|
Post by Ward on Aug 27, 2020 6:42:23 GMT -6
Jesus save us, ericn, what you are describing is textbook insanity.
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on Aug 27, 2020 21:20:25 GMT -6
Jesus save us, ericn, what you are describing is textbook insanity. AKA SNAFU
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Aug 31, 2020 13:59:07 GMT -6
Comparing Sweden's very expansive healthcare system with America's Wall Street profit-driven minimalist approach is not a valid comparison.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Aug 31, 2020 14:19:14 GMT -6
Comparing Sweden's very expansive healthcare system with America's Wall Street profit-driven minimalist approach is not a valid comparison. Except that the protocols are exactly the same between countries. They had a relatively similar rate of rise in cases but a comparatively higher per-capita peak than the USA, but since they allowed the general public to continue life as usual unless a person's health required quarantining, they were able to push people into herd immunity very quickly and nullified the double peak that we experienced. The general problem with lockdowns is that since we know the antibodies only last a few months when you have cyclical lockdowns that last roughly the same period as antibody halflives, every time you remove the lockdown you'll end up with another peak in cases and this will happen well in to the future. Sweden knew this and decided it was better to have the cases up front and allow the herd immunity to take hold, and it has. Those who pointed at high numbers in the beginning have nothing to say now that they're doing much better than the average. I guess you can say that their healthcare system is better simply because it's run by smarter people who make the right decisions when faced with political no-win situations, unlike our system that pandered to the scared to push political narratives on both sides. The USA instead decided to do lockdowns based on nothing but theory and politics and we're on the backside of the second peak that wouldn't have happened had we just quarantined the sick and at-risk and allowed those not susceptible to destroy the disease through herd immunity.. Instead we're now seeing reinfections in those susceptible people whose antibodies have already disappeared. In the end, we will have many more sick and dead due to the lockdowns effectively rendering herd immunity moot through lockdowns.
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Aug 31, 2020 14:33:15 GMT -6
Comparing Sweden's very expansive healthcare system with America's Wall Street profit-driven minimalist approach is not a valid comparison. I'm not sure I understand your point, can you clarify? Are you implying that American hospitals aren't treating Covid as well as Sweden's? Or that profits get in the way of American Hospitals ability to effectively treat disease? Or that access to healthcare is poorer here? I'm confused...
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,118
|
Post by ericn on Sept 1, 2020 13:31:06 GMT -6
Comparing Sweden's very expansive healthcare system with America's Wall Street profit-driven minimalist approach is not a valid comparison. I'm not sure I understand your point, can you clarify? Are you implying that American hospitals aren't treating Covid as well as Sweden's? Or that profits get in the way of American Hospitals ability to effectively treat disease? Or that access to healthcare is poorer here? I'm confused... I think what Bob is getting at is that a Swede is more likely to seek health care than a uninsured American.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Sept 1, 2020 13:49:20 GMT -6
As of now I know 6 directly who’ve had it and probably another 20 indirect. 1 fatality. 3 heart problems. 4 hospitalizations. 1 ventilator. 3 needing oxygen. One of the heart problems was a healthy guy about 40, showed up 2 weeks after he seemed fully recovered. Starting to bug me the news keeps running total cases. That made sense early on, now the more important number is active cases, and I don't ever see that as the headline. Nuance, people, nuance. NC is something like #9 in total cases, but #23 in active cases, and #32 in death rate. It's a real problem, but the MSM is trivializing it by sensationalizing it. This doesn't need that. No solutions are found from lying. Politicians are exaggerating the problem for political gain, which also undermines the credibility. EXAMPLE: In 1999, Al Gore said that there were only 7000 polar bears and they were going extinct. Today only 28,000 remain. See? Bears reproduce. It's been 20 years. Until warming started destroying the ice pack badly, protections may very well have increased the population.
Anyway, Al Gore invented the internet....
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Sept 1, 2020 13:55:25 GMT -6
Comparing Sweden's very expansive healthcare system with America's Wall Street profit-driven minimalist approach is not a valid comparison. Except that the protocols are exactly the same between countries. They had a relatively similar rate of rise in cases but a comparatively higher per-capita peak than the USA, but since they allowed the general public to continue life as usual unless a person's health required quarantining, they were able to push people into herd immunity very quickly and nullified the double peak that we experienced. The general problem with lockdowns is that since we know the antibodies only last a few months when you have cyclical lockdowns that last roughly the same period as antibody halflives, every time you remove the lockdown you'll end up with another peak in cases and this will happen well in to the future. Sweden knew this and decided it was better to have the cases up front and allow the herd immunity to take hold, and it has. Those who pointed at high numbers in the beginning have nothing to say now that they're doing much better than the average. I guess you can say that their healthcare system is better simply because it's run by smarter people who make the right decisions when faced with political no-win situations, unlike our system that pandered to the scared to push political narratives on both sides. The USA instead decided to do lockdowns based on nothing but theory and politics and we're on the backside of the second peak that wouldn't have happened had we just quarantined the sick and at-risk and allowed those not susceptible to destroy the disease through herd immunity.. Instead we're now seeing reinfections in those susceptible people whose antibodies have already disappeared. In the end, we will have many more sick and dead due to the lockdowns effectively rendering herd immunity moot through lockdowns. No, actually the Swedes were idiots and ended up with the worst figures in Europe, AFAIK. If not THE worst, one of them.
The US did not do lockdowns "based on politics". Lockdowns were standard medical procedure, established over a long time - at least a century.
All the politics comes from the pro Russia, anti-lockdown bunch, attempting to use COVID to manipulate election turnout.
The result is that the USA has THE WORST Covid stats in the developed world.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Sept 2, 2020 13:14:11 GMT -6
Sweden has far more hospital beds and doctors per citizen than the U.S. has. They assumed they could simply handle it but their death rate speaks volumes.
The purpose of a lockdown is to slow the spread to the point that hospitals can keep up with it. Remember that covid cases are in addition to a community's regular number of heart attacks, accidents and illnesses requiring hospitalization. It was needed due to our lack of investment in infrastructure and supplies.
What we really need are tests and contact tracing so that the spreaders can be quarantined. All the rest are emergency measures.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Sept 2, 2020 16:03:41 GMT -6
Here's an interesting new article posted at PRW by Zmix:
elemental.medium.com/a-supercom ... cb8eba9d63 elemental.medium.com A Supercomputer Analyzed Covid-19 — and an Interesting New Theory Has Emerged Thomas Smith 11-14 minutes A closer look at the Bradykinin hypothesis Photo: zhangshuang/Getty Images Earlier this summer, the Summit supercomputer at Oak Ridge National Lab in Tennessee set about crunching data on more than 40,000 genes from 17,000 genetic samples in an effort to better understand Covid-19. Summit is the second-fastest computer in the world, but the process — which involved analyzing 2.5 billion genetic combinations — still took more than a week. When Summit was done, researchers analyzed the results. It was, in the words of Dr. Daniel Jacobson, lead researcher and chief scientist for computational systems biology at Oak Ridge, a “eureka moment.” The computer had revealed a new theory about how Covid-19 impacts the body: the bradykinin hypothesis. The hypothesis provides a model that explains many aspects of Covid-19, including some of its most bizarre symptoms. It also suggests 10-plus potential treatments, many of which are already FDA approved. Jacobson’s group published their results in a paper in the journal eLife in early July. According to the team’s findings, a Covid-19 infection generally begins when the virus enters the body through ACE2 receptors in the nose, (The receptors, which the virus is known to target, are abundant there.) The virus then proceeds through the body, entering cells in other places where ACE2 is also present: the intestines, kidneys, and heart. This likely accounts for at least some of the disease’s cardiac and GI symptoms. But once Covid-19 has established itself in the body, things start to get really interesting. According to Jacobson’s group, the data Summit analyzed shows that Covid-19 isn’t content to simply infect cells that already express lots of ACE2 receptors. Instead, it actively hijacks the body’s own systems, tricking it into upregulating ACE2 receptors in places where they’re usually expressed at low or medium levels, including the lungs. In this sense, Covid-19 is like a burglar who slips in your unlocked second-floor window and starts to ransack your house. Once inside, though, they don’t just take your stuff — they also throw open all your doors and windows so their accomplices can rush in and help pillage more efficiently. The renin–angiotensin system (RAS) controls many aspects of the circulatory system, including the body’s levels of a chemical called bradykinin, which normally helps to regulate blood pressure. According to the team’s analysis, when the virus tweaks the RAS, it causes the body’s mechanisms for regulating bradykinin to go haywire. Bradykinin receptors are resensitized, and the body also stops effectively breaking down bradykinin. (ACE normally degrades bradykinin, but when the virus downregulates it, it can’t do this as effectively.) The end result, the researchers say, is to release a bradykinin storm — a massive, runaway buildup of bradykinin in the body. According to the bradykinin hypothesis, it’s this storm that is ultimately responsible for many of Covid-19’s deadly effects. Jacobson’s team says in their paper that “the pathology of Covid-19 is likely the result of Bradykinin Storms rather than cytokine storms,” which had been previously identified in Covid-19 patients, but that “the two may be intricately linked.” Other papers had previously identified bradykinin storms as a possible cause of Covid-19’s pathologies. Covid-19 is like a burglar who slips in your unlocked second-floor window and starts to ransack your house. As bradykinin builds up in the body, it dramatically increases vascular permeability. In short, it makes your blood vessels leaky. This aligns with recent clinical data, which increasingly views Covid-19 primarily as a vascular disease, rather than a respiratory one. But Covid-19 still has a massive effect on the lungs. As blood vessels start to leak due to a bradykinin storm, the researchers say, the lungs can fill with fluid. Immune cells also leak out into the lungs, Jacobson’s team found, causing inflammation. And Covid-19 has another especially insidious trick. Through another pathway, the team’s data shows, it increases production of hyaluronic acid (HLA) in the lungs. HLA is often used in soaps and lotions for its ability to absorb more than 1,000 times its weight in fluid. When it combines with fluid leaking into the lungs, the results are disastrous: It forms a hydrogel, which can fill the lungs in some patients. According to Jacobson, once this happens, “it’s like trying to breathe through Jell-O.” This may explain why ventilators have proven less effective in treating advanced Covid-19 than doctors originally expected, based on experiences with other viruses. “It reaches a point where regardless of how much oxygen you pump in, it doesn’t matter, because the alveoli in the lungs are filled with this hydrogel,” Jacobson says. “The lungs become like a water balloon.” Patients can suffocate even while receiving full breathing support. The bradykinin hypothesis also extends to many of Covid-19’s effects on the heart. About one in five hospitalized Covid-19 patients have damage to their hearts, even if they never had cardiac issues before. Some of this is likely due to the virus infecting the heart directly through its ACE2 receptors. But the RAS also controls aspects of cardiac contractions and blood pressure. According to the researchers, bradykinin storms could create arrhythmias and low blood pressure, which are often seen in Covid-19 patients. The bradykinin hypothesis also accounts for Covid-19’s neurological effects, which are some of the most surprising and concerning elements of the disease. These symptoms (which include dizziness, seizures, delirium, and stroke) are present in as many as half of hospitalized Covid-19 patients. According to Jacobson and his team, MRI studies in France revealed that many Covid-19 patients have evidence of leaky blood vessels in their brains. Bradykinin — especially at high doses — can also lead to a breakdown of the blood-brain barrier. Under normal circumstances, this barrier acts as a filter between your brain and the rest of your circulatory system. It lets in the nutrients and small molecules that the brain needs to function, while keeping out toxins and pathogens and keeping the brain’s internal environment tightly regulated. If bradykinin storms cause the blood-brain barrier to break down, this could allow harmful cells and compounds into the brain, leading to inflammation, potential brain damage, and many of the neurological symptoms Covid-19 patients experience. Jacobson told me, “It is a reasonable hypothesis that many of the neurological symptoms in Covid-19 could be due to an excess of bradykinin. It has been reported that bradykinin would indeed be likely to increase the permeability of the blood-brain barrier. In addition, similar neurological symptoms have been observed in other diseases that result from an excess of bradykinin.” Increased bradykinin levels could also account for other common Covid-19 symptoms. ACE inhibitors — a class of drugs used to treat high blood pressure — have a similar effect on the RAS system as Covid-19, increasing bradykinin levels. In fact, Jacobson and his team note in their paper that “the virus… acts pharmacologically as an ACE inhibitor” — almost directly mirroring the actions of these drugs. By acting like a natural ACE inhibitor, Covid-19 may be causing the same effects that hypertensive patients sometimes get when they take blood pressure–lowering drugs. ACE inhibitors are known to cause a dry cough and fatigue, two textbook symptoms of Covid-19. And they can potentially increase blood potassium levels, which has also been observed in Covid-19 patients. The similarities between ACE inhibitor side effects and Covid-19 symptoms strengthen the bradykinin hypothesis, the researchers say. ACE inhibitors are also known to cause a loss of taste and smell. Jacobson stresses, though, that this symptom is more likely due to the virus “affecting the cells surrounding olfactory nerve cells” than the direct effects of bradykinin. Though still an emerging theory, the bradykinin hypothesis explains several other of Covid-19’s seemingly bizarre symptoms. Jacobson and his team speculate that leaky vasculature caused by bradykinin storms could be responsible for “Covid toes,” a condition involving swollen, bruised toes that some Covid-19 patients experience. Bradykinin can also mess with the thyroid gland, which could produce the thyroid symptoms recently observed in some patients. The bradykinin hypothesis could also explain some of the broader demographic patterns of the disease’s spread. The researchers note that some aspects of the RAS system are sex-linked, with proteins for several receptors (such as one called TMSB4X) located on the X chromosome. This means that “women… would have twice the levels of this protein than men,” a result borne out by the researchers’ data. In their paper, Jacobson’s team concludes that this “could explain the lower incidence of Covid-19 induced mortality in women.” A genetic quirk of the RAS could be giving women extra protection against the disease. The bradykinin hypothesis provides a model that “contributes to a better understanding of Covid-19” and “adds novelty to the existing literature,” according to scientists Frank van de Veerdonk, Jos WM van der Meer, and Roger Little, who peer-reviewed the team’s paper. It predicts nearly all the disease’s symptoms, even ones (like bruises on the toes) that at first appear random, and further suggests new treatments for the disease. As Jacobson and team point out, several drugs target aspects of the RAS and are already FDA approved to treat other conditions. They could arguably be applied to treating Covid-19 as well. Several, like danazol, stanozolol, and ecallantide, reduce bradykinin production and could potentially stop a deadly bradykinin storm. Others, like icatibant, reduce bradykinin signaling and could blunt its effects once it’s already in the body. Interestingly, Jacobson’s team also suggests vitamin D as a potentially useful Covid-19 drug. The vitamin is involved in the RAS system and could prove helpful by reducing levels of another compound, known as REN. Again, this could stop potentially deadly bradykinin storms from forming. The researchers note that vitamin D has already been shown to help those with Covid-19. The vitamin is readily available over the counter, and around 20% of the population is deficient. If indeed the vitamin proves effective at reducing the severity of bradykinin storms, it could be an easy, relatively safe way to reduce the severity of the virus. Other compounds could treat symptoms associated with bradykinin storms. Hymecromone, for example, could reduce hyaluronic acid levels, potentially stopping deadly hydrogels from forming in the lungs. And timbetasin could mimic the mechanism that the researchers believe protects women from more severe Covid-19 infections. All of these potential treatments are speculative, of course, and would need to be studied in a rigorous, controlled environment before their effectiveness could be determined and they could be used more broadly. Covid-19 stands out for both the scale of its global impact and the apparent randomness of its many symptoms. Physicians have struggled to understand the disease and come up with a unified theory for how it works. Though as of yet unproven, the bradykinin hypothesis provides such a theory. And like all good hypotheses, it also provides specific, testable predictions — in this case, actual drugs that could provide relief to real patients. The researchers are quick to point out that “the testing of any of these pharmaceutical interventions should be done in well-designed clinical trials.” As to the next step in the process, Jacobson is clear: “We have to get this message out.” His team’s finding won’t cure Covid-19. But if the treatments it points to pan out in the clinic, interventions guided by the bradykinin hypothesis could greatly reduce patients’ suffering — and potentially save lives. - Chuck Zwicky
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 2, 2020 16:38:36 GMT -6
This is form a Doctor that I follow...thought it was a good post...this was just the last part with his comments. 1. Who is ok with this? Anyone? www.npr.org/sections/goatsa...-revoked-just-got-a-new-grant?t=1598772343552What a scam. How about we stop making viruses that can kill people when they leak from BSL labs? That'd be my vote. 2. On to PCR. Let's start with what is PCR. Polymerase chain reaction. Basically, this is a technique or process that turns a single gene into billions of copies in a matter of a few hours. This technique was discovered and described by Kary Mullis in 1983 for which he won a Nobel prize. PCR targets the gene with primers. The primers are segments of the ends of the gene you are interested in. DNA polymerase, an enzyme which replicates DNA, then fills in the rest. This process is repeated over and over until you have 30-40 billion copies after several hours. In the case of disease, you take a sample from a patient (blood, sputum, feces, nasopharyngeal swab, saliva, etc.) and submit it to DNA amplification. In the case of an RNA virus, the RNA is converted to DNA first with an enzyme. That DNA sample is then combined with the gene target primers which bind the ends of "loose strands" of DNA (separated by heat) followed by rapid replication with DNA polymerase. Multiple cycles are performed and each one doubles the prior amount of DNA present. Fluorescent markers then bind the DNA so it can be visualized. The number of cycles required is very important. This is the Ct or Cq value. They are interchangeable. Often equated with a "viral load" in the case of viral disease detection. I saw Michael Mina put it this way in a tweet which I thought was clever: "Ct is like zooming in on your computer screen. If you have to zoom a lot, then the thing was small to start with. If you have to zoom a little, then the thing was big to start. In PCR, the ‘thing’ is the starting amount of virus." Just as an aside, my virologist, infectious disease colleague in Dallas studied under Kary. She is wicked smart and my go to for questions. Here is a comment I made on 6/28 regarding the use of PCR: "An absolutely fantastic article on PCR and its misuse as a diagnostic tool. I've been hinting at this in a couple of these posts but for fear of pushback I've mostly held my tongue. But as a biochemist at heart I can't any longer. PCR is NOT a diagnostic tool. It is a manufacturing tool. It can help make a diagnosis but it should not be the sole arbiter. This article takes you through the why: off-guardian.org/2020/06/27/covid19-pcr-tests-are-scientifically-meaningless/From the article: And that’s why we asked Dr Calisher whether he knows one single paper in which SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated and finally really purified. His answer: I know of no such a publication. I have kept an eye out for one.” Continued: Another essential problem is that many PCR tests have a “cycle quantification” (Cq) value of over 35, and some, including the “Drosten PCR test”, even have a Cq of 45. The Cq value specifies how many cycles of DNA replication are required to detect a real signal from biological samples. “Cq values higher than 40 are suspect because of the implied low efficiency and generally should not be reported,” as it says in the MIQE guidelines. MIQE stands for “Minimum Information for Publication of Quantitative Real-Time PCR Experiments”, a set of guidelines that describe the minimum information necessary for evaluating publications on Real-Time PCR, also called quantitative PCR, or qPCR. The inventor himself, Kary Mullis, agreed, when he stated: "If you have to go more than 40 cycles to amplify a single-copy gene, there is something seriously wrong with your PCR.” The MIQE guidelines have been developed under the aegis of Stephen A. Bustin, Professor of Molecular Medicine, a world-renowned expert on quantitative PCR and author of the book A-Z of Quantitative PCR which has been called “the bible of qPCR.” In a recent podcast interview Bustin points out that “the use of such arbitrary Cq cut-offs is not ideal, because they may be either too low (eliminating valid results) or too high (increasing false “positive” results).” And, according to him, a Cq of 20 to 30 should be aimed at, and there is concern regarding the reliability of the results for any Cq over 35. If the Cq value gets too high, it becomes difficult to distinguish real signal from background, for example due to reactions of primers and fluorescent probes, and hence there is a higher probability of false positives. Emphasis above added by me. Guess what the Roche test Cq (they call it Ct) cutoff value is? 40! I looked it up on the FDA website. Who still thinks 120k people have died from CV19? What if we had more appropriately used 20-30 as the cutoff like Bustin says? It makes you think doesn't it?" Present day again. Let's look at this weekend's NY Times article. www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html"This number of amplification cycles needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in the results sent to doctors and coronavirus patients, although it could tell them how infectious the patients are. In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found. On Thursday, the United States recorded 45,604 new coronavirus cases, according to a database maintained by The Times. If the rates of contagiousness in Massachusetts and New York were to apply nationwide, then perhaps only 4,500 of those people may actually need to isolate and submit to contact tracing." "Any test with a cycle threshold above 35 is too sensitive, agreed Juliet Morrison, a virologist at the University of California, Riverside. “I’m shocked that people would think that 40 could represent a positive,” she said." A more reasonable cutoff would be 30 to 35, she added. Dr. Mina said he would set the figure at 30, or even less. Those changes would mean the amount of genetic material in a patient’s sample would have to be 100-fold to 1,000-fold that of the current standard for the test to return a positive result — at least, one worth acting on. This is stating the exact same point I was making back in June and even before. PCR isn't meant for this. It is too sensitive. In fact, you can make anyone positive, just set the Ct value high enough and everyone will be positive. 40 is way too high and that is what every lab in the US is using (I was unaware of this when I posted that information about the Roche test). The European CDC uses 35. Most labs use 20-30 for other PCR tests. With proper controls and pure reagents, 35 is likely ok but across an entire country with thousands of labs? No thanks, give me 30 or less. This is why the CDC has gone away from mass testing of asymptomatic persons. They don't readily spread and their false positive rate is very high. Did you know for prior epidemics like MERS and SARS you had to have symptoms AND two positive PCR tests to get diagnosed? Also, if you are asymptomatic and have a +PCR, it is recommended to have another PCR using a different gene sequence target? This coincides well with Muge Cevik's article I posted here that showed no relation of +PCR to infectiousness: "Thus, detection of viral RNA cannot be used to infer infectiousness." www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.25.20162107v2The PCR needs to fade into the background. We need to move on to antigen testing for symptomatic and high risk asymptomatic individuals who have been exposed... that's it. The question is what changed compared with prior viral outbreaks? Check this out: So why this until recently?: Questions need answering. 3. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...cted-treated-fell-40-per-cent-covid-pandemic/Lockdowns kill. In the end it will not even be close. Virus deaths will be dwarfed by lockdown deaths. Probably an order of magnitude difference at the rate we are going. 4. That number of children is more than the number who have died in the entire world from CV19. These lockdowns will be judged harshly by history, and rightfully so. Inhumane, narcissistic, selfish, cruel, theoretical nonsense.... that's what they will say about us... or just call us fools. I think that would sum it up pretty well. 5. Can't wait to see this study on Ivermectin. www.trialsitenews.com/zagaz...i-hypothesis-drug-effective-against-covid-19/6. Herd immunity, determined by heterogeneity. Double yes. arxiv.org/pdf/2008.08142.pdf7. Get kids back in school. It's safe and they are largely unaffected by this virus. Estimated 137,047,945 children. Five months March-July. 78 deaths from COVID-19. Compared with 21,966 deaths from all-causes. CV19 is an adult disease. Another thing here. Who wants to wager the US's slightly higher child death numbers are due to our higher Ct PCR cutoff values I discussed above? I'd bet a lot that's the case... Whole paper here: 8. Yep. www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...-shows-have-succumbed-medieval-mass-neurosis/
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 2, 2020 16:41:28 GMT -6
Sweden has far more hospital beds and doctors per citizen than the U.S. has. They assumed they could simply handle it but their death rate speaks volumes. The purpose of a lockdown is to slow the spread to the point that hospitals can keep up with it. Remember that covid cases are in addition to a community's regular number of heart attacks, accidents and illnesses requiring hospitalization. It was needed due to our lack of investment in infrastructure and supplies. What we really need are tests and contact tracing so that the spreaders can be quarantined. All the rest are emergency measures. Try immigrating to Sweden. They won't allow it.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Sept 4, 2020 6:10:38 GMT -6
Johnkenn, the links you posted have been deleted. They must violate someone's community brainwashing standards, I reckon.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 4, 2020 11:12:33 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 4, 2020 11:13:16 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 4, 2020 11:14:21 GMT -6
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,118
|
Post by ericn on Sept 4, 2020 15:00:46 GMT -6
Sweden has far more hospital beds and doctors per citizen than the U.S. has. They assumed they could simply handle it but their death rate speaks volumes. The purpose of a lockdown is to slow the spread to the point that hospitals can keep up with it. Remember that covid cases are in addition to a community's regular number of heart attacks, accidents and illnesses requiring hospitalization. It was needed due to our lack of investment in infrastructure and supplies. What we really need are tests and contact tracing so that the spreaders can be quarantined. All the rest are emergency measures. They also have a true centralized health care system vs the US where nobody knows what any other institution is doing!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2020 21:15:22 GMT -6
It's a real problem, but the MSM is trivializing it by sensationalizing it. This doesn't need that. No solutions are found from lying. Politicians are exaggerating the problem for political gain, which also undermines the credibility. EXAMPLE: In 1999, Al Gore said that there were only 7000 polar bears and they were going extinct. Today only 28,000 remain. See? Bears reproduce. It's been 20 years. Until warming started destroying the ice pack badly, protections may very well have increased the population.
Anyway, Al Gore invented the internet....
A small side note to the situation of the polar bears and climate change... They become a problem in Greenland because the polar bears more and more find their food in the trash cans of villages and towns and don't always go further north to follow the retreating ice ... they have to adopt their behavior to the changing climate so they don't starve, at the expense of the safety of the people of e.g. Greenland. And polar bears are quite dangerous to human beings if it comes to direct confrontation... Last year a population of 52 polar bears became a threat to the people of Guba, a russian arctic settlement with 2000 citizens, when they entered the village and looted the trash cans. The state of emergency was announced, ~10 of them were constantly in the village. The thinning of the ice due to global warming forces them to go further inland on their search for food.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2020 21:51:51 GMT -6
Sweden has far more hospital beds and doctors per citizen than the U.S. has. They assumed they could simply handle it but their death rate speaks volumes. The purpose of a lockdown is to slow the spread to the point that hospitals can keep up with it. Remember that covid cases are in addition to a community's regular number of heart attacks, accidents and illnesses requiring hospitalization. It was needed due to our lack of investment in infrastructure and supplies. What we really need are tests and contact tracing so that the spreaders can be quarantined. All the rest are emergency measures. Try immigrating to Sweden. They won't allow it. At the moment, EU countries do not allow US citizens to enter their countries. Some Americans have managed to find ways to legally circumvent this (enter through third countries), some EU countries even block this to keep US citizens from entering their countries under all circumstances. Not a good time to immigrate to any European country at all. No offense. It is just as it is. The US are not considered a safe country to travel anymore by Europe, due to the corona situation. This is heartbreaking for many Europeans, too, who have relatives in the US, or transatlantic couples. An aunt of mine is living in Philadelphia. A friend of mine has a relationship with a US American, and they are forced to stay in a long distance relationship now, without knowing how long this will continue. They already considered marrying before Corona came up. Older people, they don't have infinite time ...
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 4, 2020 22:46:12 GMT -6
Try immigrating to Sweden. They won't allow it. At the moment, EU countries do not allow US citizens to enter their countries. Some Americans have managed to find ways to legally circumvent this (enter through third countries), some EU countries even block this to keep US citizens from entering their countries under all circumstances. Not a good time to immigrate to any European country at all. No offense. It is just as it is. The US are not considered a safe country to travel anymore by Europe, due to the corona situation. This is heartbreaking for many Europeans, too, who have relatives in the US, or transatlantic couples. An aunt of mine is living in Philadelphia. A friend of mine has a relationship with a US American, and they are forced to stay in a long distance relationship now, without knowing how long this will continue. They already considered marrying before Corona came up. Older people, they don't have infinite time ... Oh, I’m not offended. Completely happy in the US. I’m not sure you meant it this way, but that comes across as incredibly sanctimonious... Btw - I looked up the case fatality rates and there are 19 (Nineteen) European countries with higher case fatality percentages. Btw - just looked up the case fatality rate www.statista.com/statistics/1105914/coronavirus-death-rates-worldwide/
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2020 23:24:34 GMT -6
At the moment, EU countries do not allow US citizens to enter their countries. Some Americans have managed to find ways to legally circumvent this (enter through third countries), some EU countries even block this to keep US citizens from entering their countries under all circumstances. Not a good time to immigrate to any European country at all. No offense. It is just as it is. The US are not considered a safe country to travel anymore by Europe, due to the corona situation. This is heartbreaking for many Europeans, too, who have relatives in the US, or transatlantic couples. An aunt of mine is living in Philadelphia. A friend of mine has a relationship with a US American, and they are forced to stay in a long distance relationship now, without knowing how long this will continue. They already considered marrying before Corona came up. Older people, they don't have infinite time ... Oh, I’m not offended. Completely happy in the US. I’m not sure you meant it this way, but that comes across as incredibly sanctimonious... Btw - I looked up the case fatality rates and there are 19 (Nineteen) European countries with higher case fatality percentages. Btw - just looked up the case fatality rate www.statista.com/statistics/1105914/coronavirus-death-rates-worldwide/No John, I did not mean it that way. I am honestly not interested in politicizing it across the ocean at all. I am fed up with the discussion and split in society about how to handle Corona in my own country already. We have also political parties who want to profit from polarizing. No good thing at all. PS: I know, that your president arguments, that the case to fatality ratio is the important thing to look at. Personally, I do not think so. But I already wrote this months ago.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Sept 5, 2020 0:26:41 GMT -6
Specifically not peer revued yet. Just sayin'.....
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Sept 5, 2020 0:29:43 GMT -6
So? And your point is? It IS an interesting stastic, but no real meaning to the overarching problem, far as I see.
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Sept 5, 2020 8:12:41 GMT -6
So? And your point is? It IS an interesting stastic, but no real meaning to the overarching problem, far as I see. The point is there are a lot of people dying and/or suffering from other causes that are directly related to how we’re handling this epidemic. Drug abuse, child abuse, domestic abuse, depression, suicide, people avoiding hospitals out of fear...all these things are important too. But it’s not part of the narrative so no one cares or considers these things when developing policy. The one thing that is certain is that this situation is a massive cluster fuck. The shear amount of data that needs to be analyzed, the high amount of corrupt data (false positives, false negatives, faulty death counts etc etc), the politicization of science, public ignorance/fear/anger...it’s a big web that needs to unraveled. And it’s much more complicated that simply looking at how many people are dying.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 5, 2020 9:48:23 GMT -6
Oh, I’m not offended. Completely happy in the US. I’m not sure you meant it this way, but that comes across as incredibly sanctimonious... Btw - I looked up the case fatality rates and there are 19 (Nineteen) European countries with higher case fatality percentages. Btw - just looked up the case fatality rate www.statista.com/statistics/1105914/coronavirus-death-rates-worldwide/No John, I did not mean it that way. I am honestly not interested in politicizing it across the ocean at all. I am fed up with the discussion and split in society about how to handle Corona in my own country already. We have also political parties who want to profit from polarizing. No good thing at all. PS: I know, that your president arguments, that the case to fatality ratio is the important thing to look at. Personally, I do not think so. But I already wrote this months ago. Damn - you deleted your profile because you didn’t get your way? Usually means your argument is bad.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 5, 2020 9:58:06 GMT -6
I’m going to hold my tongue. But I’m locking this thread...two members have now chosen to stomp off - and it’s not worth it. We all have our own opinions that won’t be changed by anyone online. I avoided this thread for about rheee months and all it does is just piss me off when I come back.
|
|