Non-computer Corona virus thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sky-Knight said:
China has the benefit of a leadership with actual goals. Those goals include our destruction... they're acting on a plan based on their goals. We're over here playing the red v blue game while the planet burns in the balance.
Click to expand...

I do not, even for a moment, believe that China is in any way interested in killing the goose that keeps laying the golden eggs for them, and the USA is a big, big one of those geese. They are every bit as dependent on us as we are on them.

I agree with you on the "they have leadership, and we haven't, for quite a while" position, though. And I'll openly admit that I place the blame for that squarely on the political right in our nation. It would be very difficult for anyone except on the fringe right in the USA to consider my politics overall as anything beyond center-left.

One of the things I have been amazed that the "corporatists," regardless of which political party they're in, have failed to grasp is just how dangerous it is to national security to outsource the manufacture of the vast majority of things we depend on. I am a believer in government intervention in markets, even here, because the following quote is absolutely true, in my observation:

'Well-regulated free markets' is not an oxymoron, but a necessity for good economic outcomes.
~ Peter Diamond, winner of the 2010 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences

But also because propping up certain industries is an essential part of national security. I grew up in coal and steel country, and coal is, even to me, "good riddance," but our letting go of steel manufacturing, among numerous other things, was not, and remains, a tragically bad decision from a national security perspective.

We really couldn't do what we did when World War II arrived now. There is just not the manufacturing infrastructure to "repurpose" as there was then.

There is an excellent opinion piece in the New York Times by Darren Walker, President of the Ford Foundation, entitled, Are You Willing to Give Up Your Privilege? Philanthropy alone won't save the American dream, that is not at all what most would think based upon the title. One of the things he says, that I've been saying for years, is: This will require rejecting Milton Friedman’s outmoded ideology: the dogma that a company must put shareholder value above all other objectives. It will require that corporations operate, in the words of the Business Roundtable, “for the benefit of all stakeholders — customers, employees, suppliers, communities and shareholders.”

I was raised during, and was the at the very tail end of generations that benefited from, business leaders having the conviction, and acting on it, that running a business was for the benefit of all stakeholders, and when push came to shove it was your employees to whom you owed your loyalty even more than the shareholders. It not only made moral sense, but great business sense, because hanging on to experienced people through the hard times, which made them want to stay with you and do their absolute best, is the best way to ensure long-term success in a business. Employees are not "interchangeable parts," and that newbie isn't worth diddly compared to the person who's been with you for several decades and has institutional memory as deep as the ocean. We've got to get back to realizing this, and doing things in both the private and public sectors that reflect that we realize this.
 
Sky-Knight said:
@phaZed, in regards to the COVID-19 situation, there was one nation that had the power to contain it. They ignored it... and worse depending on how cynical you view the chain of events, intentionally spread it beyond their borders to ensure all this wouldn't just be on their heads alone.
Click to expand...

But that assumes a lot. It assumes that any nation CAN contain it. It assumes that China ignored it, when it looks like they did anything but. Really, though, hasn't China's response to COVID been exemplary? You also assume (in the cynical view) that the virus originated in China, specifically Wuhan, yet, there is mounting evidence that COVID-19 was out and about in Spain since March 2019.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...wage-sample-spanish-study-shows-idUSKBN23X2HQ

China reported COVID to the WHO on December 31st, 2019 - That's pretty early, and they(China) don't report single-cases, they only report when it's established that there is a "problem" - that's a WHO thing, not a China thing. So, five weeks passes for them and they noticed exponential growth and reported it.. that seems reasonable to me given the circumstances of the Virus, identifying the virus, the two week incubation, etc. There were less than 200 cases in Wuhan when it was reported.

And as far as "Wuhan" goes, the supposed place it was "Let lose on the populace" - it's unclear if the first cases from November onward are even Wuhan residents and/or they could have carried it from elsewhere.
https://www.livescience.com/first-case-coronavirus-found.html
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/soc...nas-first-confirmed-covid-19-case-traced-back

I don't want to be a China apologist here, but to try and scapegoat China and ignore everything else (like our own response) seems like yet another BS fight for US to worry about while the real action happens under our noses, IMO.
 
@phaZed The article you linked debunked itself... one positive test from a single sample isn't a positive result. It's an anomaly, an outlier... nothing more.

And I refuse to believe the virus was out during that time... why? LOOK OUTSIDE. If this thing was in the wild then, our hospitals would have been inundated THEN. That's how infectious this thing is. Though you do raise a fair point, could China have contained this? The evidence seems to indicate, no... it couldn't.

But don't forget, the Chinese doctor that blew the whistle on this died in a jail cell. https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-02-06/coronavirus-china-xi-li-wenliang

As screwed up as the US is, we aren't incarcerating and causing the death of the very people trying to get ahead of this mess. Heck, in some ways I wish we were... because the reckless profiteering in these efforts deserves a bit of that. But we're not...
 
Sky-Knight said:
The article you linked debunked itself... one positive test from a single sample isn't a positive result. It's an anomaly, an outlier... nothing more.
Click to expand...
While you are correct, a single positive test is an anomaly, it doesn't mean that the article debunks itself... or that the anomaly isn't actually true. Especially when you take into account that there are 3-5 reports of such from different countries (That I can find). Taken individually, yes I agree, it's dubious at best.. but when taken as a whole, when multiple, single case infection reports come from multiple places around the globe (That pre-date), something is probably going on - maybe it is erroneous, however, it should cast doubt as to "Wuhan" and "Wuhan Lab". It doesn't nullify, just casts doubt.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/05/world/europe/france-coronavirus-timeline.html

As a thought experiment against your logic here: 'We will never find the "patient zero" because he/she is a single case.'
But there was a "first", this we know.

Sky-Knight said:
And I refuse to believe the virus was out during that time... why? LOOK OUTSIDE. If this thing was in the wild then, our hospitals would have been inundated THEN.
Click to expand...
No, not really. That's where the "R-Value" comes in. Not to mention the dynamics of the virus and starting location. It takes time to propagate and it takes time to "move" from it's original location. If the virus originated in the US, then maybe we would have been inundated sooner, and China would have been in Jan-Feb-Mar. It took China about a month to see 30 cases. Only then did it start going parabolic. If true, how many people in France or Spain had it and died without officials realizing it was "new"? Where were those people (populated area? Farmland? Etc.)? How many people got it that never travel and rarely venture into cities? If the virus doesn't get on a plane or meet anyone else, then it takes a long time to get anywhere.

Sky-Knight said:
As screwed up as the US is, we aren't incarcerating and causing the death of the very people trying to get ahead of this mess.
Click to expand...
Well, sure, maybe not for 'this' - but the US routinely incarcerates and kills people relating to other issues that threaten the Government(or rather, the governments illegal actions)... it's gone so far that the US can now imprison people indefinitely without trial or representation. As a purely tit-for-tat comparison, we're just as bad, if not worse. We're firing professionals left and right in this country for not doctoring the COVID numbers(Florida), Trump is suppressing testing, we got rid of the CDC pandemic team, etc... so we are "suppressing". But as for the Chinese doctor... yes, it's suspicious, but kinda like you say - one story doesn't equal the truth, who really knows what happened to the doctor? The official story is he died of COVID... for what evidence to the contrary but circumstantial?
 
Out of pocket in US is 73000 on bad case if you have no insurance some insurance will NOT cover it because pandemics are not covered act of god thing lol.

Current government has a plan they want as many people to catch it as possible and hopefully herd immunity will kick in sorry to say but with current research it will not work with covid-19.
 
Galdorf said:
. . . herd immunity will kick in sorry to say but with current research it will not work with covid-19.
Click to expand...

Herd immunity always kicks in after about 60% or more in a population have been infected and lived through whatever it is. At that point you can still have spot outbreaks through areal epidemics.

Unless you believe that Covid-19 will kill literally everyone, and there's already plenty of evidence that it, like any pathogen, can't, eventually herd immunity kicks in and brings any pandemic to an end.

The question is, and should be, are we as humans willing to allow the amount of death that will unquestionably occur if we do nothing, either now with social distancing measures and personal protective equipment (in the form of face masks for most of us in day-to-day life), or getting a vaccine ASAP?

I'd hope that the vast majority of us would answer that rhetorical question with a resounding, "Absolutely not!!," and behave accordingly and push our governments to do so as well.
 
@britechguy Herd immunity doesn't help if this thing only imparts 6 months of immunity.

And, if this thing continues to mutate... it'll become an endemic seasonal cold...

We've never stopped one of those...
We've never made a working vaccine for one of those...

But supposedly we have vaccine's available now, UPMC has one example. The problem is production... though if things keep progressing like they have been we should start to see those products hit the shelf Q1 next year.

It's a good thing we're hot and heavy into anti-virals as a species... because we're going to need a medical miracle to get out of this.

But in the meantime, the least anyone can do is mask up. That's our rifle to fight this new enemy. I can't stand these morons repeating the same tired BS they spewed back in the 1920s regarding masks... I swear no one bothers to read anything in history anymore. Google has it all a quick click away... still can't be bothered.
 
@Sky-Knight,

Although it is definitely possible that immunity to Covid-19 could be short term, and 6 months would be very short term, that is not the general pattern according to the experts. Almost all are predicting permanent immunity, or very long term immunity, rather than short term but are, of course, presenting the "worst case immunity scenario."

All viruses mutate, and there's so far nothing about this one that suggests that it's mutating in such a way that it would be "unrecognizable" to the immune system that already has a defense response to it.

In any case, the science is already quite conclusive that using face masks is one of the most effective methods that the population at large has to minimize transmission along with maintaining social distance when at all possible when not dealing with members of one's own household.

Personally, I'm sick to death (no pun intended) of the endless stream of "I have the right to do what I want" coming out of far too many mouths in this country, and in way more instances than just face masks. As the old saw goes, "Your right to swing your fist ends just before it hits my face." It's disgusting how some confuse license, the decision to do whatever one wants whenever one wants with no consideration of the rights of others, with liberty. Liberty is, and always has been, constrained by consideration of the competing rights of all parties. In a situation like this one, your "right" to go without a mask, pack a bar or restaurant, crowd a beach, etc., does not in any way, shape, or form come close to equaling the competing rights of others to avoid a highly infections and dangerous illness. The weight is so far on the side of those whose health may be at risk, up to and including death, that your desires to behave just as you'd like (any you) have as close to zero weight as can be, if not zero weight. And when I see the news coverage of some of those speaking out against mandatory mask orders, my heart sinks and my mind recoils at the abject stupidity and utter selfishness.
 
Yes, and he's right, if not enough people get the vaccine. If they don't, many more will die, but we will still, eventually, reach herd immunity. It's how every pandemic in history has come to an end.

How we reach it is a completely separate issue from the fact that it will be reached, one way or another. From the article you reference: Herd immunity is when a sufficient proportion of a population is immune to an infectious disease, either through prior illness or vaccination, so that spread from person to person unlikely. [Italic emphasis mine].
 
On the mask issue...

From the Washington Post:

“Men are less inclined to wear masks. A recent study, co-authored by professors at Berkeley and the U.K.’s Middlesex University, found that men resisted for several reasons: They were less likely to believe they’d get sick with the coronavirus (they are actually more likely to get sick), and ‘Men more than women agree that wearing a face covering is shameful, not cool, a sign of weakness, and a stigma.’”

From The Guardian:

"Can masculinity be so glacially unmovable and paper-thin fragile? Apparently, yes – which is unfortunate, because the danger from Covid-19 remains very, very real. This week Scientific American called masks the “condoms of the face”, arguing that the struggle to get men to wear masks during this pandemic has parallels in the struggle to get men to wear condoms during the rise of HIV. While it seems strange to compare something you’d wear so visibly in public to something worn privately in intimate moments, the analogy underscores how some men’s notions of masculinity are intertwined with a corrosive mix of petulance, indestructibility and, ultimately, privilege. The article cited research showing that 'masculine ideology' is associated with rejection of condom use."
 
The men not wearing the mask thing makes no sense to me...

You see, the mask doesn't protect the wearer... it protects those around the wearer from the wearer.

Which means, a man putting on a mask is protecting his family, his coworkers, and everyone else around him.

But I have the exact same logic for condoms too...

The odd part to me is the core of my ethos that creates that drive comes from my two military parents drilling protect and serve into me from a young age. And my dad? He's the toxic monster that refuses to mask up, will go to his grave swearing this is all a hoax... Meanwhile my post-cancer sister is stuck living with the man in all her high risk glory.

Not fun, makes me want to inflict grievous bodily harm.
 
Things don`t look good for China again Wuhan is on hard lockdown and parts of Australia cases in other areas US especially totally out of control but here where i live there has not been a case in months and no deaths masks are mandated other transmittable diseases have seen a drastic drop.

Now there is a mutation of covid-19 in US is spreading like wildfire not any more lethal than the others but contract tracing with large numbers can`t be done this mutation since most people don`t have symptoms or very mild.
 
Sky-Knight said:
You see, the mask doesn't protect the wearer... it protects those around the wearer from the wearer.
Click to expand...

Actually, it protects both the wearer and those around them, but the advantage, particularly if the wearer is already infected, leans more toward others.

But wearing a mask also significantly reduces the risk of the wearer, too. Just not quite so much as it does others in specific circumstances.
 
britechguy said:
Actually, it protects both the wearer and those around them, but the advantage, particularly if the wearer is already infected, leans more toward others.
Click to expand...
It can prevent a viral infection entering through the nose or mouth, true, but the eyes are probably the most common point of entry. Another problem with face masks is that they tend to cause irritation or itching when worn for prolonged periods, or need frequent adjusting, which can lead to more hand-to-face contact than there might be without a mask. Don't get me wrong, I'm not in any way agreeing with the anti-mask mobs, and I think face masks should certainly be worn wherever they might help prevent the virus spreading to others, but people need to be mindful when wearing a mask so as not to increase their own risk of infection. Face shields are probably a better solution because they provide protection for the eyes and also make the wearer less likely to inadvertently touch their face, since they have to reach under the shield to do so.
 
Moltuae said:
Another problem with face masks is that they tend to cause irritation or itching when worn for prolonged periods, or need frequent adjusting, which can lead to more hand-to-face contact than there might be without a mask.
Click to expand...
True but for me, I constantly use my hand sanitizer as well. I also clean all computers with 99% alcohol as well.
 
Porthos said:
True but for me, I constantly use my hand sanitizer as well. I also clean all computers with 99% alcohol as well.
Click to expand...
And that's great. Like I said, people need to be mindful and not be fooled into believing that a mask alone will keep them safe. I fear that unfortunately for a large proportion of the population that's not the case and that, in some cases, face masks could be helping the virus spread instead of preventing it.
 
Last edited:
Moltuae said:
Like I said, people need to be mindful and not be fooled into believing that a mask alone will keep them safe. I fear that unfortunately for a large proportion of the population that's not the case and that, in some cases, face masks could helping the virus spread instead of preventing it.
Click to expand...

When it comes to risk, there's virtually nothing that "keeps one safe" if, by safe, you mean 100% (or very close to it) protected from whatever it may be.

It's a matter of relatively safer, not completely safe. And I personally fear for those who believe that a mask would or could keep them 100% safe as much as I do those who adamantly refuse to wear them, as they expose themselves and others to a much higher probability of infection if mingling with the public.

As you noted, the main ports of entry are the eyes (and that's only if touched with infected hands or having had infected aerosol particles float in - which masks on others reduce substantially), nose, and mouth. It's important to touch none of those three areas unless your hands are freshly washed for at least 20 seconds or have been "hand santitizered to death" when washing is not an option.

But when I don and doff my mask, the only place on my head that I touch is around my ears. Since viruses and bacteria, too, can't walk, that does not introduce any significant additional risk. And when donning my mask or adjusting it I touch only the mask, not the skin surrounding my nose. The area well beneath my chin is really not of much concern for the same reason as the ear area is not.

The basics of masks and how they work keeps being repeated and repeated and repeated. I would hope that anyone who takes the time and effort to use one has also bothered to learn those basics. But I'd still rather them wear them, even if they were to infect themselves, because that mask reduces the emissions of aerosols from them by a very large amount and shortens the distance what gets out goes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top