I still don't think the sky is falling ......but

[Brierley]

Lockdowns aren't fool proof because not everyone abides by the rules, case in point Thailand and Australia. But lockdown rules do help slow the rate of transmission and if enough people do as they are asked, that may be enough to buy time to vaccinate a majority of the population and let science win this battle..

[starky]

12 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Misleading stats. You should be quoting the percentage of people who contracted the virus. That would be the virus which is now spreading out of control at a faster rate then ever before with an increasing death rate.

In fact the WHO is currently estimating that taking under-reporting and undertesting into account the global mortality rate will be @3.2 %. Unfortunately some countries will be substantially higher and some countries will be substantially lower. 

[starky]

Just now, Brierley said:

Lockdowns aren't fool proof because not everyone abides by the rules, case in point Thailand and Australia. But lockdown rules do help slow the rate of transmission and if enough people do as they are asked, that may be enough to buy time to vaccinate a majority of the population and let science win this battle..

By that do you mean no more covid and we can just go back to the normal flu killing 600 000 thousand a year? Or is your position covid will be completely eradicated? And if not how many deaths are you comfortable with so lockdowns are no longer required?

[starky]

26 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

What is ignored by the naysayers is that there is no economy without eliminating the virus.  The majority of people won't ignore the virus.

 

The same people who are anti mask and anti lock down are typically those who argue against efforts to reduce climate change. They are the first cohort in human history which is dedicated to ensuring that the human species can't survive.

 

edit: I borrowed that line from Noam Chomskey.

What elimination of the virus? 

[Brierley]

3 minutes ago, starky said:

By that do you mean no more covid and we can just go back to the normal flu killing 600 000 thousand a year? Or is your position covid will be completely eradicated? And if not how many deaths are you comfortable with so lockdowns are no longer required?

I doubt that covid will  be eradicated in the short term but the threat can be reduced to a manageable level, just like the flu.

 

Deaths....dunno, I'm not comfortable with even one death but I may accept there is no real alternative. 

 

[Tagged]

10 minutes ago, Brierley said:

I doubt that covid will  be eradicated in the short term but the threat can be reduced to a manageable level, just like the flu.

 

Deaths....dunno, I'm not comfortable with even one death but I may accept there is no real alternative. 

 

Spanish flu took 2 years for the worst outbreak to loose intensity, 5 years to more or less dissapear, but oubreaks lasted  19 years, and Spanish flu is still with us today. 

[starky]

2 minutes ago, Tagged said:

Spanish flu took 2 years for the worst outbreak to loose intensity, 5 years to more or less dissapear, but oubreaks lasted  19 years, and Spanish flu is still with us today. 

Only between 5 and 19 more years of lockdowns then? Mark it on your calender ???????????? celebrate good times come on!

[Jeffr2]

42 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Misleading stats. You should be quoting the percentage of people who contracted the virus. That would be the virus which is now spreading out of control at a faster rate then ever before with an increasing death rate.

He's a well known covid denier and loves conspiracy theories.  And fake news websites. LOL

[Jeffr2]

34 minutes ago, starky said:

Don't believe I stated anywhere that I am anti lockdown simply responding to the question raised by another poster about what the effects of perpetual rolling lockdowns may have on society in general? Not sure if the arguments are spurious as people in authority are already asking similar questions.

  Im an Aussie. We are into 14 months of some of the harshest lockdowns and tightly controlled borders in the world yet we are still getting cases.

  So on the assumption that we will never eradicate covid, like we have never really eradicated anything except smallpox at what point do we consider other options? Or are no cases zero community spread or zero local infections the only acceptable outcome? 

We still don't fully understand this virus.  Research is now saying the jabs aren't good for a very long time.  Don't work well against the variants.  And even if you get one, you can still get the virus and spread it along.

 

This is a vicious enemy.  It's going to take a huge global coordinated effort to beat it.  Sadly, many don't seem to care.  The anti-vaxxers, anti-mask, anti-lockdowns.  These sentiments don't help beat the virus.  Not saying you are any of these!!!!

 

Again, no easy answers.

[starky]

35 minutes ago, Brierley said:

I doubt that covid will  be eradicated in the short term but the threat can be reduced to a manageable level, just like the flu.

 

Deaths....dunno, I'm not comfortable with even one death but I may accept there is no real alternative. 

 

Yes but the world was comfortable with 600 000 dying a year from the flu, or the same amount that die from HIV annually and all the other deaths that  WERE previously acceptable that I can't mention because it makes me anti vax, anti lockdown covid denier. 

  Even though I have already been vaccinated, definitely think lockdowns are effective and do not deny covid.

  So your not happy with even one death but the 600 000 a year from the flu never bothered you? Or those with HIV? Anyhoo so what is under control? similar rates to the flu? How about a million? How about 1.5 million? it's obviously gonna be more than 1 so how do we ever get back to normality?

Edited April 20, 2021 by starky

[Jeffr2]

4 minutes ago, starky said:

Yes but the world was comfortable with 600 000 dying a year and all the other deaths that  WERE previously acceptable that I can't mention because it makes me anti vax, anti lockdown covid denier. 

  Even though I have already been vaccinated, definitely think lockdowns are effective and do not deny covid.

  So your not happy with even one death but the 600 000 a year from the flu never bothered you? Anyhoo so what is under control similar rates to the flu? How about a million? How about 1.5 million? it's obviously gonna be more than 1 so how do we ever get back to normality?

Who in the world was comfortable with  600k deaths?  From the flu?  You seem to like the higher range of the data.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6815659/

 

Until recently, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated the annual mortality burden of influenza to be 250 000 to 500 000 all-cause deaths globally; however, a 2017 study indicated a substantially higher mortality burden, at 290 000-650 000 influenza-associated deaths from respiratory causes alone, and a 2019 study estimated 99 000-200 000 deaths from lower respiratory tract infections directly caused by influenza.

 

We estimated an average of 389 000 (uncertainty range 294 000-518 000) respiratory deaths were associated with influenza globally each year during the study period, corresponding to ~ 2% of all annual respiratory deaths. Of these, 67% were among people 65 years and older.

[Brierley]

9 minutes ago, starky said:

Yes but the world was comfortable with 600 000 dying a year from the flu and all the other deaths that  WERE previously acceptable that I can't mention because it makes me anti vax, anti lockdown covid denier. 

  Even though I have already been vaccinated, definitely think lockdowns are effective and do not deny covid.

  So your not happy with even one death but the 600 000 a year from the flu never bothered you? Anyhoo so what is under control similar rates to the flu? How about a million? How about 1.5 million? it's obviously gonna be more than 1 so how do we ever get back to normality?

You can't look ahead and predict what normality will look like, normality is a state that you arrive at and know that it's normal only after you get there. The new normal might be 1 death, it might be 600k or it might be 6 mill....dunno.

[starky]

11 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Who in the world was comfortable with  600k deaths?  From the flu?  You seem to like the higher range of the data.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6815659/

 

Until recently, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated the annual mortality burden of influenza to be 250 000 to 500 000 all-cause deaths globally; however, a 2017 study indicated a substantially higher mortality burden, at 290 000-650 000 influenza-associated deaths from respiratory causes alone, and a 2019 study estimated 99 000-200 000 deaths from lower respiratory tract infections directly caused by influenza.

 

We estimated an average of 389 000 (uncertainty range 294 000-518 000) respiratory deaths were associated with influenza globally each year during the study period, corresponding to ~ 2% of all annual respiratory deaths. Of these, 67% were among people 65 years and older.

Ok so can we call it  294 000 to 518 000 would you be more "comfortable" with that?  CDC says 218 000 to 646 000? Comfortable with that? Regardless of you trying to diminish my claims we were Comfortable with many deaths from influenza also other viruses  annually with zero concern except in the medical community.

    So it is not allowed to mention co-morbidities in relation to covid or that it affects the elderly significantly worse, or those with respiratory infections or the obese and so on because its covid that triggers it? but its totally fine in regards with deaths from influenza?

Edited April 20, 2021 by starky

[Tagged]

34 minutes ago, starky said:

Only between 5 and 19 more years of lockdowns then? Mark it on your calender ???????????? celebrate good times come on!

It is smaller outbreaks, and not pandemendic outbreaks, thats a huge difference. The pandemendic lasted two years from what I can understand. 

Edited April 20, 2021 by Tagged

[Jeffr2]

4 minutes ago, starky said:

Ok so can we call it  294 000 to 518 000 would you be more "comfortable" with that?  CDC says 218 000 to 646 000? Comfortable with that? Regardless of you trying to diminish my claims we were Comfortable with many deaths from influenza also other viruses      So it is  not allowed to mention co-morbidities in relation to covid or that it affects the elderly significantly worse, or those with respiratory infections or the obese and so on because its covid that triggers it? but its totally fine in regards with deaths from influenza?

Who was comfortable with that many deaths?  Not sure what you're on about....

[Tagged]

It is a long read for most, but worth it, and also quite understandable backed up with experts. So whatever you think of washington post, it is worth it. 

 

And Im still sure we should be happy to live today, and not back then. Just my two cent. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/09/01/1918-flu-pandemic-end/

[rabas]

53 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

You mean the virus that has killed 0.04% of the world's population?

 

This is a bit like saying "no problem yet" standing in front of a speeding train.

 

An additional reason for Thailand's current problem is mutation. Mutations are a direct result of allowing large case numbers. More to come.

 

As for statistics. COVID's daily death toll is more than three times the world's daily traffic fatalities.

[Jeffr2]

10 minutes ago, Tagged said:

It is a long read for most, but worth it, and also quite understandable backed up with experts. So whatever you think of washington post, it is worth it. 

 

And Im still sure we should be happy to live today, and not back then. Just my two cent. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/09/01/1918-flu-pandemic-end/

WaPo does excellent research.  Great publication.  It's behind a pay wall.  Just turn on your VPN, or use the Opera browser with it's free proxy server.  Amazing that virus is still with us today. 

 

From that article:

 

Quote

 

Over time, those who contracted the virus developed an immunity to the novel strand of influenza, and life returned to normal by the early 1920s, according to historians and medical experts. Reports at the time suggest the virus became less lethal as the pandemic carried on in waves.

 

Seasonal influenza tends to kill the oldest and youngest in a society but in 1918, roughly half of those who died were men and women in their 20s and 30s. People were getting sick and dying in the prime of their lives.

 

“As many as 8 to 10 percent of all young adults then living may have been killed by the virus,” historian John M. Barry wrote in his best-selling book “The Great Influenza.”

 

 

[Jeffr2]

15 minutes ago, Tagged said:

It is a long read for most, but worth it, and also quite understandable backed up with experts. So whatever you think of washington post, it is worth it. 

 

And Im still sure we should be happy to live today, and not back then. Just my two cent. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/09/01/1918-flu-pandemic-end/

Some here should read this article.  Especially paying attention to this part:

 

 

Quote

 

Despite all that, influenza viruses and coronaviruses are not the same. There’s very little someone can draw from influenza to then provide treatment for the infectious disease named covid-19, said Paul Offit, the director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.

“They’re really different viruses,” Offit added.

 

 

[Tagged]

2 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Some here should read this article.  Especially paying attention to this part:

 

 

 

You know it have turned in to religion, when people go by their guts and feelings and not science, and also claim science is part of the bigger plot. Im so tired of all this controverial discussion where people claim to know better than people who have studied the history, studied todays illnesses and diseases, who as said know the history are wrong, and they really trying hard to save us and the future. 

 

Nobody knows what covid 19 would or could have turned in to if we did not try our best to stop it. 

 

I really do hope we do not see the 30íes ever ever again, or at least in my lifetime. 

 

 

[Jeffr2]

1 minute ago, Tagged said:

You know it have turned in to religion, when people go by their guts and feelings and not science, and also claim science is part of the bigger plot. Im so tired of all this controverial discussion where people claim to know better than people who have studied the history, studied todays illnesses and diseases, who as said know the history are wrong, and they really trying hard to save us and the future. 

 

Nobody knows what covid 19 would or could have turned in to if we did not try our best to stop it. 

 

I really do hope we do not see the 30íes ever ever again, or at least in my lifetime. 

 

 

That article also said the 3 big pandemics we had after 1918 were all due to the "Spanish" flu.  Incredible.  The world could be an entirely different place for the rest of our lives.

[starky]

25 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Who was comfortable with that many deaths?  Not sure what you're on about....

The world. Humanity in general pretty much everyone on the planet outside the medical community. Comfortable as in the world went about its business without a care in the world and nobody mentioning deaths from influenza daily on television with global body counts. That sort of Comfortable. As in how many deaths from covid would be acceptable annually for the world to go back to that? People are saying one death from covid is too many even in 80-90 year olds with respiratory problems and other contributing factors but no one was saying that about influenza. Not trying to compare influenza with covid but I think it is fair to question peoples level of concern over deaths from covid whilst apparently not caring about the 100s of thousands that die from influenza. 

  Im sure you do understand what I mean by comfortable because clearly you are well read, intelligent person. It's impossible to find any common ground. 

[starky]

19 minutes ago, rabas said:

 

This is a bit like saying "no problem yet" standing in front of a speeding train.

 

An additional reason for Thailand's current problem is mutation. Mutations are a direct result of allowing large case numbers. More to come.

 

As for statistics. COVID's daily death toll is more than three times the world's daily traffic fatalities.

If I were to do a similar comparison between Thailand's covid deaths and Thailand's traffic fatalities I would be called a covid denier and get flamed for the rest of the day.

[impulse]

21 minutes ago, rabas said:

1 hour ago, impulse said:

 

You mean the virus that has killed 0.04% of the world's population?

 

This is a bit like saying "no problem yet" standing in front of a speeding train.

 

An additional reason for Thailand's current problem is mutation. Mutations are a direct result of allowing large case numbers. More to come.

 

As for statistics. COVID's daily death toll is more than three times the world's daily traffic fatalities.

 

Here's the statement that was in reply to:

 

What is ignored by the naysayers is that there is no economy without eliminating the virus.  The majority of people won't ignore the virus.

 

Which is hysterical fear mongering.  The virus isn't wrecking the economy.  The response to the virus is.

 

 

[Jeffr2]

4 minutes ago, starky said:

The world. Humanity in general pretty much everyone on the planet outside the medical community. Comfortable as in the world went about its business without a care in the world and nobody mentioning deaths from influenza daily on television with global body counts. That sort of Comfortable. As in how many deaths from covid would be acceptable annually for the world to go back to that? People are saying one death from covid is too many even in 80-90 year olds with respiratory problems and other contributing factors but no one was saying that about influenza. Not trying to compare influenza with covid but I think it is fair to question peoples level of concern over deaths from covid whilst apparently not caring about the 100s of thousands that die from influenza. 

  Im sure you do understand what I mean by comfortable because clearly you are well read, intelligent person. It's impossible to find any common ground. 

Good gosh.  What a bunch of junk.  Incredible.

[Jeffr2]

2 minutes ago, starky said:

If I were to do a similar comparison between Thailand's covid deaths and Thailand's traffic fatalities I would be called a covid denier and get flamed for the rest of the day.

Because it's ridiculous to try and do that kind of comparison.  Just like it's ridiculous to try and compare CV19 to the seasonal flu.  Just doesn't make sense.  Though many seem to try. 

[Jeffr2]

1 minute ago, impulse said:

 

Here's the statement that was in reply to:

 

What is ignored by the naysayers is that there is no economy without eliminating the virus.  The majority of people won't ignore the virus.

 

Which is hysterical fear mongering.  The virus isn't wrecking the economy.  The response to the virus is.

 

 

Come on.  Put 2 and 2 together.  Without the virus, there'd be no lockdowns.  Understand?

 

And if the virus raged, like in Brazil, the economy would potentially be in worse shape.  The biggest casualty here is the tourism sector.  A big part of the economy, but not the entire economy.

[Jeffr2]

An interesting read on how South Korea dealt with the virus.  Successfully.

 

https://www.vox.com/22380161/south-korea-covid-19-coronavirus-pandemic-contact-tracing-testing

 

 

Quote

 

South Korea’s Covid-19 success story started with failure

 

The inside account of how one country built a system to defeat the pandemic.

 

It was a three-step protocol: test, trace, and isolate. And it worked. Within a week of Patient 31’s diagnosis, the country was performing the most Covid-19 tests in the world; it implemented perhaps the most elaborate contact tracing program anywhere; and it set up isolation centers so thousands of patients could quarantine.

 

 

[starky]

18 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Because it's ridiculous to try and do that kind of comparison.  Just like it's ridiculous to try and compare CV19 to the seasonal flu.  Just doesn't make sense.  Though many seem to try. 

Tell him that .

[rabas]

11 minutes ago, impulse said:

Here's the statement that was in reply to:

 

What is ignored by the naysayers is that there is no economy without eliminating the virus.  The majority of people won't ignore the virus.

 

Which is hysterical fear mongering.  The virus isn't wrecking the economy.  The response to the virus is.

You make the same mistake twice, judging a raging pandemic by what it has done.

 

My sole point was you fight a pandemic not because of what it has done, but for what it could do to humanity. Right now there are patients in Saudi hospitals co-infected with both SARS-2 (COVID) and MERS. MERS has a fatality rate of 35%. Yes they can mix according to experts.