More about the high school in Paulding county:

Georgia school seen in photo of a crowded hallway will briefly move to online learning after reporting 9 cases of Covid-19

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/09…covid-19-cases/index.html

Quote from JedRothwell

I toss out the mask as soon as I get home. I toss the gloves into the washing machine.

You may find that surgical gloves are still in short supply. You can wash them and reuse them many times. To dry them, hang them up on a towel rack and the next day, turn them inside out. To see if one is intact, blow it up like a balloon. I recommend sprinkling a little baby powder on the inside.

Quote from Shane D.

but in my next life I have decided to reincarnate as a Swede.

Not all Swedes are equal..

..Greta Thunberg...there was another one on LF ...something about the 'black swan"??

6000 death toll in Sweden may not include as many elderly as in the UK.

Apparently many aged can stay at home in Sweden

"https://www.seniorsmatter.com/healthcare-in-sweden/2491976"

So Sweden did not have so many large aged care facilities (200 residents in one place)

such as are in Melbourne, which are being ravaged by Covid..

Hopefully the vulnerable in the 70 -85 group at home can remain isolated until Covid goes away.

The profoundly incompetent WHO's misinformation record on Covid-19

(used by Big Tech thought controllers to censor and suppress dissenting news) ---

Drbeen Medical Lectures : WHO - World Health Organization A Performance Review

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/0…monia-outbreak-virus.html

China said they weren't sure the coronavirus did human to human transmission...8 January

Maybe China,,like the WHO.... hadn't read the textbook or CDC

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/general-information.html

'

Common human coronaviruses usually spread from an infected person to others through

• the air by coughing and sneezing

Quote from Lou Pagnucco

The profoundly incompetent WHO's misinformation record on Covid-19

(used by Big Tech thought controllers to censor and suppress dissenting news) ---

Drbeen Medical Lectures : WHO - World Health Organization A Performance Review

External Content www.youtube.com

Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.

Display all external content

Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

The challenge here is not to spot intent, the challenge here is to make up the masses generate the courage to speak the truth.

Most people - and I include most people on this board - are extremely, extremely afraid of being speaking against the herd -- speaking against the "masters." You can break through and understand the mistruths, but you won't let yourself see their intent and evil.

Incompetent? Ya right! They say we will stick needles in your arm and you will say "oops they are incompetent."

We will all die, live in service of the truth while you can because doing so seems like the purpose of life - not politicking, not just trying to survive like a video game, not filling bank accounts.

Quote from Shane D.

Not sure how to make it happen, but in my next life I have decided to reincarnate as a Swede. Good, smart, and reasonable people...at least in handling this pandemic.

Except they have the most cases and the highest fatality rates in Europe, and their economy is a shambles because they screwed up so badly. Other than that . . . Great! They have 8,210 cases per million. Italy is 4,149.

Granted it is far better than the U.S., at 15,720. But Sweden is part of Europe where they have actual functioning health care systems and public health, not a U.S.-style third-world travesty.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Quote from Navid

Most people - and I include most people on this board - are extremely, extremely afraid of being speaking against the herd -- speaking against the "masters."

What a wuss you are! Who are you afraid of? What herd? I have been speaking against various herds and powerful institutions since the Vietnam War. I have never once -- for one moment -- felt "extremely afraid." Or a little afraid, or even slight trepidation, disquiet, dismay, angst or unease.

And at the same time an island of people being told not to eat the fish "churchexperts" from the sea as winter ran them out of crops and they all died.

It is the same with the Corana virus.

Quote from DnG

And at the same time an island of people being told not to eat the fish "churchexperts" from the sea as winter ran them out of crops and they all died.

It is the same with the Corana virus.

If you were honest about the equation here; certainty of higher COVID deaths vs certainty of harm to the economy, I'd be sympathectic.

But you are not, your argument only works if the (obviously) disastrous COVID is in fact harmless, contrary to advice of experts and experience all over the world where countries that ignore it end up in trouble. Note the long list of countries that appeared Ok, until their initially very small rates had increased exponentially to something horrible in cities.

Jed's point here (which I'll make for him) is that if you let COVID infection rates increase you get worse harm to the economy than if you take strong early action, because the infection rates get so high no-one can tolerate them. Even if governments tell people to ignore the risks, in a free country when faced with tv pics of over-run hospitals and stories of horrible deaths most people will be cautious. The later measures then have to be worse, and last longer.

There remains some question about what (lowish) rate of infection is tolerable. The costs of test and trace go up as infection rate goes up, so it is difficult to see a higher but stable infection rate as cost effective. For the same level of social restrictions - needed to get R = 1 - you have more deaths, more fear, more costs doing test and trace.

So it is just not the case that lower population-level restrictions is better for the economy. What, DnG, is the real world scenario that corresponds to your "islanders eat the COVID fish and survive" scenario? I can't see how it works for more than a month or so, after which the higher COVID rates become impossible to ignore even for those previously willing to trade more COVID deaths for less harm of other sorts (and, yes, less other deaths) due to damage to economy.

Think of it as being like managing a gambling habit. It is tough to stop, but if you stop sooner you are better off.

THH

Quote from Navid

The challenge here is not to spot intent, the challenge here is to make up the masses generate the courage to speak the truth.

Most people - and I include most people on this board - are extremely, extremely afraid of being speaking against the herd -- speaking against the "masters."

What arrogance! Combined with a dismal pessimistic view of democratic governments, which generally try to do what is for the best, however incompetent they are.

Both wrong.

Quote from THHuxleynew

If you were honest about the equation here; certainty of higher COVID deaths vs certainty of harm to the economy, I'd be sympathectic.

But you are not, your argument only works if the (obviously) disastrous COVID is in fact harmless, contrary to advice of experts and experience all over the world where countries that ignore it end up in trouble. Note the long list of countries that appeared Ok, until their initially very small rates had increased exponentially to something horrible in cities.

Jed's point here (which I'll make for him) is that if you let COVID infection rates increase you get worse harm to the economy than if you take strong early action, because the infection rates get so high no-one can tolerate them. Even if governments tell people to ignore the risks, in a free country when faced with tv pics of over-run hospitals and stories of horrible deaths most people will be cautious. The later measures then have to be worse, and last longer.

There remains some question about what (lowish) rate of infection is tolerable. The costs of test and trace go up as infection rate goes up, so it is difficult to see a higher but stable infection rate as cost effective. For the same level of social restrictions - needed to get R = 1 - you have more deaths, more fear, more costs doing test and trace.

So it is just not the case that lower population-level restrictions is better for the economy. What, DnG, is the real world scenario that corresponds to your "islanders eat the COVID fish and survive" scenario? I can't see how it works for more than a month or so, after which the higher COVID rates become impossible to ignore even for those previously willing to trade more COVID deaths for less harm of other sorts (and, yes, less other deaths) due to damage to economy.

Think of it as being like managing a gambling habit. It is tough to stop, but if you stop sooner you are better off.

THH

Display More

you cant stop the twisting of any point of view like this is what you do for a living.. but at the same time I'm using your twists and turns that force my hand.

Hope its not the hand of God, Keep talking..

Quote from THHuxleynew

What arrogance! Combined with a dismal pessimistic view of democratic governments, which generally try to do what is for the best, however incompetent they are.

Yes, because if they fail, they are voted out of office. People in the U.S. often say that agencies such as the department of motor vehicles (DMV) where you have your license renewed are unresponsive, because they have a monopoly. Here in Atlanta they are very responsive! Almost fawning. Because if they are arrogant the taxpayers will vote the local politicians out of office. It has happened before.

The Georgia Dept. of Health, on the other hand, has been appalling during the COVID-19 crisis. I blame the governor. I hope he is voted out of office because of this. If he is not, we should blame the voters for not demanding a better response.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Jed's point here (which I'll make for him) is that if you let COVID infection rates increase you get worse harm to the economy than if you take strong early action, because the infection rates get so high no-one can tolerate them. Even if governments tell people to ignore the risks, in a free country when faced with tv pics of over-run hospitals and stories of horrible deaths most people will be cautious. The later measures then have to be worse, and last longer.

Yup. Well summarized. We can't have economic recovery without first establishing control of the pandemic. To say we have to choose one or the other is a false choice. We must choose both.

Quote from THHuxleynew

There remains some question about what (lowish) rate of infection is tolerable.

There is some socially acceptable low rate of infection and death. People don't like to say that. Politicians in particular don't like to say it. They say "even one death is too many," but that is not true. Some number has to be acceptable, because you cannot prevent all deaths no matter how much you pay, and at some point the the monetary and practical cost of preventing additional deaths would become exorbitant. The effects of prevention would cause more harm than the disease. We are far from that point now, despite what the "open up" advocates claim. The same can be said for automobile accidents, air crashes, and other preventable sources of death. Some level of risk has to be acceptable. If you say "no automobile fatality is acceptable" then you will not allow cars to drive faster than 15 mph. Practically no fatal accidents occur at that speed. Even pedestrians usually survive. 15 mph would impractical on the highway, but I think it should be imposed on surface roads in quiet neighborhoods, instead of 25 mph. I hope it is with self-driving cars.

What rate of coronavirus infections and deaths is acceptable is partly a technical judgement, and partly a value judgement. That is to say, a matter of opinion. The epidemiologists will tell us how low we can reduce the infection rate given the use of masks, or with tracing with 100,000 tracers, or 300,000 tracers. They can tell us how low we need to go to make tracing effective, or to prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed. Beyond those technical criteria, society has to decide how many people it is willing to lose.

Probably Boris has changed his viewpoint on herd immunity.