The Worldwide C0VlD-19 Coronavirus Pandemic Discussion Thread...

[WillHurtDontCare]

I was pro vaccine (and still am sort of) but when I saw friends went through when their child had a suspected reaction and it changed me a bit. No one and I mean no one would acknowledge it was even a possibility. My friends weren’t after a big payday they just wanted best advice for treatment and figure out what was wrong with their daughter. Their meetings would practically start with the doctor saying “well we know for sure that it wasn’t the vaccine that caused this.” It definitely makes me think that the vaccine side effects are under reported.

It’s difficult because when you question a vaccine you get lumped in with the crazy anti-vaccers. I just look at a two month old that can’t have honey or cows milk and I am not supposed to give Child Tylenol to, and I don’t think I am stretching to wonder if 6-8 vaccines are the best thing for them.

The point ad hoc arguments being a fallacy is that the truth or merit of an idea does always need to be founded on merit of the person. Or said differently, certain phénomèna are not influenced by the opinions of humans.

Vaccines either sometimes harm people or they don't. This phenomenon is not determined by the Facebook posts of anti-vaxx fanatics. On the flip side, a seemingly robust meta-analysis of top ranked, unbiased cannot cause the phenomenon to occur either. Both of those FB posts and rigorous research might totally disconnected from the true nature of what they're talking about.

Only humans are influenced by words. Nature does not give a f***. Our opinions do not make such things so.

Just remember that the foremost goals of governments is order & power and of business is money. They don't care about you. They don't necessarily want to harm you either, but if that happens, well, c'est la vie.

Always be skeptical and do your best to only get your info from people who have a track record of caring about you or people like you.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Xeon]

Melinda Gates warns 'coronavirus is not a once in a lifetime pandemic'

The US gov should do the world a favour by sending in a crack team to storm, sack and investigate the Gates family.

 

[Visionary96]

A popular way to spend Easter for a lot of Aussies is to go camping on the mighty Murray River. Police will be patrolling the river bank looking to fine anyone caught doing that this weekend. If I’m in a tent on the river miles from anyone how am I endangering others, wether I have the virus or not? It’s madness.
A police officer pulled up at a construction site last week threatening a mate and his fellow workers with being fined for not practicing social distancing. There is NO law about this, construction workers are deemed essential and they have only been advised to keep distance from one another where safe to do so. Again, it’s madness. I’m not sure if that particular officer was just being an a$$hole or if he was directed from above to drive around making these threats, but I have a friend on the force who confirmed for us that he hasn’t heard anything about it.

I have backpacked around Swan Hill and the Moulamein area and the fact they are patrolling there is crazy! There is so much space its ridiculous haha

 

[Kevin88660]

Feel like a bum asking this ... but I will do my own research as well and read back into this thread further.
I have only read the latest page so far and am mostly wondering what smart people say about the statistics.

I understand that there are many unknowns and not everybody gets tested etc., but one thing that I can't wrap my head around is how - after that many weeks - we are at more than 20% deaths when we look at the outcomes. There are more than 500,000 closed cases, so that should be a resprectable sample size.
How is that possible (and why is it supposedly obvious) that this number will eventually go to 4% (worst case) or 0,5% (probably)? Okay, there is a lag before an active case joins the "recovered" camp and some people are not known active cases until they are dead (meaning there are people who have recovered and are never counted). That factors in ... but that strongly? I think we went from 24% to 21% in more than one week ... should that decline not happen faster?

Does anybody know interesting articles by people who look at the implications of the statistics?
Anything else that stands out?

The simple answer is selection bias.

The vast number of people who got infected with corona virus recovered on their own with mild or no syndrome. They never get to know they have it. So the people who actually got worse-fever and hospitalization to warrant a test its a biased sample of more serious cases.

When we get to test for corona antibodies later, we might discover more recovered cases-people unknowingly infected but recovered. Then we get a better estimate of the death statistics.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[msufan]

This is my opinion piece:

I think covid is serious. I’ve seen the medical evidence and all the evidence shows it to be a highly contagious, and relatively lethal disease. Certainly there are some parameters to the model that change the absolute death rate, but it’s undeniable the overwhelming effect it has on the medical system and the surge of deaths it causes anywhere it takes hold.

I’ve commented a lot in the past what I expected governments to do, or what from a policy standpoint would be required to limit spread and deaths. Certainly some things are more on point than others.

But personally I believe in freedom and the autonomy of individuals to choose how to live their lives themselves.

If someone wants to isolate and quarantine, I support that. If someone wants to go golfing, fishing, or camping I support that. The people quarantining should not shame the people that are going out. Nor should the people going out shame the people quarantining.

Everyone should be responsible for both their actions and their consequences. Freedom is not free. It comes at a cost, and the nature of government is to exchange the illusion of safety for freedom. I reject all such premises. The government cannot protect me or anyone else. All they can do is oppress us to choosing for ourselves how we choose to live or lives. I would rather die free than die safe.

The other side of this argument is that while you may be free to put yourself at risk, you are not necessarily free to put others at risk. If you decide to go out shopping, you are putting those workers at an additional risk, for example. Not only that, but if you do get sick and need hospital care, you may reduce the availability of care for others.

If not for that concern, I would agree 100% with what you have written.

 

[Voyager82]

Northern italy, Madrid, New York got hit hard because they are very densely populated. You can’t have the same rules in New York and Montana, for example. But at the same time, spread out areas can’t act like the virus doesn’t exist. It just spreads slower.

They keep saying it’s all about massive testing and social distancing. We don’t have to choose between lockdown or open economy. The reality will probably be somewhere in the middle. Slowly reopen businesses. Keep schools closed until autumn. No big gatherings, concerts, sport events etc. over the summer. Limit the amout of people inside shops/supermakets. When autumn arrives, we’ll know much more about the virus and we’ll have a solution. I have faith in science and technology.

Important Note: Over 100 doctors have already died in italy because of the virus. 15% of the reported cases in Spain are doctors/nurses. We should all be respectful towards the people who work in the front line (and their families!). We can’t be locked down for months, but we all should be less selfish and learn to act properly.

 

[ChrisV]

Just wondering how - given a mortality rate between 0.5 and 4 percent - we can see the numbers we are currently seeing.

Mortality rates aren't that simple. Maybe the crude mortality rate, but that number goes up or down depending on circumstances:

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus#what-do-we-know-about-the-risk-of-dying-from-C0VlD-19

(you can add countries to the second chart)

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[GIlman]

Mortality rates aren't that simple. Maybe the crude mortality rate, but that number goes up or down depending on circumstances:

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus#what-do-we-know-about-the-risk-of-dying-from-C0VlD-19

(you can add countries to the second chart)

I started using death rate as the best guage of disease spread probably 2 or 3 weeks ago. I look at but don’t put too much stock in the infection rate. Because there are so many variables in testing, unknowns such as subclinical rate, etc.

But most deaths by/with covid are known. So it is the most accurate measure we have at the moment with the least amount of variability. Realize that death rate is about a 3+ week lagging indicator of infection rate though. So even as death rate is increasing the infection rate can actually be decreasing.

 

[James Klymus]

I've been thinking about this for a while too: Wouldn't the fact that we started testing more and more people "artificially" increase the number of cases?

What I mean by that is say 1 million people have the virus. The moderate and severely ill get tested (as do the people they have been in close contact with.

On day one of testing 200,000 people get tested and 20,000 are positive. The next day 300,000 people are tested and 30,000 are positive. The next day 400,000 people are tested and 40,000 people are positive.

Wouldn't it be logical to see an increase in people getting sick since we are testing more and more people within that "pool" of people who are sick? Does that mean the ACTUAL amount of people with the virus is going up, or did we just find 30,000 more people who had the virus within that population who is already sick?

Does that make sense? Does anyone have any input on that idea?

 

[GIlman]

I've been thinking about this for a while too: Wouldn't the fact that we started testing more and more people "artificially" increase the number of cases?

What I mean by that is say 1 million people have the virus. The moderate and severely ill get tested (as do the people they have been in close contact with.

On day one of testing 200,000 people get tested and 20,000 are positive. The next day 300,000 people are tested and 30,000 are positive. The next day 400,000 people are tested and 40,000 people are positive.

Wouldn't it be logical to see an increase in people getting sick since we are testing more and more people within that "pool" of people who are sick? Does that mean the ACTUAL amount of people with the virus is going up, or did we just find 30,000 more people who had the virus within that population who is already sick?

Does that make sense? Does anyone have any input on that idea?

Yes, this is exactly correct. That’s one of many reasons I started looking at the death rate charts, because it became apparent that there was far more variability and unknowns in how the infected rates are determined. Some states their have been far more testing than others. In the US there have even been samples from people who died that were tested later.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[MJ DeMarco]

What's going on in parts of the country, and that fact that is it implemented and enforced, and the citizens are allowing it, is insane.

You can't buy seeds to grow your own food?
You can't use your motorboat on the lake?
You can't fish?
You can't visit your second home?
You can play ball with your kid in a park?
You can't do a drive thru worship?

How this country comes out the other side of this will be quite telling... because from these actions, what comes out is either 1) a carcass, 2) something unrecognizable, or 3) a renewed spirit of liberty.

Unfortunately my bet is not on the latter as my faith in the "average American" these days has reached new lows.

 

[James Klymus]

What's going on in parts of the country, and that fact that is it implemented and enforced, and the citizens are allowing it, is insane.

You can't buy seeds to grow your own food?
You can't use your motorboat on the lake?
You can't fish?
You can't visit your second home?
You can play ball with your kid in a park?
You can't do a drive thru worship?

How this country comes out the other side of this will be quite telling... because from these actions, what comes out is either 1) a carcass, 2) something unrecognizable, or 3) a renewed spirit of liberty.

Unfortunately my bet is not on the latter as my faith in the "average American" these days has reached new lows.

People are wising up, I see more of it every day.

I see plenty of "good little citizens" begging the government to tighten down restrictions, and snitch on their neighbors for having a BBQ.

But I'm also seeing plenty of people, More and more every day, who are worried about what the governments true motivations are.

I see both sides of media now talking about the draconian measures that the governments across America has used, and like I said government overreach is becoming a bigger and bigger conversation every day.

I'm confident in most Americans. We've been fed propaganda non stop for over a month about corona virus, but people are wising up. For every "karen" that goes around snitching on their neighbors for a nonexistent reward, there are 1000 people who have the spirit of liberty, and ARE questioning what they're told.

 

[James Klymus]

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2004211

"Second, governments must have a strong basis for the restrictions. Looking to case law regarding civil commitment, many scholars and some lower courts have concluded that isolation and quarantine are constitutional only when the government can show by clear and compelling evidence that they are the least restrictive means of protecting the public’s health"

Maybe I'm just way too optimistic, but I think that in the next few weeks we will see a flurry of lawsuits come about, that question how necessary these heavy handed measures were.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/23/coronavirus-lawsuits-are-coming-thats-not-bad-thing/

"If our leaders do not articulate a timeline for periodic reassessment, the criteria they will use to ease restrictions and how they are using this pause to act swiftly, decisively and collaboratively on a long-term solution, then community-minded citizens may rightly call on the judiciary to hold them accountable."

You could argue the effectiveness of this, But the point is that we as Americans will not just roll over and take it. We have a system in place to hold our leaders accountable, And I'm optimistic.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[James Klymus]

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2004211

"Second, governments must have a strong basis for the restrictions. Looking to case law regarding civil commitment, many scholars and some lower courts have concluded that isolation and quarantine are constitutional only when the government can show by clear and compelling evidence that they are the least restrictive means of protecting the public’s health"

Maybe I'm just way too optimistic, but I think that in the next few weeks we will see a flurry of lawsuits come about, that question how necessary these heavy handed measures were.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/23/coronavirus-lawsuits-are-coming-thats-not-bad-thing/

"If our leaders do not articulate a timeline for periodic reassessment, the criteria they will use to ease restrictions and how they are using this pause to act swiftly, decisively and collaboratively on a long-term solution, then community-minded citizens may rightly call on the judiciary to hold them accountable."

You could argue the effectiveness of this, But the point is that we as Americans will not just roll over and take it. We have a system in place to hold our leaders accountable, And I'm optimistic.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2007637?query=recirc_top_ribbon_article_12

"Resistance to drastic disease-control measures is already evident. Rising infection rates and mortality, coupled with scientific uncertainty about C0VlD-19, should keep resentment at bay — for a while. But the status quo isn’t sustainable for months on end; public unrest will eventually become too great."

 

[msufan]

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2007637?query=recirc_top_ribbon_article_12

"Resistance to drastic disease-control measures is already evident. Rising infection rates and mortality, coupled with scientific uncertainty about C0VlD-19, should keep resentment at bay — for a while. But the status quo isn’t sustainable for months on end; public unrest will eventually become too great."

This is very true. I am in MI, which has been hit hard and has implemented many of the policies MJ listed. If the governor wants compliance on the bigger issues, she would do well to begin rolling back restrictions at the fringes -- keep the schools closed, keep banning huge gatherings -- but allow all stores to reopen if they follow social distancing guidelines, allow people to fish, allow people to travel to their cottage (this should never have been banned IMO), and so on.

 

[ChrisV]

I started using death rate as the best guage of disease spread probably 2 or 3 weeks ago. I look at but don’t put too much stock in the infection rate. Because there are so many variables in testing, unknowns such as subclinical rate, etc.

But most deaths by/with covid are known. So it is the most accurate measure we have at the moment with the least amount of variability. Realize that death rate is about a 3+ week lagging indicator of infection rate though. So even as death rate is increasing the infection rate can actually be decreasing.

Yea, they address that in the URL:

The key point is that the “case fatality rate”, the most commonly discussed measure of the risk of dying, is not the answer to the question, for two reasons. One, it relies on the number of confirmed cases, and many cases are not confirmed; and two, it relies on the total number of deaths, and with C0VlD-19, some people who are sick and will die soon have not yet died. These two facts mean that it is extremely difficult to make accurate estimates of the true risk of death.

Our data on this sucks.

We really need some amount of randomized testing to establish baselines.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[ChrisV]

What's going on in parts of the country, and that fact that is it implemented and enforced, and the citizens are allowing it, is insane.

You can't buy seeds to grow your own food?
You can't use your motorboat on the lake?
You can't fish?
You can't visit your second home?
You can play ball with your kid in a park?
You can't do a drive thru worship?

I don't know what the deal is with all this, but where I live there's nothing like this. Police aren't bugging anyone, people are still out getting gas, groceries, etc.

Honestly if you didn't know there was a pandemic or go into a restaurant you might not even notice a difference.

 

[GSF]

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2007637?query=recirc_top_ribbon_article_12

"Resistance to drastic disease-control measures is already evident. Rising infection rates and mortality, coupled with scientific uncertainty about C0VlD-19, should keep resentment at bay — for a while. But the status quo isn’t sustainable for months on end; public unrest will eventually become too great."

From your link, I wonder if this gets rolled out;
"Moreover, a degree of voluntariness is maintained by eschewing forced testing and instead conditioning social privileges on cooperation"

"Consider, for example, a policy in which people seeking to return to work, school, or social activities are asked to undergo baseline testing for infection and antibodies. Positive tests for infection would trigger self-isolation. Negative tests would certify freedom of movement for a defined period — say, 2 or 3 weeks — after which additional negative tests would renew the certification."

 

[biggeemac]

We were told that we couldn't have our 5 year old grandson(or anyone under 12) at our foster homes. We rejected, and disobeyed......repeatedly. Like, daily. His mom works for us btw.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[NovaAria]

Well, let this be the lesson.
Always. Always. Always save for a rainy day. Food, money, essentials...
You don't really need the extra stuff... Until you do.

 

[msufan]

View attachment 32130

Well, let this be the lesson.
Always. Always. Always save for a rainy day. Food, money, essentials...
You don't really need the extra stuff... Until you do.

And these people line up for hours at a time when we are trying to keep people apart. Oh the irony.

 

[James Klymus]

From your link, I wonder if this gets rolled out;
"Moreover, a degree of voluntariness is maintained by eschewing forced testing and instead conditioning social privileges on cooperation"

"Consider, for example, a policy in which people seeking to return to work, school, or social activities are asked to undergo baseline testing for infection and antibodies. Positive tests for infection would trigger self-isolation. Negative tests would certify freedom of movement for a defined period — say, 2 or 3 weeks — after which additional negative tests would renew the certification."

Thats where they lost me. Snuck that in right at the end there.

They also said something to the effect of "we need to make important and famous people abide by these rules so the pheasants will see and follow their lead"

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Xeon]

 

[Tommo]

In Western Australia the police seem to be leaving people alone, I saw loads of people out enjoying life on the weekend and they were keeping a bit more distance than usual but out walking and boating, kayaking and generally going about as normal for a weekend. Over East in the big cities is a different story though.

 

[Kak]

What's going on in parts of the country, and that fact that is it implemented and enforced, and the citizens are allowing it, is insane.

You can't buy seeds to grow your own food?
You can't use your motorboat on the lake?
You can't fish?
You can't visit your second home?
You can play ball with your kid in a park?
You can't do a drive thru worship?

How this country comes out the other side of this will be quite telling... because from these actions, what comes out is either 1) a carcass, 2) something unrecognizable, or 3) a renewed spirit of liberty.

Unfortunately my bet is not on the latter as my faith in the "average American" these days has reached new lows.

I mentioned this on the podcast with Gillman.

Something that rubbed me very wrong in the order passed here. When they said that churches can’t meet as usual, for obvious and understandable reasons... They went so far to “allow online services.”

Allow them? Affirming our ability do do something on the internet? That was absurd.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Tommo]

First wave of COVID-19 survivors do vital tasks since they're immune

The first wave of coronavirus survivors are doing their part to help the US get back on track by donating blood and plasma and heading back to work because they are now immune to the virus.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Tommo]

One of the 4 best states in the country.

Two Houston cops lead chicks on mission to find their mother

A Houston Police Department sergeant was captured on video helping chicks find their mother on Saturday.

www.dailymail.co.uk

And here is why lol

 

[ChrisV]

The Civil War of Social Distancing:

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Vigilante]

I mentioned this on the podcast with Gillman.

Something that rubbed me very wrong in the order passed here. When they said that churches can’t meet as usual, for obvious and understandable reasons... They went so far to “allow online services.”

Allow them? Affirming our ability do do something on the internet? That was absurd.

I saw one of the governors issue a statement as she(?) restricted in person services that online services were allowed. It read awkward. I just skimmed past it but it stuck in my mind. What do you mean you’re allowing online services? In America? WTF?

 

[NovaAria]

A little bit of good news.
My country is lifting lockdowns on the 19th.
Still no concerts, cinemas... opening. But for everything else, distancing must become the norm and the people can carry on as usual. For example, no more than three persons in a barber's shop.

Makes sense, and I am glad that they are doing the sensible thing. They said that they will be keeping an eye on things and going back to quarantines is a possibility if there is a second wave.
But for now, life is relatively going back to normal.