covid-19

[airdvr 210]

I'm hearing things about a positive outcome with ivermectin.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7129059/

[kallend 2,106]

2 minutes ago, airdvr said:

I'm hearing things about a positive outcome with ivermectin.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7129059/

Will it bring 178,000 people back from the dead?

[turtlespeed 226]

28 minutes ago, kallend said:

Will it bring 178,000 people back from the dead?

It has a better chance of that than the 2.4 million that died of other stuff.

[billvon 3,064]

1 hour ago, airdvr said:

I'm hearing things about a positive outcome with ivermectin.

Yep.  Early research there is promising.  We should have some trial results in a few months.

Which, again, is an excellent reason to do whatever we can right now - masks, shutdowns, distancing - to reduce infections.  If, for example, we had taken sufficient basic precautions to have avoided the second wave, we could have avoided 40,000 deaths.  And the later you push waves of infections, the more people survive, because we have more drugs, vaccines and treatment protocols available.

[yoink 321]

What second wave? We’ve never got out of the first/

[jakee 1,559]

6 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

I'm pretty sure those deaths you are talking about were intentional murders, right?

Unless you’re saying Clinton murdered those people on purpose your statement has no relevance. You realise that, right?

[airdvr 210]

6 hours ago, jakee said:

Unless you’re saying Clinton murdered those people on purpose your statement has no relevance. You realise that, right?

My take on it was "If it's discovered that China was manufacturng a bio-weapon that got out of hand..."

[SkyDekker 1,465]

14 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

What do you think would happen if this was intentional?

You would find a way to blame Obama, Clinton or Biden.

[FrancoR 0]

23 hours ago, FrancoR said:

Oh, it  is 178.000 now

179.000

[Phil1111 1,149]

Dr. Anthony Fauci needed surgery a week or so ago. So the national weasel in chief decided it was a good time to muscle the CDC. They had a meeting while Fauchi was in surgery to amend the CDC national testing guidelines. So now exposure to a positive covid case doesn't mean you have, or should  be tested.

The new US flag for the trump republic.

[kallend 2,106]

7 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Dr. Anthony Fauci needed surgery a week or so ago. So the national weasel in chief decided it was a good time to muscle the CDC. They had a meeting while Fauchi was in surgery to amend the CDC national testing guidelines. So now exposure to a positive covid case doesn't mean you have, or should  be tested.

The new US flag for the trump republic.

Well, we wouldn't want the numbers to look bad, would we?

[turtlespeed 226]

On 8/25/2020 at 6:34 PM, turtlespeed said:

I know that and you know that - but, I was asking John.  Specifically John.

I also agree with the rest of what you said.

Still no answer . . . I wonder why.

[turtlespeed 226]

15 hours ago, jakee said:

Unless you’re saying Clinton murdered those people on purpose your statement has no relevance. You realise that, right?

I'm saying that the reason for their death was murder.

[wmw999 2,527]

2 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

I'm saying that the reason for their death was murder.

Fine. And who murdered them? Anyone you know?

If you get to the "she could have rescued them -- maybe -- " argument, consider the "he could have made a difference with a better approach -- maybe" only applying it to a lot more people.

Wendy P.

[turtlespeed 226]

9 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Fine. And who murdered them? Anyone you know?

If you get to the "she could have rescued them -- maybe -- " argument, consider the "he could have made a difference with a better approach -- maybe" only applying it to a lot more people.

Wendy P.

Well, we know it wasn't a bunch of people all riled up about a video, don't we?

My post had nothing to do with Clinton.

The comment was directed at  "What would the response be if we found out the deaths from Covid-19 were actually intentional."

What would the reaction/response be.

The response to those 4 murders was pretty intense. (As opposed to unintentional death numbers)  Ripples still being felt from that, and court cases still being heard.

My response of  "Damn - that is a great perspective." was true and sincere.

 

 

Edited August 26, 2020 by turtlespeed

[kallend 2,106]

3 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

Still no answer . . . I wonder why.

Still having that reading problem, I see.

[20kN 93]

It doesn't really matter. We could stop testing entirely. It wouldn't have any effect on people going to the ER with symptoms and so the best source of reliable info on Covid is hospitalizations and deaths. Specifically, excess deaths. We could start classifying all Covid deaths as accidents, it wouldent change the excess deaths data which cannot be falsified. We know how many Americans die on average each year from all causes, so anything in excess of the norm could reasonably be assumed to be a Covid-related death. That is assuming that the whole of America dident suddenly find interest in chain smoking, drag racing and BASE jumping.

Edited August 27, 2020 by 20kN

[Coreece 190]

3 minutes ago, 20kN said:

It doesn't really matter.

Just stop there.  People are going to believe what they want to.

We'll get a vaccine and everything will go back to normal and all the naysayers will say, "see, only 200K+ deaths, less than all the deaths of everything else, it was totally worth it to be a giant fucking asshole with our  'fuck you and your mask' wheel of fortune FB memes. . .

[20kN 93]

10 minutes ago, Coreece said:

Just stop there.  People are going to believe what they want to.

We'll get a vaccine and everything will go back to normal and all the naysayers will say, "see, only 200K+ deaths, less than all the deaths of everything else, it was totally worth it to be a giant fucking asshole with our  'fuck you and your mask' wheel of fortune FB memes. . .

I'm just pointing out that no matter how hard anyone tries, it's not hard to determine how much spread there is with Covid. If it was an illness that dident cause death or ER visits, then it might be hard to track. But since it fairly universally affects people regardless of location the deaths and hospitalizations dont lie. We could say hey, we're only seeing 20 new infections per day in the whole USA, but the deaths and hospitalizations will prove that claim valid or invalid very quickly. Even if the powers at be were to mandate that states no longer count covid related deaths and hospitalizations, we'll still know based solely on hospitalization utilization rates and excess deaths. Put simply, it's not possible to falsify the numbers to the point that no one can figure it out. Anyone with half a brain and basic research inclination will still be able to determine if we have this under control or not.

Also, people will say that regardless. As you said people believe what they want to believe. Until it kills their wife or puts them in the hospital, there will always be people who will discount it as fake news.

Edited August 27, 2020 by 20kN

[Coreece 190]

2 minutes ago, 20kN said:

10 minutes ago, Coreece said:

Just stop there.  People are going to believe what they want to.

We'll get a vaccine and everything will go back to normal and all the naysayers will say, "see, only 200K+ deaths, less than all the deaths of everything else, it was totally worth it to be a giant fucking asshole with our  'fuck you and your mask' wheel of fortune FB memes. . .

I'm just pointing out that no matter how hard anyone tries, it's not hard to determine how much spread there is with Covid. If it was an illness that dident cause death or ER visits, then it might be hard to track. But since it fairly universally affects people regardless of location the deaths and hospitalizations dont lie. We could say hey, we're only seeing 20 new infections per day in the whole USA, but the deaths and hospitalizations will prove that claim valid or invalid very quickly.

I know exactly what you're saying, and you're right.  But this was already pointed out to Trump in the HBO Axios interview and he just ignored it.  Others will say that the numbers were botched just to scare us or that they died of something else.

[headoverheels 333]

29 minutes ago, 20kN said:

It doesn't really matter. We could stop testing entirely. It wouldn't have any effect on people going to the ER with symptoms and so the best source of reliable info on Covid is hospitalizations and deaths. Specifically, excess deaths. We could start classifying all Covid deaths as accidents, it wouldent change the excess deaths data which cannot be falsified. We know how many Americans die on average each year from all causes, so anything in excess of the norm could reasonably be assumed to be a Covid-related death. That is assuming that the whole of America dident suddenly find interest in chain smoking, drag racing and BASE jumping.

Excess deaths is important data, but not all encompassing.  We doubtless have less deaths from influenza this year, since many people were taking Covid precautions that also cut way down on flu transmission.  People are more reluctant to go to the doctor, for fear of catching Covid, so there will be some increase in non-Covid deaths as a result.

Death data comes several weeks after infection, so detection of the trend in number of infections comes much later.

That said, with the typical test result delays we have in the US, the testing isn't of the value that it should be.

 

Edited August 27, 2020 by headoverheels

[Coreece 190]

18 minutes ago, Coreece said:

23 minutes ago, 20kN said:

I'm just pointing out that no matter how hard anyone tries, it's not hard to determine how much spread there is with Covid. If it was an illness that dident cause death or ER visits, then it might be hard to track. But since it fairly universally affects people regardless of location the deaths and hospitalizations dont lie. We could say hey, we're only seeing 20 new infections per day in the whole USA, but the deaths and hospitalizations will prove that claim valid or invalid very quickly.

I know exactly what you're saying, and you're right.  But this was already pointed out to Trump in the HBO Axios interview and he just ignored it.  Others will say that the numbers were botched just to scare us or that they died of something else.

And I know you want to say "but you (they) aren't listening" - and that is exactly my point.  It doesn't matter.  They will believe what they want.  And then they'll acknowledge the deaths they've just denied and effectively say "big deal" in one way or another.

Edited August 27, 2020 by Coreece

[jakee 1,559]

6 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

I'm saying that the reason for their death was murder.

Why does that make a difference?

[turtlespeed 226]

11 hours ago, kallend said:

Still having that reading problem, I see.

Not at all.  But it seems that you are.  Was Nancy wrong?

14 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

I know that, and you know that - but, I was asking John.  Specifically John.

I also agree with the rest of what you said.

 

[turtlespeed 226]

9 hours ago, Coreece said:

I know exactly what you're saying, and you're right.  But this was already pointed out to Trump in the HBO Axios interview and he just ignored it.  Others will say that the numbers were botched just to scare us or that they died of something else.

He not only ignored it, he made it an item to hold pride in resisting the facial coverings and shutdowns.

He double, tripled, and, quadrupled down on it.

Now he's wearing a mask. <eyeroll>