe nowadays most people have never experienced it? I mean not sleeping for a week, with a high fever, delusional, constantly throwing up or with severe diarrhea, and pleurisy for weeks afterwards, which makes every breath feel like sandpaper is in your chest. . . Anyone who experienced that would gladly wear a mask to avoid it, even if there were no risk of death.


    The trouble with giving people the advantages of public health such as clean water, vaccinations and all the rest is that they grow up with it, and they never realize how wonderful it is. They don't appreciate it. They have no memory of polio or even severe influenza. They think rubella (German measles) is a minor, inconsequential illness. The next thing you know, lunatic anti-vaccination conspiracy theories circulate, and idiots come to believe that vaccinations cause harm. There is a large supply of idiots -- and there always will be. There may be enough idiots to prevent herd immunity. Maybe COVID-19 will still be circulating decades from now thanks to the idiots.


    In the 1960s, the government did not put up with such idiots. It more or less ordered everyone to take the improved oral polio vaccine. I am not a big fan of authoritarian government, but there are times when it should step in and force people to do what is best for everyone. During wars, pandemics, floods and earthquakes you have to push civil liberties aside to some extent, temporarily.

  • There are no scientists who says we need to force a vaccine on anyone. The scientists at GB Declaration are from Stanford, Oxford and Harvard and they make good points based on actual science. They talk about protecting the elderly and letting the young people move forward. They have data on their side.


    I haven't seen a scientist of repute advocating for forcing people to take a vaccine. No forced medical intervention is needed, we have treatments. If and when a vaccine is proved to be safe and effective, which this week Bill Gates said will not be with first generation vaccines, then you can take it. You are an odd fellow jumping up and down promoting an intervention that has no backing.

  • I am all in favor of wearing masks and social distancing. I used to catch colds and flu all the time until we started adopting these preventative measures, along with regularly taking supplements, vitamins and eating a much healthier diet (lots of fruit and veg). So some benefits to this pandemic of limiting the spread of other virus mediated illnesses.:)

  • There are no scientists who says we need to force a vaccine on anyone.

    I am saying there should be such scientists, not that there are. Scientists and doctors do say we should force vaccines on children, even when their parents say no. Two states no longer allow religious exemptions. Parents were not allowed to refuse vaccines when I was a child, and they should not be allowed to now. The 1950s were authoritarian, partly as a result of WWII. I am glad we have put much of that authoritarian rule behind us, but I think we went overboard in the other direction. Some should be brought back.


    I would not actually force the vaccine. I would say you cannot go into any store, shopping mall, or other public space without a mask if you have not been vaccinated. If you do, and it can be shown you infected someone, you will be fined $10,000. This is similar to saying children do not have to be vaccinated but they will not be allowed into schools if they are not. I would keep that rule in place until the virus is extinct in humans. I suppose some sort of license would have to be issued to people who have been vaccinated or have recovered and have antibodies.


    Experts are now predicting we will have over 100,000 cases a day in December if nothing is done. This is a national emergency, similar to WWII. We need the government to respond, but it will not, so ~200,000 more people may die for no reason. This is one of the blackest times in U.S. history. It is not like 1918, because this time, we could have prevented it.

  • Second “White Coat Summit” in Washington DC

    - Politics continues to overrule science

    - Early treatment protocols continue to be censored

    http://covexit.com/second-whit…-summit-in-washington-dc/


    Choose Truth and Choose Life – Op-Ed by Vladimir Zev Zelenko M.D. (Oct-18)

    "...HCQ is a Zinc ionophore... both Zinc and HCQ are required in order to kill the virus...

    the studies that were performed with HCQ but without Zinc either missed the boat or were

    intentionally designed to fail...

    The three drug regimen...costs approximately $20 for the entire treatment.

    ... As of 7:50 PM EST on October 15, 2020 there are 1,094,979 recorded deaths from Covid-19.

    A vast majority of these could have been easily avoided with timely treatment...

    ...the studies that are used to demonize HCQ, The Zelenko Protocol and other treatment regimens,

    are seriously flawed and were designed to fail. For example: the Lancet study was retracted

    for fraud. The Recovery Trial sponsored by Oxford used lethal doses of HCQ. The Veterans

    Administration study from Virginia used only critically ill and hospitalized patients on

    respirators. This is just to mention a few.

    The forces that oppose HCQ and “The Zelenko Protocol” are powerful and numerous:

    some politicians seeking power for their party if the economy continues into a tailspin;

    big-pharma executives seeking profit from their expensive medications and vaccines;

    the WHO pushing its agenda in line with the interests of its funding sources..."

    http://covexit.com/choose-trut…vladimir-zev-zelenko-m-d/


    Ivermectin: An old weapon for a new enemy

    - An Indian panel provides a good overview of study results


    Melatonin is significantly associated with survival of intubated COVID-19 patients

    - Melatonin is surpisingly effective in late stage Covid

    https://www.medrxiv.org/conten…10.15.20213546v1.full.pdf


    The Addition Of Zinc To Hydroxychloroquine And Azithromycin: Improved Outcomes in Hospitalized COVID


  • NY Times report (which I think has no paywall):


    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/1…/china-economy-covid.html


    With Covid-19 Under Control, China’s Economy Surges Ahead

    • Exports jumped, and local governments engaged in a binge of debt-fueled construction projects. Even consumer spending is finally recovering.
    • The country’s vigorous economic expansion shows that a fast rebound is possible when the coronavirus is brought firmly under control.
  • I'm surprised this video of two days ago, the second video of the docs meeting at the steps of the Supreme Court, hasn't been taken down yet.

    Why on earth do you think this will be taken down? Things like this are everywhere on the internet and on YouTube. The contents of this video is pure bullshit. Fifth-rate unscientific garbage. But the internet is awash with similar garbage and there is no chance anyone will take it down. No reason to, either. There is plenty more where this came from. YouTube does not try to judge the merits of a scientific discussion. It only takes down videos for narrow reasons that violate its policies, such as pornography.

  • A study in JAMA finds that 78% of COVID-19 survivors have heart problems. This is another reason why the plan to achieve herd immunity by allowing widespread infections would be a disaster. See:


    https://jamanetwork.com/journa…ology/fullarticle/2768916


    Outcomes of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients Recently Recovered From Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

    Key Points

    Question What are the cardiovascular effects in unselected patients with recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)?

    Findings In this cohort study including 100 patients recently recovered from COVID-19 identified from a COVID-19 test center, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging revealed cardiac involvement in 78 patients (78%) and ongoing myocardial inflammation in 60 patients (60%), which was independent of preexisting conditions, severity and overall course of the acute illness, and the time from the original diagnosis.

    Meaning These findings indicate the need for ongoing investigation of the long-term cardiovascular consequences of COVID-19.

  • Why on earth do you think this will be taken down? Things like this are everywhere on the internet and on YouTube. The contents of this video is pure bullshit. Fifth-rate unscientific garbage. But the internet is awash with similar garbage and there is no chance anyone will take it down. No reason to, either. There is plenty more where this came from. YouTube does not try to judge the merits of a scientific discussion. It only takes down videos for narrow reasons that violate its policies, such as pornography.


    In my version of the Matrix, the first instalment of this video series was promptly removed by Youtube. In my version of the Matrix, Youtube channels with hundreds of thousands of subscribers were shut down because they aired non official, yet evidence based views of Covid.

    Twitter removed tweets from the highest political offices in the land. Twitter accounts were disabled for Covid reasons. And so on.

    Jed maybe you have an updated, Chinese Communist Party version.

    Some producers who were shut out of Youtube have managed to continue their work. It's hard to shut down the land of the free and the brave.

    https://thehighwire.com/videos/mask-whistleblowers-tell-all/