Quote from Curbina

I think the problem is the widespread impression, which is not without base, that China did not and is still not telling the whole truth. No doubts about S. Korea or Japan, but nothing that is published by Chinese media or authoritative sources can really be trusted unless independently verifiable.

I think that impression is wrong, and the Chinese medical establishment is now telling the truth. But for the sake of argument, suppose they are not. Suppose they lying and thousands of people are dying every day. That does not make the data from Japan and Korea suspect. It does not impeach the data from New York State, or New Zealand, or anyplace else. Experts in many places have done random antibody studies to determine what fraction of the population was infected but not tested. Naturally, it varies from one place to the other. Few in Korea, many in New York City. Either way, Roseland67's statement above is not true:

vehemently disagree.

You have absolutely ZERO idea how many people are infected, ZERO.

We do have some idea. Rosland67 is vehemently disagreeing with a world-class group of experts in Japan and Korea who have successfully brought this pandemic under control. Obviously, they know more about this than he does. Obviously too, they could not have stopped the pandemic if they had "ZERO idea how many people are infected." Without that knowledge you can do nothing to stop the pandemic.

He also said:

Quote from Roseland67

Do honestly believe that the 5 million people that have been tested and shown positive are the only infected people in the US?

Do you?

Hopefully not

This is a classic straw man argument. No, of course I do not believe that. NO ONE BELIEVES THAT.

Every article and every expert on earth has said the actual cases exceed the positive tests. The reasons are clear to everyone. That is why they do random antibody studies: to find out how many patients were not tested. That's the whole point. However, having done those tests, they can now make a reasonable estimate of the total number of cases. As I said, without that information, you cannot control the virus. You have no idea what the case mortality rate is, or how the virus affects people in various age groups, or where it was previously endemic.

Here is an important study of face masks, which ones work, and which do not:

https://advances.sciencemag.or…2020/08/07/sciadv.abd3083

Low-cost measurement of facemask efficacy for filtering expelled droplets during speech

Quote from JedRothwell

So, you are saying that public health officials in Japan, Korea and China are "spinning a story." We can't believe them. You should explain why they have the pandemic under control. You cannot control it without good data, and you have to make the data public, so people know what to do. Do you imagine they do not really have the pandemic under control, and the entire population of all three countries is going alone with their deception? Do you think people in Japan and Korea don't realize that thousands of their friends and family are sick and dying?

China is a totalitarian dictatorship and the government can suppress the facts. They did so at first, but as far as anyone can tell they are now telling the truth. Japan and Korea are open, democratic societies. The government cannot cover up the facts. Not much anyway. The state government here in Georgia does a better job of stonewalling the media and lying about the facts than the Japanese government, but even so, everyone here can see they are incompetent fools and liars. You cannot fool the public for long about a deadly pandemic.

So, you are saying you miss your new york office...?

Sorry to hear that.

Quote from Roseland67

DNG,

As expected, Jed, like every other

“Group Think Blue” adherent, believes that shouting down all other opposing views and then telling them their views “don’t count”

somehow proves his point, after all, that’s what he’s been told to do, and he obeys.

They will find a brave new world out here if they're strong enough to unplug themselves from the Matrix, turn off CNN and learn to think for themselves.

Unfortunately, our resident political automaton has miles to go before he sleeps.

Display More

Jed has very definite views about COVID in which he passionately believes certain things are true. Mainly, he sees the evils of pandemic deaths as very high, and reckons the only rational solution is very strong government action: as has worked in a number of countries. Notice, he does not say that extreme tight lockdown is the solution: rather he sees that as a failure caused by governments without the capacity to do other things that work better and do not stop people going about their normal levels.

You are saying here, I think, that because he holds those views strongly, he is not thinking for himself and is part of the media-organised polarisation in the USA. (I don't think you are really believing he is deliberately engaging in a PR he does not believe for others).

I have always found Jed to be rational, but more certain of his facts than I would be - it sometimes makes him seem irrational. So over this pandemic I am less certain morally what is right - the evils of restrictions that crash the economy are very real and deaths from horrible disease are something we live with, with many diseases, it is a fine balance, and will make moral questions for many years to come, what is right. I agree with him that governments that are able to organise strong "big brother like" track and trace, with effective plentiful testing, will do much much better. We have obvious examples of this. Look, for a clear case, at New Zealand. Very strong early action - enormous priority given to track and trace, and everyone doing what was needed when they were locked down. Cost, both human and to economy, less than almost anywhere else. They are lucky in having very precise control over immigration, being an island.

I don't see this is a partisan point, unless you trade off distrust of government against older people dying horribly and unnecessarily from this disease, because your politics is so far to distrust government that higher deaths are preferable to temporary measures. It is pretty clear that after we have effective vaccines (very likely early next year) few people will die. It is also pretty clear that the overall death rate will vary enormously according to how effectively governments have responded, and how lucky they have been - Stefan's point that some countries were seeded more than others before lockdown is true.

I can agree with you only if you reckon those who are highly polarised (that is in the US Trump, + his supporters, and most of the new democrats, but not old-style democrats nor old-style republicans) are caught in a media-sanitised partial view of issues which demonises opponents.

Saying that Jed's views are not his own but manufactured by the media you are dehumanising somone with (I guess) different views from you. So can you expand further on this? Are you saying that you are equally certain (sharing this with about 1/3 of the US) that Jed's views along with those of another 1/3 of the US should be dismissed as rubbish? Or are you saying that Jed is part of the political disastrous polarisation that has been sharpened even further by Trump and the new Republicans and that you don't like? If first option, then it is you who are going along with media-inspired polarisation and dehumanisation of opponents.

I'd hope you are against this polarisation - in which case the only way out is to respect your opponents and argue the issues. If somone has biased views and is not seeing this clearly that in the end will come out just as long as those with more complete views so not engage in tribal behaviour. And whatever politics Trump himself should be anathema to anyone looking for better political discourse in the US because he, along with many of the democrats and (now) many of the republicans who support him, demonise political opponents. It is not demonising Trump to say that his strategy (or maybe just his personality) is to simplify complex issues and divide people into friends and foes, then to treat foes with an extreme lack of respect.

THH

Quote from Curbina

But I agree we have a more or less good estimate, from the seroprevalence tests, of the higher and lower boundary for the Most probable number of total cases. This has been surprisingly and consistently low for all the studies, and even when the sample number has been large, as in the ongoing study in Spain (average of around 5,4% with the most affected areas with up to 14%, if I recall correctly).

We know from a very few celebrated examples that under uncontrolled and high transmission conditions a lot of people will catch COVID, maybe 50% of population? And be seropositive. With others staying anti-body free who may or may not catch some milder form of the disease.

We know that nearly all countries have low seropositivity (e.g. in UK, with a relatively high infection rate due to slow lockdown and letting in people from Italy without restrictions, it is 6%).

That means the disease has got to only maybe 1/4 - 1/10 of the people it could get to if left unchecked. And so we control it or suffer a much larger death toll.

Those facts are indisputable. Even Navid etc (I think) can't shake them.

What we do not know is how easy it is to control the disease in different populations, and therefore what measures are needed to do this. we are finding out with the whole world a set of different local experiments. In some places we'd expect a high infection rate might lead locally to reduced transimission from (local) herd immunity but it is not easy to know because before we get there any place with very high rates lock down to save their local medical system. We also don't know how much better treatment over the next few months will improve medical outcomes. What concerns me is not the death rate so much as the number of people with severe COVID who do not die but then have permanent disabilities as the result. it is a nasty disease.

I checked global research for "Cold Fusion"

alas... no conspiracy .. no mention. .. the closest thing was Boris's patriotic science.... maybe he was talking about Essex?

"

Boris Johnson’s claims that the UK is ‘on the verge of creating commercially viable miniature fusion reactors for sale around the world’ has left scientists and industry experts baffled – as it is still decades off. 7 October 2019

***

During his big conference speech Johnson trumpeted the technological achievements of British science, telling the audience:

Quote

“I know they have been on the verge for some time, it is a pretty spacious kind of verge, but now we are on the verge of the verge.”

Curbina, you concern is the concern of billions. I believe that early treatment is the only way of stopping the virus in it's track. Once it has found its way to the lungs the storm takes over and it spreads into the other organs. Then the survivers which will be many many more than ones that die, will live their lives fearing the next shoe to drop. Not much of a life, as Jed has pointed out from the very beginning of this thread. Surely if doctors hands were untied and allowed to practice medicine, by now after almost 9 months of this, that early treatments would be available to all. Instead we test treatments well into the infection, from my non scientific view, THAT IS INSANE and criminal ! In the US as I said in a different post once positive you are sent home to quarantine only coming to the hospital if symptoms progress. Does this strategy make sense to the any of you, well maybe Thh, not enough evidence, but to the rest of the board.?

Quote from THHuxleynew

Jed has very definite views about COVID in which he passionately believes certain things are true. Mainly, he sees the evils of pandemic deaths as very high, and reckons the only rational solution is very strong government action: as has worked in a number of countries. Notice, he does not say that extreme tight lockdown is the solution: rather he sees that as a failure caused by governments without the capacity to do other things that work better and do not stop people going about their normal levels.

You are saying here, I think, that because he holds those views strongly, he is not thinking for himself and is part of the media-organised polarisation in the USA. (I don't think you are really believing he is deliberately engaging in a PR he does not believe for others).

I have always found Jed to be rational, but more certain of his facts than I would be - it sometimes makes him seem irrational. So over this pandemic I am less certain morally what is right - the evils of restrictions that crash the economy are very real and deaths from horrible disease are something we live with, with many diseases, it is a fine balance, and will make moral questions for many years to come, what is right. I agree with him that governments that are able to organise strong "big brother like" track and trace, with effective plentiful testing, will do much much better. We have obvious examples of this. Look, for a clear case, at New Zealand. Very strong early action - enormous priority given to track and trace, and everyone doing what was needed when they were locked down. Cost, both human and to economy, less than almost anywhere else. They are lucky in having very precise control over immigration, being an island.

I don't see this is a partisan point, unless you trade off distrust of government against older people dying horribly and unnecessarily from this disease, because your politics is so far to distrust government that higher deaths are preferable to temporary measures. It is pretty clear that after we have effective vaccines (very likely early next year) few people will die. It is also pretty clear that the overall death rate will vary enormously according to how effectively governments have responded, and how lucky they have been - Stefan's point that some countries were seeded more than others before lockdown is true.

I can agree with you only if you reckon those who are highly polarised (that is in the US Trump, + his supporters, and most of the new democrats, but not old-style democrats nor old-style republicans) are caught in a media-sanitised partial view of issues which demonises opponents.

Saying that Jed's views are not his own but manufactured by the media you are dehumanising somone with (I guess) different views from you. So can you expand further on this? Are you saying that you are equally certain (sharing this with about 1/3 of the US) that Jed's views along with those of another 1/3 of the US should be dismissed as rubbish? Or are you saying that Jed is part of the political disastrous polarisation that has been sharpened even further by Trump and the new Republicans and that you don't like? If first option, then it is you who are going along with media-inspired polarisation and dehumanisation of opponents.

I'd hope you are against this polarisation - in which case the only way out is to respect your opponents and argue the issues. If somone has biased views and is not seeing this clearly that in the end will come out just as long as those with more complete views so not engage in tribal behaviour. And whatever politics Trump himself should be anathema to anyone looking for better political discourse in the US because he, along with many of the democrats and (now) many of the republicans who support him, demonise political opponents. It is not demonising Trump to say that his strategy (or maybe just his personality) is to simplify complex issues and divide people into friends and foes, then to treat foes with an extreme lack of respect.

THH

Display More

Like most topics of science continue to be elusive and how scientists describe ghost particles that come up from the core of the earth, they will bond with different elements, to keep earths core hot ..they are the mechanism of cold fusion. and yet the Fake deceiving write up's are the same as whats going on though out the world today. Stop and look around, you lost this war of words.

I did not believe you all are the cause but a victim until I see the none stop reckless driving of the people reporting only the collision course to this virus.

just like delaying the "mail in voting' to replace trump by simply not counting the votes to restore there power and everything go's back to the way they planed.

I think not.

you still have time to change.

Quote from JedRothwell

https://advances.sciencemag.or…2020/08/07/sciadv.abd3083

Low-cost measurement of facemask efficacy for filtering expelled droplets during speech

Here the "old" paper we linked some weeks ago with a bit more science behind it.. https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202004.0203/v2

The above paper is about droplets but aerosols from a speaker just about start where the paper above stops. Of course droplets are the worst you can get and they will make almost everybody terribly sick. But droplets in my view are a rare case in public. Sitting in a room with tons of aerosols is far more likely and may be even more dangerous as the surface (whole lung nasal region, throat) affected inside your body is much larger. Thus the paper Jed linked just ignores aerosols.

Quote from Toffoli

Coronavirus Timeline and Analysis

https://www.globalresearch.ca/…navirus-time-line/5705776

The problem with this guy is that he is not informed about even the most basic facts like the origin of the first CoV-19 victims and thus he is just talking. A waste of time to read!

Quote from Shane D.

Most people are wearing face masks, but from my observation, many reuse them without cleaning. That may have something to do with my shopping at Walmart though. They may as well wear a petri dish on their face. Can't be healthy.

I usually expose used mask to sun light and wait some 5 days before re-use. But during winter time this will be a problem.

Face masks in my view can be risky if a person is highly infective because he then will spread the more far reaching tiny aerosols. On the other side most masks even FP95 do not fully protect against aerosols. As papers show a mask just gives you 3x less exposition thus 3 minutes instead of one...

Thus all sick people should stay home as a mask will not fully protect others.

People should avoid closed rooms and stay as short as possible. This will be one reason for a winter surge in infections.

Quote from Shane D.

Most people are wearing face masks, but from my observation, many reuse them without cleaning.

When I go to the store, I wear a throw-away surgical mask and surgical gloves. I mean mask #1 "surgical mask, 3-layer" in this report:

https://advances.sciencemag.or…2020/08/07/sciadv.abd3083

They are not expensive. You can buy them anywhere these days. Office Depot sells them cheap.

I toss out the mask as soon as I get home. I toss the gloves into the washing machine. In places where there are fewer people I wear a cloth mask, but after reading that report I think a throw-away mask is better.

After coming back from the store I wash cloth masks, surgical gloves and clothes in the washing machine with hot water, and I take a shower. This is what my grandfather did in 1918. He went in the basement door, changed his clothes and showered, before going upstairs to join the family.

Ivermectin and COVID-19 Management with Adam Gaertner