6 minutes ago, vermin on arrival said:

That's what I was thinking. Maybe just hitting the societies with people who are obese/less healthy(hypertension etc) harder, and the US is one the most obese unhealthy countries in the world.

One bonus is that less fatties are lingering around the supermarkets and if they are, then masked and gloved up.

2 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

The Washington Post has come out a couple of days ago saying that covid is a hoax,

 

Some private opinion article may have advanced that opinion. But the Washington Post newspaper and its journalists surely did not.

 

2 hours ago, timendres said:

We will lead the world out of this scaredy cat nonsense if no one else will.

 

Quote

 

Models shift to predict dramatically more U.S. deaths as states relax social distancing

A key model favored by the White House nearly doubled its prediction to 134,000 fatalities by August

 

A key model of the coronavirus pandemic favored by the White House nearly doubled its prediction Monday for how many people will die from the virus in the U.S. by August – primarily because states are reopening too soon.

The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington’s School of Medicine is now projecting 134,000 coronavirus-related fatalities, up from a previous prediction of 72,000. Factoring in the scientists’ margin of error, the new prediction ranges from 95,000 to 243,000.

 

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/04/cdc-daily-deaths-coronavirus-234377

2 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

Sorry, i got a bit carried away ????

 

You've been injecting disinfectant again???  

4 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Some private opinion article may have advanced that opinion. But the Washington Post newspaper and its journalists surely did not.

I thought that was wrong too. I think he mixed it up with the Washington Times. 

4 hours ago, moe666 said:

Yes the death rate is low unless you were one of the dead

A mutant coronavirus has emerged, even more contagious than the original, study says

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/health-news/a-mutant-coronavirus-has-emerged-even-more-contagious-than-the-original-study-says/ar-BB13CHNP?li=BBnb7Kz

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

And the best news of all:

 

Streeck's conclusions about lethality of the virus have just been confirmed by genetic research from Arizona. It's happened again, one of the key parts of this virus' genome sequence has gone missing in one strain, just like with SARS previously. This should mean that the virus will become even less lethal as it loses part of its ability to transmit.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8288189/At-12-different-strains-coronavirus-circulating-UK-March.html

 

Apparently you missed this other news of the day, via the LA Times:

 

https://news.yahoo.com/mutant-coronavirus-emerged-even-more-110046843.html

 

Quote

Scientists say a now-dominant strain of the coronavirus appears to be more contagious than original

 

Scientists have identified a new strain of the coronavirus that has become dominant worldwide and appears to be more contagious than the versions that spread in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a new study led by scientists at Los Alamos National Laboratory.

 

The new strain appeared in February in Europe, migrated quickly to the East Coast of the United States and has been the dominant strain across the world since mid-March, the scientists wrote.

 

In addition to spreading faster, it may make people vulnerable to a second infection after a first bout with the disease, the report warned.

 

 

13 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Quote

 

Models shift to predict dramatically more U.S. deaths as states relax social distancing

A key model favored by the White House nearly doubled its prediction to 134,000 fatalities by August

 

A key model of the coronavirus pandemic favored by the White House nearly doubled its prediction Monday for how many people will die from the virus in the U.S. by August – primarily because states are reopening too soon.

The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington’s School of Medicine is now projecting 134,000 coronavirus-related fatalities, up from a previous prediction of 72,000. Factoring in the scientists’ margin of error, the new prediction ranges from 95,000 to 243,000.

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/04/cdc-daily-deaths-coronavirus-234377

Yup. It is a nasty virus indeed. Lockdown of the entire country still not the correct policy.

2 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Apparently you missed this other news of the day, via the LA Times:

 

https://news.yahoo.com/mutant-coronavirus-emerged-even-more-110046843.html

 

Quote

Scientists say a now-dominant strain of the coronavirus appears to be more contagious than original

 

Scientists have identified a new strain of the coronavirus that has become dominant worldwide and appears to be more contagious than the versions that spread in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a new study led by scientists at Los Alamos National Laboratory.

 

The new strain appeared in February in Europe, migrated quickly to the East Coast of the United States and has been the dominant strain across the world since mid-March, the scientists wrote.

 

In addition to spreading faster, it may make people vulnerable to a second infection after a first bout with the disease, the report warned.

 

 

Is this new strain more deadly? That is the pertinent question. Otherwise, more fear mongering. 

1 minute ago, timendres said:

Yup. It is a nasty virus indeed. Lockdown of the entire country still not the correct policy.

 

Even at the peak of anti-virus measures in the U.S., the "entire country" was never locked down. Essential businesses continued to operate. People could still go outside, run errands, do grocery shopping, seek medical care, etc etc.  And many areas never went for full social distancing requirements.

 

 

Just now, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Even at the peak of anti-virus measures in the U.S., the "entire country" was never locked down. Essential businesses continued to operate. People could still go outside, run errands, do grocery shopping, seek medical care, etc etc.  And many areas never went for full social distancing requirements.

Oh. My mistake. Then 20 million plus people were not forced out of their jobs, and we did not spend $2 Trillion trying to mitigate the disaster. Then all is well.

13 minutes ago, timendres said:

 

Is this new strain more deadly? That is the pertinent question. Otherwise, more fear mongering. 

 

So you don't care about mass illness and hospitalizations, lingering health effects...  And all the additional deaths that are going to occur, whether it's one strain or another, as anti-virus measures are relaxed in some areas?

 

There's a small but loud group of right wing activists going crazy about these issues, as they are want to do, being egged on by Trump, of course.

 

But that's not the current opinion of most Americans at large:

 

Quote

 

A Pretty Significant Majority of Americans Oppose Reopening Businesses, Poll Finds

Governors across the nation may be rushing to lift restrictions and allow businesses to reopen, but a significant majority of Americans oppose these reopenings, according to a new Washington Post-University of Maryland poll.

 

The opposition underscores the disconnect between many state leaders and their constituents, who are afraid of contracting the coronavirus and do believe the worst of the pandemic is yet to come. 

 

About half of the nation’s 50 states have eased restrictions on business under pressure from President Trump and right-wing protesters, but reopening the economy is all but certain to be a failure if most Americans are too scared to visit such businesses.

 

https://couriernewsroom.com/2020/05/05/americans-oppose-reopening-businesses-coronavirus/

 

7 minutes ago, timendres said:

Oh. My mistake. Then 20 million plus people were not forced out of their jobs, and we did not spend $2 Trillion trying to mitigate the disaster. Then all is well.

 The U.S. has a population of 300+ million people.

 

I never said many people didn't lose the jobs or there isn't economic impact. I merely said, you were wrong and incorrect in saying the whole country was on lockdown. It isn't, and never was. But it obviously suits your purpose to over exaggerate things.

 

 

1 minute ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

So you don't care about mass illness and hospitalizations, lingering health effects...  And all the additional deaths that are going to occur, whether it's one strain or another, as anti-virus measures are relaxed in some areas?

 

There's a small but loud group of right wing activists going crazy about these issues, as they are want to do, being egged on by Trump, of course.

 

But that's not the opinion of most Americans at large:

A lot of assumptions in that reply. Suggesting I don't care is a bit insulting and disingenuous. Dragging in Trump and the right wing demonstrates a bias.

 

What I am trying to say is that our policies on COVID-19 have been ill prepared, poorly studied, not well thought out, too politically driven, and largely less effective than they could be. What we need is less fear and more thinking, planning, and proper action. I can excuse the initial response due to a lack of information. Going forward, we need to be more intelligent.

7 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 The U.S. has a population of 300+ million people.

 

I never said many people didn't lose the jobs or there isn't economic impact. I merely said, you were wrong and incorrect in saying the whole country was on lockdown. It isn't, and never was. But it obviously suits your purpose to over exaggerate things.

So, the term "lockdown" has never been used to describe what happened in the US. Thank you for pointing that out. I will attempt to use the proper term going forward. What was the term again?

1 minute ago, timendres said:

 

What I am trying to say is that our policies on COVID-19 have been ill prepared, poorly studied, not well thought out, too politically driven, and largely less effective than they could be. What we need is less fear and more thinking, planning, and proper action. I can excuse the initial response due to a lack of information. Going forward, we need to be more intelligent.

 

I would agree with pretty much all of what you say above. However, I suspect whatever your ideas of "proper action" and "intelligent" measures might be probably are different than mine, and those of most public health officials dealing with the pandemic.

 

4 minutes ago, timendres said:

So, the term "lockdown" has never been used to describe what happened in the US. Thank you for pointing that out. I will attempt to use the proper term going forward. What was the term again?

I don't really care what term you or anyone else want to call it. But the facts are/were, the whole country was never locked down, as per your prior post claiming "Lockdown of the entire country."

 

Life (and death) went on, with varying degrees of restrictions and business closures being enforced with quite large variations place to place.

 

1 hour ago, chessman said:

I thought this article was interesting. For every ‘rule’ about this disease there are exceptions that cannot be explained.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/03/world/asia/coronavirus-spread-where-why.html

 

Yes I read that one. It was interesting.

38 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

So you don't care about mass illness and hospitalizations, lingering health effects...  And all the additional deaths that are going to occur, whether it's one strain or another, as anti-virus measures are relaxed in some areas?

 

There's a small but loud group of right wing activists going crazy about these issues, as they are want to do, being egged on by Trump, of course.

 

But that's not the current opinion of most Americans at large:

 

https://couriernewsroom.com/2020/05/05/americans-oppose-reopening-businesses-coronavirus/

 

It doesn't surprise me. They are scared <deleted>less now with the plethora of half assed policies being enforced by a government that doesn't seem to care about them with no coherent policy at the top in the middle of a deadly epidemic. Some states and localities are doing a good job, but overall it seem to be the textbook case of how not to handle a deadly pandemic. It seems basically like we have 50 different policies being enacted, with some governors leaving local level officials more leeway as well.

 

A short term lockdown of 1 or 2 months (or maybe in some nightmare scenario 3 months) makes sense while the authorities try to get an understanding of what it going on and coming to terms with what is happening and developing a coherent policy a mitigation so things can reopen. However, keeping it there indefinitely while waiting to develop some kind of retroviral or a vaccine (which may never happen) will be a disaster.

 

It does seem that the media places a huge emphasis on the nightmare scenarios since they grab attention and get clicks.

Prof Neill Ferguson has quit advising the UK government after breaking the lockdown to see his lover. This says it all, you know these lockdowns are complete and utter poo!

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8289921/Scientist-advice-led-lockdown-QUITS-breaking-restrictions-meet-married-lover.html

7 hours ago, chessman said:

I thought that was wrong too. I think he mixed it up with the Washington Times. 

Exactly, my mistake.

4 hours ago, tribalfusion001 said:

Prof Neill Ferguson has quit advising the UK government after breaking the lockdown to see his lover. This says it all, you know these lockdowns are complete and utter poo!

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8289921/Scientist-advice-led-lockdown-QUITS-breaking-restrictions-meet-married-lover.html

I KNEW IT! That hypocritical beancounter was banging a married left-wing campaigner and ignoring the lockdown himself while he was jumping on another man's wife.

 

I KNEW there was something off with that guy.

 

So he tells all of Britain to go into lockdown while ignoring it himself. You can't make it up.

8 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Apparently you missed this other news of the day, via the LA Times:

 

https://news.yahoo.com/mutant-coronavirus-emerged-even-more-110046843.html

 

 

No, I saw it but I wouldn't hold my breath. This study has not been peer reviewed and we've seen previously a study by Chinese researchers claiming a more aggressive strain, which was roundly debunked as being totally flawed.

 

Genetic analysis is notoriously easy to get wrong. One error some geneticists often get wrong is that they see a preponderance of one strain and just declare it as "more aggressive", however, by mere chance one strain can be expected to spread more than the others, it does not mean the strain is more aggressive.

 

Of course the recently unlocked SAGE files show that UK scientists believe they had found 12 strains in the UK (and of course your study referred to Europe), however, none was more aggressive or infectious than the others:

 

"There is no suggestion that any of the strains are any more potent or infectious than another, infectious disease experts say."

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8288189/At-12-different-strains-coronavirus-circulating-UK-March.html

 

 

2 hours ago, Logosone said:

No, I saw it but I wouldn't hold my breath. This study has not been peer reviewed and we've seen previously a study by Chinese researchers claiming a more aggressive strain, which was roundly debunked as being totally flawed.

 

1. Most of the research being published right now on CV isn't being peer reviewed prior to going public, because of the rush to try to make progress and share info.... So that's nothing different than the current norm.

 

2. These findings didn't come from the Chinese, but rather from an international consortium led by the Los Alamos National Laboratory in the U.S.  That would tend to give their findings a bit more gratitas.

 

Quote

 

The report was based on a computational analysis of more than 6,000 coronavirus sequences from around the world collected by the Global Initiative for Sharing All Influenza Data, a public-private organization in Germany. Time and again, the analysis found the new version was transitioning to become dominant.

 

The Los Alamos team, assisted by scientists at Duke University and the University of Sheffield in England, identified 14 mutations. Those mutations occurred among the nearly 30,000 base pairs of RNA that make up the coronavirus's genome.

 

 

1 hour ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Most of the research being published right now on CV isn't being peer reviewed prior to going public, because of the rush to try to make progress and share info.... So that's nothing different than the current norm.

One can't help noticing that you are rather harsh against anything which doesn't fit with the mainstream narrative.

Yet, when it comes to the credibility of the ones you believe, you justify their mistakes with the "rush to try to make progress".

Well, i admit that i am very biased, but others here seem to be very biased too.

Then, you often use the Trump-card to criticise those you don't agree with, even when politics was not mentioned.

Is that perhaps an admission that politics is heavily influencing the public perception of covid19 ?

1 hour ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

1. Most of the research being published right now on CV isn't being peer reviewed prior to going public, because of the rush to try to make progress and share info.... So that's nothing different than the current norm.

 

2. These findings didn't come from the Chinese, but rather from an international consortium led by the Los Alamos National Laboratory in the U.S.  That would tend to give their findings a bit more gratitas.

 

 

Couple of things:

 

1. Yes a lot of the research has not been peer reviewed, and hence we have had a few major clangers not just among geneticists' papers but also medical papers. It is therefore safer to wait until a paper has been peer reviewed before ringing alarm bells.

 

2. One scientist commented on that paper: “There is a lot of speculation here,” Hotez said. “They have no experimental verification.”.

 

So, I repeat: No experimental verification. All these people have done is tap into the German database which everyone can do and tried to interpret it.

 

3. The people from Sheffield University themselves have cautioned "The Los Alamos study does not indicate that the new version of the virus is more lethal than the original. People infected with the mutated strain appear to have higher viral loads. But the study’s authors from the University of Sheffield found that among a local sample of 447 patients, hospitalization rates were about the same for people infected with either virus version.

 

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-05/mutant-coronavirus-has-emerged-more-contagious-than-original

 

So, if you actually dig deeper you'll see that whilst the press loves to make noise, in reality this study is not coming up with Jaws 2.0 of the virus. Relax.

1 hour ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

1. Most of the research being published right now on CV isn't being peer reviewed prior to going public, because of the rush to try to make progress and share info.... So that's nothing different than the current norm.

 

2. These findings didn't come from the Chinese, but rather from an international consortium led by the Los Alamos National Laboratory in the U.S.  That would tend to give their findings a bit more gratitas.

 

 

It is very normal for these viruses to mutate all the time. Usually that means that they do less harm. And usually that means that any immunity agains the pre-mutation version is still working. 

Keep in mind that success for a virus means it does not kill its host, but that it gets spread. A virus which kills too many of its hosts has failed, is going to disappear.

10 minutes ago, Logosone said:

 

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-05-05/mutant-coronavirus-has-emerged-more-contagious-than-original

 

So, if you actually dig deeper you'll see that whilst the press loves to make noise, in reality this study is not coming up with Jaws 2.0 of the virus. Relax.

 

 I read the whole report. You're just quoting additional portions from it. That notwithstanding, the report didn't claim the newer strain was more lethal, nor did my prior post.

 

But what the report does note is that a mutated strain could make it more difficult to develop an effective vaccine, and even more so, if the CV continues to mutate over time. For me, that was one of the main takeaways of their findings.

 

28 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

One can't help noticing that you are rather harsh against anything which doesn't fit with the mainstream narrative.

Yet, when it comes to the credibility of the ones you believe, you justify their mistakes with the "rush to try to make progress".

Well, i admit that i am very biased, but others here seem to be very biased too.

Then, you often use the Trump-card to criticise those you don't agree with, even when politics was not mentioned.

Is that perhaps an admission that politics is heavily influencing the public perception of covid19 ?

 

I have no respect for people and leaders who peddle crazy treatment ideas and unproven drugs that have dangerous side effects, against the advice of medical professionals.

 

I have no respect for people and leaders who denied and discounted the virus, now leaving the U.S. with a death toll heading toward 100,000 or more that already (at almost 70K now) is the highest in the world.

 

I have no respect for "deep state"/world order nuts who think the CV is some kind of conspiracy of governments and the media.

 

I haven't justified any research mistakes. But I did correctly point out that the current norm for scientific research findings re COVID is to publish them right away without waiting for peer review. There are obvious reasons for going that route. And yes indeed, that has sometimes produced the dissemination of flawed information and assumptions that later get corrected.