Coronavirus (COVID-19 Outbreak) (72 Viewers)
- Thread starter Bjerknes
- Start date
I'm not sure that's any better than the average New Yorker cover, honestly.
Is it any wonder all the governors are going, "F%#% this sh%$. We're going commando."?
Biden is basically a Petri dish. As long as the Democrats can keep it alive and make its lips move in the lab, they feel that's a better shot at a working, functional president than Trump. They'd be right, but the bar is so low.
The US would massacre someone like Newsom. Even if his ex-wife's birthday party got tons of Republicans CV-19 in Florida, he's a former SF mayor, governor of Cali ... things wide swaths of America despise on principle.
Pro life
Pro gun
Pro wrestling
Won't need to. Nature's swamp will reclaim it with climate change in a few years... so no worries.
OK, I liked that.
It's a good and reasonable vision. Smart of them to share it in advance too. Nobody else has had the balls to, strangely.
There will be freak-outs (how's a restaurant supposed to stay afloat with half tables empty, etc.), but I dare someone to put up or shut up and propose some better, realistic options.
It fits Trump's modus operandi of being America's AIDS -- basically seeking out and destroying every semblance of an immune system America has to viruses and disease.
Still, if you're gonna crap on WHO, you have to look at the 194 clowns who put commerce and travel ahead of health with it in the first place:
https://pandemic.substack.com/p/the-2005-decision-that-made-the-2020
It's untenable and unsurprising.
Is it any wonder all the governors are going, "F%#% this sh%$. We're going commando."?
Biden is basically a Petri dish. As long as the Democrats can keep it alive and make its lips move in the lab, they feel that's a better shot at a working, functional president than Trump. They'd be right, but the bar is so low.
The US would massacre someone like Newsom. Even if his ex-wife's birthday party got tons of Republicans CV-19 in Florida, he's a former SF mayor, governor of Cali ... things wide swaths of America despise on principle.
Pro life
Pro gun
Pro wrestling
Won't need to. Nature's swamp will reclaim it with climate change in a few years... so no worries.
OK, I liked that.It's a good and reasonable vision. Smart of them to share it in advance too. Nobody else has had the balls to, strangely.
There will be freak-outs (how's a restaurant supposed to stay afloat with half tables empty, etc.), but I dare someone to put up or shut up and propose some better, realistic options.
It fits Trump's modus operandi of being America's AIDS -- basically seeking out and destroying every semblance of an immune system America has to viruses and disease.
Still, if you're gonna crap on WHO, you have to look at the 194 clowns who put commerce and travel ahead of health with it in the first place:
https://pandemic.substack.com/p/the-2005-decision-that-made-the-2020
It's untenable and unsurprising.
Ironically that means the American democracy is more stable than you'd think. As an outsider looking in, it seems as if America is about to fall any minute now. But mostly it's just antics from a lunatic president. Even if the commander in chief is an idiot, there are still many very capable people in the government as a whole, on all sorts of levels.
- - - Updated - - -
And this is why all this panic is silly. You have to reopen at some point. Nothing much will really have changed though. Hell, we don't even know if people who recovered from it are immune yet.
There is nothing that has been rational about our response. Nothing.
- - - Updated - - -
And this is why all this panic is silly. You have to reopen at some point. Nothing much will really have changed though. Hell, we don't even know if people who recovered from it are immune yet.
There is nothing that has been rational about our response. Nothing.
The reason why California is able to even think about opening up parts of the state right now is because they were well ahead of the curve in regards to self quarantine and social distancing. If other states had followed suit, this would have been more controlled than what it is.
Which is also why Gavin Newsom could very well be President in 2024. The rest of the country is indeed watching how he has handled this.
Which is also why Gavin Newsom could very well be President in 2024. The rest of the country is indeed watching how he has handled this.
If it is such a magical device, how come they didn't use it to disinfect the interview area, so they didn't have to wear masks?
But that's the typical BS propaganda one should expect from a regime. Probably looking to sell people a false sense of security before they reopen the country.
I wonder what futuristic device/cure our authoritarian leader will try to sell Americans to justify reopening the US at the end of April? Or maybe he already has - hydroxychloroquine
But that's the typical BS propaganda one should expect from a regime. Probably looking to sell people a false sense of security before they reopen the country.
I wonder what futuristic device/cure our authoritarian leader will try to sell Americans to justify reopening the US at the end of April? Or maybe he already has - hydroxychloroquine
I know you generally vote Republican. This being said, iirc, you also bothered to go and vote for Killery at the last elections, or at least I think I saw you saying so.
That earned you a ton of respect from me.
There are moments when party lines and political convictions should just be brushed aside ...
I like Cuomo, New York has been hit the hardest but that city offers a very different dynamic to cope with. This being said, until I see any different, Newsom is who'd like to see lead this country, asap.
That earned you a ton of respect from me.
There are moments when party lines and political convictions should just be brushed aside ...
I like Cuomo, New York has been hit the hardest but that city offers a very different dynamic to cope with. This being said, until I see any different, Newsom is who'd like to see lead this country, asap.
That's how you make stats work for you. Unfortunately, the only way to really determine that is indiscriminate testing, including testing for antibodies, since many people, who were infected but had little to no symptoms, are likely cured/not infectious, at this point. Very few countries or US states have that sort of testing capacity, even at this point in the pandemic, and it is still very questionable how accurate the latest tests are. Earlier in the pandemic, the accuracy of the tests used was highly questionable. Since then there have been reports about new tests with supposedly better accuracy and yielding faster results. Most countries in the world, including the US, are still struggling to acquire these new tests and bring their testing capacity to adequate levels. And this concerns just the tests that check for covid infection. The antibody tests are a different matter altogether.
Point is, it may be many months before a country like the US stumbles its way to finally being in position to get a better understanding of mortality rate and levels of infection for the covid pandemic.
Hopefully the likes of Germany, South Korea, etc would fare better in that regard and we, the US, can copy their findings.
This is an example of why building up a proper testing capacity and creating accurate tests, as early as possible in the pandemic, was so important. Having not just enough but also correct data, ultimately determines the best course of action.
This being said, a lower mortaity rate for covid doesn't, or shouldn't, necessarily change the way the pandemic is handled. Even if we assume covid's mortality rate to be about the same that of seasonal flu (0.1%), covid is (likely) much more infectious due to two factors - 1) a much longer incubation period than seasonal flu (1-2 weeks vs 1-2 days) and 2) lack of pre-existing immunity in the general population, unlike is the case with seasonal flu.
Why is that a problem? Because a small percentage of a very large number is still a large number. For example, 0.1% of say 100 mil infected in the US alone, a number of total infections that can be reached very quickly without any counter measures, is still 100K dead over a period of a few weeks. And this is just the expected number of deaths, the number of people, who'd require hospitalization will be much, much higher. Over a relatively short period of time, such numbers would still overwhelm the health care system in most countries/states.
Once the health-care system is overwhelmed, many people, who would have otherwise survived, would end up dying because they would not receive the necessary care under a collapsed health-care system. So this back-feeding could result in the death-toll going up to 150-200K, if not higher, when all is said and done.
And this pretty much the best-case scenario, where I assumed covid-19 to have the same death rate as that of seasonal flu.
- - - Updated - - -
No respect lost there. I can understand a republican not voting for Hillary. I blame democrats who didn't find her exciting enough or moderates/independents who, for whatever the f*ck reason, thought Hillary and Trump were on the same level.
Speaking of Evan McMullin ...
Point is, it may be many months before a country like the US stumbles its way to finally being in position to get a better understanding of mortality rate and levels of infection for the covid pandemic.
Hopefully the likes of Germany, South Korea, etc would fare better in that regard and we, the US, can copy their findings.
This is an example of why building up a proper testing capacity and creating accurate tests, as early as possible in the pandemic, was so important. Having not just enough but also correct data, ultimately determines the best course of action.
This being said, a lower mortaity rate for covid doesn't, or shouldn't, necessarily change the way the pandemic is handled. Even if we assume covid's mortality rate to be about the same that of seasonal flu (0.1%), covid is (likely) much more infectious due to two factors - 1) a much longer incubation period than seasonal flu (1-2 weeks vs 1-2 days) and 2) lack of pre-existing immunity in the general population, unlike is the case with seasonal flu.
Why is that a problem? Because a small percentage of a very large number is still a large number. For example, 0.1% of say 100 mil infected in the US alone, a number of total infections that can be reached very quickly without any counter measures, is still 100K dead over a period of a few weeks. And this is just the expected number of deaths, the number of people, who'd require hospitalization will be much, much higher. Over a relatively short period of time, such numbers would still overwhelm the health care system in most countries/states.
Once the health-care system is overwhelmed, many people, who would have otherwise survived, would end up dying because they would not receive the necessary care under a collapsed health-care system. So this back-feeding could result in the death-toll going up to 150-200K, if not higher, when all is said and done.
And this pretty much the best-case scenario, where I assumed covid-19 to have the same death rate as that of seasonal flu.
- - - Updated - - -
No respect lost there. I can understand a republican not voting for Hillary. I blame democrats who didn't find her exciting enough or moderates/independents who, for whatever the f*ck reason, thought Hillary and Trump were on the same level.
Speaking of Evan McMullin ...
Last edited:
That's how you make stats work for you. Unfortunately, the only way to really determine that is indiscriminate testing, including testing for antibodies, since many people, who were infected but had little to no symptoms, are likely cured/not infectious, at this point. Very few countries or US states have that sort of testing capacity, even at this point in the pandemic, and it is still very questionable how accurate the latest tests are. Earlier in the pandemic, the accuracy of the tests used was highly questionable. Since then there have been reports about new tests with supposedly better accuracy and yielding faster results. Most countries in the world, including the US, are still struggling to acquire these new tests and bring their testing capacity to adequate levels. And this concerns just the tests that check for covid infection. The antibody tests are a different matter altogether.
Point is, it may be many months before a country like the US stumbles its way to finally being in position to get a better understanding of mortality rate and levels of infection for the covid pandemic.
Hopefully the likes of Germany, South Korea, etc would fare better in that regard and we, the US, can copy their findings.
This is an example of why building up a proper testing capacity and creating accurate tests, as early as possible in the pandemic, was so important. Having not just enough but also correct data, ultimately determines the best course of action.
This being said, a lower mortaity rate for covid doesn't, or shouldn't, necessarily change the way the pandemic is handled. Even if we assume covid's mortality rate to be about the same of seasonal flu (0.1%), covid is (likely) much more infectious due to two factors - 1) a much longer incubation period than seasonal flu (1-2 weeks vs 1-2 days) and 2) lack of pre-existing immunity in the general population, unlike is the case with seasonal flu.
Why is that a problem? Because 0.1% of say 100 mil infected in the US alone, a number that can be reached very quickly without any counter measures, is still 100K dead over a period of a few weeks. And this is just the expected number of deaths, the number of people, who'd require hospitalization will be much, much higher. Over a relatively short period of time, such numbers would still overwhelm the health care system in most countries/states.
Once the health-care system is overwhelmed, many people, who would have otherwise survived, would end up dying because they would not receive the necessary care under a collapsed health-care system. So this back-feeding could result in the death-toll going up to 150-200K, if not higher, when all is said and done.
- - - Updated - - -
No respect lost there. I can understand a republican not voting for Hillary. I blame democrats who didn't find her exciting enough or moderates/independents who, for whatever the f*ck reason, thought Hillary and Trump were on the same level.
Speaking of Evan McMullin ...
Point is, it may be many months before a country like the US stumbles its way to finally being in position to get a better understanding of mortality rate and levels of infection for the covid pandemic.
Hopefully the likes of Germany, South Korea, etc would fare better in that regard and we, the US, can copy their findings.
This is an example of why building up a proper testing capacity and creating accurate tests, as early as possible in the pandemic, was so important. Having not just enough but also correct data, ultimately determines the best course of action.
This being said, a lower mortaity rate for covid doesn't, or shouldn't, necessarily change the way the pandemic is handled. Even if we assume covid's mortality rate to be about the same of seasonal flu (0.1%), covid is (likely) much more infectious due to two factors - 1) a much longer incubation period than seasonal flu (1-2 weeks vs 1-2 days) and 2) lack of pre-existing immunity in the general population, unlike is the case with seasonal flu.
Why is that a problem? Because 0.1% of say 100 mil infected in the US alone, a number that can be reached very quickly without any counter measures, is still 100K dead over a period of a few weeks. And this is just the expected number of deaths, the number of people, who'd require hospitalization will be much, much higher. Over a relatively short period of time, such numbers would still overwhelm the health care system in most countries/states.
Once the health-care system is overwhelmed, many people, who would have otherwise survived, would end up dying because they would not receive the necessary care under a collapsed health-care system. So this back-feeding could result in the death-toll going up to 150-200K, if not higher, when all is said and done.
- - - Updated - - -
No respect lost there. I can understand a republican not voting for Hillary. I blame democrats who didn't find her exciting enough or moderates/independents who, for whatever the f*ck reason, thought Hillary and Trump were on the same level.
Speaking of Evan McMullin ...
Not necessarily. Unlike most people on this forum I can think of people as capable and still disagree with them.
This childlike splitting behaviour PI demonstrates for example reminds me of a teenage girl who is trying to find out who she is. And people who disagree with her must be bad and must be punished through dislikes.
It's not how the world works. Adults can disagree with someone and still think of them as intelligent, because they have the capacity to try and understand where the other person is coming from.
Their reasoning is a bit more complex than Trump = bad.
Verstuurd vanaf mijn ONEPLUS A6003 met Tapatalk
This childlike splitting behaviour PI demonstrates for example reminds me of a teenage girl who is trying to find out who she is. And people who disagree with her must be bad and must be punished through dislikes.
It's not how the world works. Adults can disagree with someone and still think of them as intelligent, because they have the capacity to try and understand where the other person is coming from.
Their reasoning is a bit more complex than Trump = bad.
Verstuurd vanaf mijn ONEPLUS A6003 met Tapatalk