Coronavirus COVID-19

[89Hen]

I still thankfully only know three people first hand who have had it and had bad(ish) symptoms and nobody who has died of it. Still terrible, but puts in perspective how few people it really impacts.

[Gil Dobie]

I still thankfully only know three people first hand who have had it and had bad(ish) symptoms and nobody who has died of it. Still terrible, but puts in perspective how few people it really impacts.

Most people are like you, no deaths. My case, 5 died out of 9 that I know that had it. 2 of the survivors did need O2 and were hospitalized, 1 was in their 20's and had no problems, the other never got tested, but said they had it.

[HI54UNI]

My father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate had it. It was touch and go but he survived.

[SeattleGriz]

My daughters ex-boyfriends dad died of Covid recently. Apparently he was out and about like there was no Covid.

Our ranch partner died of it a couple weeks ago. He was the town vet and stated if he got it, it would kill him.

He was overweight, had diabetes and drank.

[BDKJMU]

After 5 weeks of vaccinations..
https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccinations

330+ million population US. I believe ballpark 260 million age 16 and over (eligible for vaccine). Figure around 70% tops/around 180 million will be willing, able, and bother to get the vaccine. If we're going to ballpark have 360 million doses (180 million people x 2 shots each), do the math, at the current avg pace would take close to 3 years. Now if get up to 1 million doses a day (may be close to there already), that's still close to a year. 1.5 million doses a day ballpark Sept. Bottom line, this is gonna take awhile to even get to 2/3 to 70% of the over 16 population...

[kalm]

After 5 weeks of vaccinations..
https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccinations

330+ million population US. I believe ballpark 260 million age 16 and over (eligible for vaccine). Figure around 70% tops/around 180 million will be willing, able, and bother to get the vaccine. If we're going to ballpark have 360 million doses (180 million people x 2 shots each), do the math, at the current avg pace would take close to 3 years. Now if get up to 1 million doses a day (may be close to there already), that's still close to a year. 1.5 million doses a day ballpark Sept. Bottom line, this is gonna take awhile to even get to 2/3 to 70% of the over 16 population...

The J&J one jab should be approved here within a couple of months and improved logistics and federal assistance should speed things up.

Herd immunity still won’t happen world wide in 2021 according to the WHO. Hopefully the US will catch up and be close to normal by this winter.

[SeattleGriz]

Who thinks they are going to limit cycle thresholds for the PCR test and when false positives drop, claim COVID is on the retreat?

Conspiracy theorists and autocrats.

Hmm. Seems my conspiracy is already coming true.

https://www.who.int/news/item/14-12-202 ... -ivd-users

Users of RT-PCR reagents should read the IFU carefully to determine if manual adjustment of the PCR positivity threshold is necessary to account for any background noise which may lead to a specimen with a high cycle threshold (Ct) value result being interpreted as a positive result

[kalm]

Conspiracy theorists and autocrats.

Hmm. Seems my conspiracy is already coming true.

https://www.who.int/news/item/14-12-202 ... -ivd-users

Users of RT-PCR reagents should read the IFU carefully to determine if manual adjustment of the PCR positivity threshold is necessary to account for any background noise which may lead to a specimen with a high cycle threshold (Ct) value result being interpreted as a positive result

Where’s the conspiracy?

[SeattleGriz]

Hmm. Seems my conspiracy is already coming true.

https://www.who.int/news/item/14-12-202 ... -ivd-users

Where’s the conspiracy?

I don't know, you tell me. You're the one who claimed my idea would only be believed by conspiracy theorist and autocrats.

[kalm]

Where’s the conspiracy?

I don't know, you tell me. You're the one who claimed my idea would only be believed by conspiracy theorist and autocrats.

Well here we are.

[SeattleGriz]

I don't know, you tell me. You're the one who claimed my idea would only be believed by conspiracy theorist and autocrats.

Well here we are.

We are where everyone who had common sense has been claiming, but were labeled as crazy.

The WHO article has three main points:
1) When diagnosing someone with COVID, a positive test is not enough. You should be including clinical symptoms in addition to the test to determine a positive.
2) The cycle threshold of many of the PCR tests is too high and thus creating false positives and now needs to be taken into account.
3) Now that the WHO supported mass implemention of the testing and diagnosis protocol, they now feel a "reassessment" is in order.

I'm all for being on the side of cautious, but this is another example of the lack of true science. These points were out there from the beginning, but as stated above, anyone who brought them up were labeled as crazy and zero substantive discussion took place on the topic.

[kalm]

Well here we are.

We are where everyone who had common sense has been claiming, but were labeled as crazy.

The WHO article has three main points:
1) When diagnosing someone with COVID, a positive test is not enough. You should be including clinical symptoms in addition to the test to determine a positive.
2) The cycle threshold of many of the PCR tests is too high and thus creating false positives and now needs to be taken into account.
3) Now that the WHO supported mass implemention of the testing and diagnosis protocol, they now feel a "reassessment" is in order.

I'm all for being on the side of cautious, but this is another example of the lack of true science. These points were out there from the beginning, but as stated above, anyone who brought them up were labeled as crazy and zero substantive discussion took place on the topic.

What would you have changed and how would that have helped control the pandemic?

[SeattleGriz]

We are where everyone who had common sense has been claiming, but were labeled as crazy.

The WHO article has three main points:
1) When diagnosing someone with COVID, a positive test is not enough. You should be including clinical symptoms in addition to the test to determine a positive.
2) The cycle threshold of many of the PCR tests is too high and thus creating false positives and now needs to be taken into account.
3) Now that the WHO supported mass implemention of the testing and diagnosis protocol, they now feel a "reassessment" is in order.

I'm all for being on the side of cautious, but this is another example of the lack of true science. These points were out there from the beginning, but as stated above, anyone who brought them up were labeled as crazy and zero substantive discussion took place on the topic.

What would you have changed and how would that have helped control the pandemic?

That is actually a very good question. At this point I don't think it would have changed the pandemic much. I'm still of the belief that those who are susceptible and don't practice good hygiene habits, would, and will catch the virus. We just would have had much lower case counts and lower deaths attributed to Covid-like many other countries.

In regards to what would have changed? I think it would have spurred more serious debate over the efficacy of lockdowns and whether we should have had them. Your business, especially being an outdoor business might not have been affected. I actually don't know if your business was affected, just assuming it was.

Of course one aspect I am willing to admit, is I have no idea how a more "even" discussion would have played out. Would it have increased bad behavior because some felt it was even more bullshit?

[kalm]

What would you have changed and how would that have helped control the pandemic?

That is actually a very good question. At this point I don't think it would have changed the pandemic much. I'm still of the belief that those who are susceptible and don't practice good hygiene habits, would, and will catch the virus. We just would have had much lower case counts and lower deaths attributed to Covid-like many other countries.

In regards to what would have changed? I think it would have spurred more serious debate over the efficacy of lockdowns and whether we should have had them. Your business, especially being an outdoor business might not have been affected. I actually don't know if your business was affected, just assuming it was.

Of course one aspect I am willing to admit, is I have no idea how a more "even" discussion would have played out. Would it have increased bad behavior because some felt it was even more bullshit?

Fair enough. I just see under-counting alleged more than over-counting. At least by the more reputable sources.

I’m guessing a hell of a lot more people have had it than are tallied, but the death rates sound legit.

[SeattleGriz]

That is actually a very good question. At this point I don't think it would have changed the pandemic much. I'm still of the belief that those who are susceptible and don't practice good hygiene habits, would, and will catch the virus. We just would have had much lower case counts and lower deaths attributed to Covid-like many other countries.

In regards to what would have changed? I think it would have spurred more serious debate over the efficacy of lockdowns and whether we should have had them. Your business, especially being an outdoor business might not have been affected. I actually don't know if your business was affected, just assuming it was.

Of course one aspect I am willing to admit, is I have no idea how a more "even" discussion would have played out. Would it have increased bad behavior because some felt it was even more bullshit?

Fair enough. I just see under-counting alleged more than over-counting. At least by the more reputable sources.

I’m guessing a hell of a lot more people have had it than are tallied, but the death rates sound legit.

What reputable sources? I know WHO seems to change their story frequently, but they still have some benefit...maybe.

I could see under counting happen.

[kalm]

Fair enough. I just see under-counting alleged more than over-counting. At least by the more reputable sources.

I’m guessing a hell of a lot more people have had it than are tallied, but the death rates sound legit.

What reputable sources? I know WHO seems to change their story frequently, but they still have some benefit...maybe.

I could see under counting happen.

Clarification: under-reporting of deaths.

[SDHornet]

1. Illnesses inside the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV):

The U.S. government has reason to believe that several researchers inside the WIV became sick in autumn 2019, before the first identified case of the outbreak, with symptoms consistent with both COVID-19 and common seasonal illnesses. This raises questions about the credibility of WIV senior researcher Shi Zhengli’s public claim that there was “zero infection” among the WIV’s staff and students of SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-related viruses.
Accidental infections in labs have caused several previous virus outbreaks in China and elsewhere, including a 2004 SARS outbreak in Beijing that infected nine people, killing one.
The CCP has prevented independent journalists, investigators, and global health authorities from interviewing researchers at the WIV, including those who were ill in the fall of 2019. Any credible inquiry into the origin of the virus must include interviews with these researchers and a full accounting of their previously unreported illness.
2. Research at the WIV:

Starting in at least 2016 – and with no indication of a stop prior to the COVID-19 outbreak – WIV researchers conducted experiments involving RaTG13, the bat coronavirus identified by the WIV in January 2020 as its closest sample to SARS-CoV-2 (96.2% similar). The WIV became a focal point for international coronavirus research after the 2003 SARS outbreak and has since studied animals including mice, bats, and pangolins.
The WIV has a published record of conducting “gain-of-function” research to engineer chimeric viruses. But the WIV has not been transparent or consistent about its record of studying viruses most similar to the COVID-19 virus, including “RaTG13,” which it sampled from a cave in Yunnan Province in 2013 after several miners died of SARS-like illness.
WHO investigators must have access to the records of the WIV’s work on bat and other coronaviruses before the COVID-19 outbreak. As part of a thorough inquiry, they must have a full accounting of why the WIV altered and then removed online records of its work with RaTG13 and other viruses.
3. Secret military activity at the WIV:

Secrecy and non-disclosure are standard practice for Beijing. For many years the United States has publicly raised concerns about China’s past biological weapons work, which Beijing has neither documented nor demonstrably eliminated, despite its clear obligations under the Biological Weapons Convention.
Despite the WIV presenting itself as a civilian institution, the United States has determined that the WIV has collaborated on publications and secret projects with China’s military. The WIV has engaged in classified research, including laboratory animal experiments, on behalf of the Chinese military since at least 2017.
The United States and other donors who funded or collaborated on civilian research at the WIV have a right and obligation to determine whether any of our research funding was diverted to secret Chinese military projects at the WIV.

https://www.state.gov/fact-sheet-activi ... -virology/

[SeattleGriz]

1. Illnesses inside the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV):

The U.S. government has reason to believe that several researchers inside the WIV became sick in autumn 2019, before the first identified case of the outbreak, with symptoms consistent with both COVID-19 and common seasonal illnesses. This raises questions about the credibility of WIV senior researcher Shi Zhengli’s public claim that there was “zero infection” among the WIV’s staff and students of SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-related viruses.
Accidental infections in labs have caused several previous virus outbreaks in China and elsewhere, including a 2004 SARS outbreak in Beijing that infected nine people, killing one.
The CCP has prevented independent journalists, investigators, and global health authorities from interviewing researchers at the WIV, including those who were ill in the fall of 2019. Any credible inquiry into the origin of the virus must include interviews with these researchers and a full accounting of their previously unreported illness.
2. Research at the WIV:

Starting in at least 2016 – and with no indication of a stop prior to the COVID-19 outbreak – WIV researchers conducted experiments involving RaTG13, the bat coronavirus identified by the WIV in January 2020 as its closest sample to SARS-CoV-2 (96.2% similar). The WIV became a focal point for international coronavirus research after the 2003 SARS outbreak and has since studied animals including mice, bats, and pangolins.
The WIV has a published record of conducting “gain-of-function” research to engineer chimeric viruses. But the WIV has not been transparent or consistent about its record of studying viruses most similar to the COVID-19 virus, including “RaTG13,” which it sampled from a cave in Yunnan Province in 2013 after several miners died of SARS-like illness.
WHO investigators must have access to the records of the WIV’s work on bat and other coronaviruses before the COVID-19 outbreak. As part of a thorough inquiry, they must have a full accounting of why the WIV altered and then removed online records of its work with RaTG13 and other viruses.
3. Secret military activity at the WIV:

Secrecy and non-disclosure are standard practice for Beijing. For many years the United States has publicly raised concerns about China’s past biological weapons work, which Beijing has neither documented nor demonstrably eliminated, despite its clear obligations under the Biological Weapons Convention.
Despite the WIV presenting itself as a civilian institution, the United States has determined that the WIV has collaborated on publications and secret projects with China’s military. The WIV has engaged in classified research, including laboratory animal experiments, on behalf of the Chinese military since at least 2017.
The United States and other donors who funded or collaborated on civilian research at the WIV have a right and obligation to determine whether any of our research funding was diverted to secret Chinese military projects at the WIV.

https://www.state.gov/fact-sheet-activi ... -virology/

I'm amazed at how many still don't know Fauci farmed the COVID gain of function research out to Wuhan because the US had its own problems.

[SDHornet]

Going to be fun watching all the "shut everything down" folks spin some serious mental gymnastics when the donk governors/mayors start opening everything up with case counts and daily deaths being what they currently are.

[SeattleGriz]

What reputable sources? I know WHO seems to change their story frequently, but they still have some benefit...maybe.
Mini
I could see under counting happen.

Clarification: under-reporting of deaths.

Still didn't list your reputable sources.

[kalm]

Clarification: under-reporting of deaths.

Still didn't list your reputable sources.

Google is your friend. This hasn’t exactly been hidden. NYT, Marketplace, CNBC, JAMA, Yale, Bloomberg, Forbes.

[SeattleGriz]

Still didn't list your reputable sources.

Google is your friend. This hasn’t exactly been hidden. NYT, Marketplace, CNBC, JAMA, Yale, Bloomberg, Forbes.

Ok. Thought you might have had access to a specific science journal or such. Traditional news sources work.

Glad you didn't list the Michael Mann Institute of Science.

[kalm]

Google is your friend. This hasn’t exactly been hidden. NYT, Marketplace, CNBC, JAMA, Yale, Bloomberg, Forbes.

Ok. Thought you might have had access to a specific science journal or such. Traditional news sources work.

Glad you didn't list the Michael Mann Institute of Science.

Yeah...none of those sources referenced scientific studies and journals. And I didn’t include the Journal of the American Medical Association did I?



(Always fun to be challenged a 2nd time over shit you debunked a few months prior)

[SeattleGriz]

Ok. Thought you might have had access to a specific science journal or such. Traditional news sources work.

Glad you didn't list the Michael Mann Institute of Science.

Yeah...none of those sources referenced scientific studies and journals. And I didn’t include the Journal of the American Medical Association did I?

That wasn't my point. Sometimes great information is behind a paywall. I've found lots of stuff I would have liked to read, but won't cough up $ to read one article.

[kalm]

Yeah...none of those sources referenced scientific studies and journals. And I didn’t include the Journal of the American Medical Association did I?

That wasn't my point. Sometimes great information is behind a paywall. I've found lots of stuff I would have liked to read, but won't cough up $ to read one article.

I have a friend on Facebook who has a PhD in Physics, who always posts these great links, only to find they are subscription only.

Most of those sites I listed don’t have paywalls and especially concerning Covid reporting where the paywall is removed.

And you must have missed JAMA.

Not to mention newsworthy findings find a way of getting released and/or the facts reported via open sources regardless. IOW’s there really isn’t much evidence of some super secret - if we only knew what the REAL science was - thing going on here.