It will cull the weak, a vaccine will appear, it will be forgotten just  as the young foreget the Deaths in WW2.

Just because no virology text ever written includes lock downs as a response is a reason to avoid them. Just because pandemic responses do not include locking down the uninfected doesn't mean that we shouldn't do it. All the doctors and scientists that wrote all those older texts are idiots, the new ones who have never written pandemic response texts are much smarter. And I know because i saw it on the TV.

 

As an aside I've been following along with a course in pharmacology, what has been covered to date dealing with agonist and antagonist drugs in reference to modifying nerve function is the greatest load of quackery I've ever read. Can't wait to get to virology...

13 hours ago, Stygge said:

Testing is the key.

 

Testing is the key to create false positives and false negatives, give the wrong drugs to the wrong people and put respirators to already old and sick people and help them die quicker, with cause of death stated: COVID.
Thank God we did not all get tested for HIV, otherwise half of us might be taking antiviral drugs now.

An by the way, the guy who invented this genetic procedure that is now used as a test for CORONA (PRC testing), wrote a forward to a book that dealt with how HIV does not cause AIDS.

Think about that!

Leave em alone, up too them.

23 hours ago, simple1 said:

Unless you're referring to Living Wills, from where did you source that info?

sorry my mistake no one has ever died from influenza????

22 hours ago, nauseus said:

Ok then, you can be the one to say who's life can go on, and who's cannot. Good luck living with that.

all im saying is locking down the world is extreme, where do you draw the line? we got the 2nd wave to come yet,the 3rd wave,4th wave,do we keep on lockdown till then,and it could be we gotta live with it for 2-3 years till theres a vaccine so we do we stay in lockdown for up to 3 years and there might never be a vaccine. so thats it then stay shutdown forever...no that wont happen cuz life goes on....  which is my point

1 hour ago, paulikens said:

sorry my mistake no one has ever died from influenza????

You had posted "we knowingly let a lot of people die every year through flu" I asked where you sourced the info,. your reply above is irrelevant

3 hours ago, paulikens said:

all im saying is locking down the world is extreme, where do you draw the line? we got the 2nd wave to come yet,the 3rd wave,4th wave,do we keep on lockdown till then,and it could be we gotta live with it for 2-3 years till theres a vaccine so we do we stay in lockdown for up to 3 years and there might never be a vaccine. so thats it then stay shutdown forever...no that wont happen cuz life goes on....  which is my point

It's all extreme. I think the question "when do you draw the line" is as relevant as whereso. We don't know yet how many waves there will be or when there will be a vaccine. That's part of the problem, too many variables and unknowns. The only thing we do know is that this virus can kill a lot of people.

5 hours ago, simple1 said:

You had posted "we knowingly let a lot of people die every year through flu" I asked where you sourced the info,. your reply above is irrelevant

patronising aren't you and you have a superiority complex. my source is a man up the pub told me

On 5/18/2020 at 4:34 PM, nauseus said:

And here again is a good deal of assumption.

Nevertheless, in good company, you will hardly find a virologist expecting otherwise.

23 hours ago, farang51 said:

By the way, herd immunity takes time too. The experts I have read on the subject figure it will take 2-3 years to achieve herd immunity.

Herd immunity is achieved as soon as enough are infected, and recovered, and thus immune, in addition to the ones having natural immunity. As discussed in some other threads the required percentage seems to be much lower than originally expected, and close to be reached in many areas.

 

 

45 minutes ago, yuyiinthesky said:

Nevertheless, in good company, you will hardly find a virologist expecting otherwise.

How would you know that?

32 minutes ago, yuyiinthesky said:

Herd immunity is achieved as soon as enough are infected, and recovered, and thus immune, in addition to the ones having natural immunity. As discussed in some other threads the required percentage seems to be much lower than originally expected, and close to be reached in many areas.

 

 

Blah.

57 minutes ago, yuyiinthesky said:

Herd immunity is achieved as soon as enough are infected, and recovered, and thus immune, in addition to the ones having natural immunity. As discussed in some other threads the required percentage seems to be much lower than originally expected, and close to be reached in many areas.

 

Just great that you refer to one of your own posts as evidence; you could have linked to your source instead. Anyway, other scientists arrive at a quite different number. In this PDF they argue that you need to reach 74 per cent. And please note, that reaching the threshold do not mean that the virus will magically stop spreading. It will be more difficult for the virus to find new hosts, but it will still spread.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=12&ved=2ahUKEwjPnrbltMDpAhVfwcQBHeShBpYQFjALegQIBxAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mdpi.com%2F2076-393X%2F8%2F2%2F236%2Fpdf&usg=AOvVaw1Ol0w1Qsi4s_kYGWh6Tkwu

 

Besides, it seems that we are very far from anything resembling herd immunity; even in the worst areas, only about 10 per cent has been infected and thus may (or may not) be immune.

https://www.euronews.com/2020/05/15/analysis-how-close-are-we-to-covid-19-herd-immunity

 

That also means that you would have to accept many more deaths if you want to use herd immunity from natural infections to stop the virus. More that ten times the deaths already registered in Spain, Italy, UK, etc.

18 hours ago, Rancid said:

Just because no virology text ever written includes lock downs as a response is a reason to avoid them. Just because pandemic responses do not include locking down the uninfected doesn't mean that we shouldn't do it. All the doctors and scientists that wrote all those older texts are idiots, the new ones who have never written pandemic response texts are much smarter. And I know because i saw it on the TV.

 

As an aside I've been following along with a course in pharmacology, what has been covered to date dealing with agonist and antagonist drugs in reference to modifying nerve function is the greatest load of quackery I've ever read. Can't wait to get to virology...

I had to read that three times to realise you are taking the michael.

17 hours ago, DeadBite said:

a book that dealt with how HIV does not cause AIDS.

There has been evidence that HIV does not necessarily cause HIV available and I tend to believe that.

11 hours ago, nauseus said:

It's all extreme. I think the question "when do you draw the line" is as relevant as whereso. We don't know yet how many waves there will be or when there will be a vaccine. That's part of the problem, too many variables and unknowns. The only thing we do know is that this virus can kill a lot of people.

Compared to past pandemics it doesn't kill a lot proportionately. If the world was not overpopulated the death toll would be far, far less.

23 hours ago, paddypower said:

Nursing homes seem to have been badly managed- and that's in hindsight,

I speak only for those in my country as I have no personal knowledge of other countries aged care industry.

I know people that work in aged care industry as cleaning staff and nursing staff. I refer to them as an industry as that is what they are, an industry exploiting the aged to make money for profit.

The cleaning staff are too few and underpaid, the nursing staff too few to do their job properly.

I have no doubt that had Corona struck widely it would have been a catastrophe as there just are not enough medically trained staff to carry out correct procedures safely. As it happened, the virus was contained in very few aged care places, and lockdown stopped the spread to others.

Its a sad P.C World . No one dare mention the benefits from covits culling the weak in overpopulated areas. Its done parts of India a favour imo. Medicine has kept too many alive that would be better off dead these days.

Personally, I'm not a fan of the whole herd immunity idea, especially when it comes at the expense of the most vulnerable parts of our societies, the old, those with pre-existing health issues, etc.

 

Then I read this today and it actually gave me the feeling that there might just be some hope in sight after all, in spite of the terrible price that is being paid.

 

"Scientists from the Korean Centers for Disease Control and Prevention studied 285 Covid-19 survivors who had tested positive for the coronavirus after their illness had apparently resolved, as indicated by a previous negative test result. The so-called re-positive patients weren’t found to have spread any lingering infection, and virus samples collected from them couldn’t be grown in culture, indicating the patients were shedding non-infectious or dead virus particles."

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

There has been evidence that HIV does not necessarily cause HIV available and I tend to believe that.

Cause hiv dosen,t cause aids, aids= a***h*** injected death sentance,so just use your back passage as a one way street and you,'ll be ok.

7 hours ago, nauseus said:

Blah.

I appreciate your always eloquent and well-informed responses.  Keep up the good work!

11 minutes ago, kingdong said:

Cause hiv dosen,t cause aids, aids= a***h*** injected death sentance,so just use your back passage as a one way street and you,'ll be ok.

Wow, the epitome of parading one's ignorance. ????

2 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

I appreciate your always eloquent and well-informed responses.  Keep up the good work!

Well informed hearsay more like.

19 hours ago, Rancid said:

what has been covered to date dealing with agonist and antagonist drugs in reference to modifying nerve function is the greatest load of quackery I've ever read.

Your post is quackery; completely incorrect.

 

 

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Compared to past pandemics it doesn't kill a lot proportionately. If the world was not overpopulated the death toll would be far, far less.

Brilliant!

1 hour ago, pineapple01 said:

Its a sad P.C World . No one dare mention the benefits from covits culling the weak in overpopulated areas. Its done parts of India a favour imo. Medicine has kept too many alive that would be better off dead these days.

You should stop taking the tablets then!

21 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

I appreciate your always eloquent and well-informed responses.  Keep up the good work!

I wasn't talking to you. But I might have been.

4 hours ago, GalaxyMan said:

"Scientists from the Korean Centers for Disease Control and Prevention studied 285 Covid-19 survivors who had tested positive for the coronavirus after their illness had apparently resolved, as indicated by a previous negative test result. The so-called re-positive patients weren’t found to have spread any lingering infection, and virus samples collected from them couldn’t be grown in culture, indicating the patients were shedding non-infectious or dead virus particles."

Viruses cannot be grown in culture, only bacteria and fungi can.
And this is one of the main reasons that science has never been able to isolate the "virus"