Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 126   Go Down

Author Topic: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS  (Read 86350 times)

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5540
    • Photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #720 on: April 16, 2020, 04:11:35 pm »

I don;t need your approval to post in this thread.  Read Les's comment.  He said the experts deceived us putting us in danger so we wouldn't order masks and leave more for medical people.  A noble deed.  But a lie.  So how can you trust anything they say?

Obviously, otherwise you wouldn't have posted here for quite some time. You are just making up stuff where it doesn't exist and post it here; it might fly on the other thread and this should be reserved for something more objective.

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5540
    • Photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #721 on: April 16, 2020, 04:12:27 pm »

I forgot if I posted this

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #722 on: April 16, 2020, 06:10:29 pm »

The initial guidance was indeed intended to preserve medical masks ("surgical masks" and [K]N95 respirators) for those interacting with patients, and that remains part of the current guidance.  The updated guidance, at least in the United States, is based on later research showing that asymptomatic and presymptomatic individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 are capable of shedding the virus and infecting others.  In other words, the current guidance is for individuals to wear non-medical face coverings in places where it is difficult or impossible to maintain minumum physical distance in order to reduce the probability that they will make other nearby individuals sick.  No inconsistency there, just a change in the protocol based on new evidence.

That's certainly not what he said, and I presume it's not what he meant since he never mentioned anything suggesting a motive of "deceit."  And I agree with Armand Tanase that this kind of uninformed speculative chatter should be reserved for the other thread.
Discussing medical protocol in a thread about the medical issues fits this thread.  You cannot have discussion about medical issues without discussing the efficacy of their advice.  Using "no politics" to silence opposing views is sticking your head in the sand. Just because you believe there was no deception doesn;t make it so.  I believe as do others that the advice was given originally because they needed PPE for medical personnel.  While I'm agreement with the plan, it's important that they should have been upfront with it to maintain credibility with other issues.  Why would I trust people, especially experts,  who are fooling me?  Curiously, I just searched Google and found that I wasn't alone.  Even the NY Times had an opinion piece about it by a professor of information science. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-face-masks.html

It also raises another important issue which is where else have they been wrong?  What other information are we getting that's off the mark either because of deliberate misleading or plain innocent mistakes?  Remember, their advice effects not only medical care.  It also effects how we intend to bring the country and the world back to normal operations.  Why should we trust them regarding these important issues when they apparently got a simple issue like the efficacy of a mask wrong?



faberryman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4851
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #723 on: April 16, 2020, 06:23:47 pm »

Discussing medical protocol in a thread about the medical issues fits this thread.  You cannot have discussion about medical issues without discussing the efficacy of their advice.  Using "no politics" to silence opposing views is sticking your head in the sand. Just because you believe there was no deception doesn;t make it so.  I believe as do others that the advice was given originally because they needed PPE for medical personnel.  While I'm agreement with the plan, it's important that they should have been upfront with it to maintain credibility with other issues.  Why would I trust people, especially experts,  who are fooling me?  Curiously, I just searched Google and found that I wasn't alone.  Even the NY Times had an opinion piece about it by a professor of information science. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-face-masks.html

It also raises another important issue which is where else have they been wrong?  What other information are we getting that's off the mark either because of deliberate misleading or plain innocent mistakes?  Remember, their advice effects not only medical care.  It also effects how we intend to bring the country and the world back to normal operations.  Why should we trust them regarding these important issues when they apparently got a simple issue like the efficacy of a mask wrong?
You shouldn't listen to them. Do whatever you want to do. You know what's best for you.
Logged

chez

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2501
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #724 on: April 16, 2020, 06:26:46 pm »

Discussing medical protocol in a thread about the medical issues fits this thread.  You cannot have discussion about medical issues without discussing the efficacy of their advice.  Using "no politics" to silence opposing views is sticking your head in the sand. Just because you believe there was no deception doesn;t make it so.  I believe as do others that the advice was given originally because they needed PPE for medical personnel.  While I'm agreement with the plan, it's important that they should have been upfront with it to maintain credibility with other issues.  Why would I trust people, especially experts,  who are fooling me?  Curiously, I just searched Google and found that I wasn't alone.  Even the NY Times had an opinion piece about it by a professor of information science. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-face-masks.html

It also raises another important issue which is where else have they been wrong?  What other information are we getting that's off the mark either because of deliberate misleading or plain innocent mistakes?  Remember, their advice effects not only medical care.  It also effects how we intend to bring the country and the world back to normal operations.  Why should we trust them regarding these important issues when they apparently got a simple issue like the efficacy of a mask wrong?

Alan, you've asked this question many times now in numerous threads. You just don't seem to trust experts in their fields.

I'll throw this back to you. If you don't trust the experts opinions...who's would you rather follow. Rather than asking that same question...why not let us know your alternative voice you'd listen to.
Logged

Manoli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2296
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #725 on: April 16, 2020, 07:00:52 pm »

Manoli,
If this is in fact what is happening in the U.K. then the deaths from Covid-19 are likely under-reported, yet the reported deaths in the U.K. from Covid-19 are still very significantly higher than in Thailand.

Ray,

Not suggesting that Thailand or any other country is deliberately under-reporting. My earlier post was just a heads-up as the QC made clear in his letter, and on which he is seeking further clarification. Thailand has excellent results so far, as do a few other countries. What has proved true is that countries who adopted social distancing early have benefited(*). Those who delayed have suffered in comparison.

There are plenty of ‘unexplained coincidences’ as well but I dont think its beneficial to speculate as to the ‘why‘, yet. Questions to be answered in the ‘fullness of time’ - and from my reading that will be ‘some time’ , ‘cos once we’re passed the peak there’s bound to be a fairly heavy bout of acrimonious/accusatory debate between the scientists and the politicos.

(*) combined with other measures, contact tracing and testing in particular.
Logged

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5540
    • Photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #726 on: April 16, 2020, 07:04:31 pm »

Discussing medical protocol in a thread about the medical issues fits this thread.  You cannot have discussion about medical issues without discussing the efficacy of their advice.  Using "no politics" to silence opposing views is sticking your head in the sand. Just because you believe there was no deception doesn;t make it so.  I believe as do others that the advice was given originally because they needed PPE for medical personnel.  While I'm agreement with the plan, it's important that they should have been upfront with it to maintain credibility with other issues.  Why would I trust people, especially experts,  who are fooling me?  Curiously, I just searched Google and found that I wasn't alone.  Even the NY Times had an opinion piece about it by a professor of information science. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-face-masks.html

It also raises another important issue which is where else have they been wrong?  What other information are we getting that's off the mark either because of deliberate misleading or plain innocent mistakes?  Remember, their advice effects not only medical care.  It also effects how we intend to bring the country and the world back to normal operations.  Why should we trust them regarding these important issues when they apparently got a simple issue like the efficacy of a mask wrong?


...
Like I said, liars, damn liars and experts.

When you are writing that you are not looking for an opinion or factual discussion. That's why I said the other thread will serve you much better.

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #727 on: April 16, 2020, 07:05:01 pm »

Alan, you've asked this question many times now in numerous threads. You just don't seem to trust experts in their fields.

I'll throw this back to you. If you don't trust the experts opinions...who's would you rather follow. Rather than asking that same question...why not let us know your alternative voice you'd listen to.
I don't trust experts when I get a whiff of BS or incompetency from them.  Why would you?

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5540
    • Photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #728 on: April 16, 2020, 07:06:50 pm »

I don't trust experts when I get a whiff of BS or incompetency from them.  Why would you?

Did it ever cross your mind that maybe you don't understand the facts discussed and that's why you think it's BS ...

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #729 on: April 16, 2020, 07:09:03 pm »

Did it ever cross your mind that maybe you don't understand the facts discussed and that's why you think it's BS ...
Your insults never end, do they?  When you can't debate with logic or heart, you resort to name calling. 

chez

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2501
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #730 on: April 16, 2020, 07:17:24 pm »

I don't trust experts when I get a whiff of BS or incompetency from them.  Why would you?

Didn't answer my question. If you don't trust the advice of experts...whose advice do you trust?

The other question is are you competent enough to know when an expert in the field is incompetent?
Logged

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5540
    • Photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #731 on: April 16, 2020, 07:20:46 pm »

Your insults never end, do they?  When you can't debate with logic or heart, you resort to name calling.

It's not name calling, it's a very serious question.
You often complain about pretty obvious stuff and what irks me the most, you forget what was discussed just a few pages before.
I wonder, how do you decide if what an expert at something says, is BS? You need some modicum of knowledge of that subject to be able to say that. Oh, wait, you just read it on the internet.


Last obvious stuff?
The masks usage: it was stated in the beginning that the general population should not use it in order to preserve them for the medical staff. Later, it was quite clearly said that you should use a mask to try to reduce the chance of infecting the others if you are asymptomatic, not to protect yourself.
The above were stated in these forums multiple times, and yet you start questioning those statements as if you just joined this forum, and you wonder why I question your understanding? How about you read what others are saying, for starters.

LesPalenik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5339
    • advantica blog
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #732 on: April 16, 2020, 08:07:55 pm »

As of today, number of US Covid-19 deaths (34580) exceeded the 2019-2019 flu deaths (34200), so if anybody still thinks this virus is less harmful than the flu, they should re-examine the virus information or their sanity.  Worldwide deaths up to this date exceeded 145,000. At the current rate, by end of April we may see globally 4-5 million cases and over 250,000 deaths.

Quote
CDC estimates that the burden of illness during the 2018–2019 season included an estimated 35.5 million people getting sick with influenza, 16.5 million people going to a health care provider for their illness, 490,600 hospitalizations, and 34,200 deaths from influenza. The number of influenza-associated illnesses that occurred last season was similar to the estimated number of influenza-associated illnesses during the 2012–2013 influenza season when an estimated 34 million people had symptomatic influenza illness.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2018-2019.html
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10365
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #733 on: April 16, 2020, 08:36:22 pm »

Ray,

Not suggesting that Thailand or any other country is deliberately under-reporting. My earlier post was just a heads-up as the QC made clear in his letter, and on which he is seeking further clarification. Thailand has excellent results so far, as do a few other countries. What has proved true is that countries who adopted social distancing early have benefited(*). Those who delayed have suffered in comparison.

Fair enough. The particularly low 'reported' death rate in Thailand caught my attention because Thailand has been a favourite holiday destination for me in the past. However, I'm sure glad I didn't go there this January to experience the early lock-downs and cancelled air flights in and out of the country.  ;)

I suspect that the normal, wide-spread use of face masks every year, because of the regular and serious air pollution in many parts of Thailand, has contributed to the low death rate from Covid-19, as well as the early adoption of social distancing and various lock-downs.
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #734 on: April 16, 2020, 09:20:59 pm »

Didn't answer my question. If you don't trust the advice of experts...whose advice do you trust?

The other question is are you competent enough to know when an expert in the field is incompetent?
I went to three doctors for "second" opinions of what to do with a cancer I had once.  I got three different solutions which was the best course to follow. Anyone who listens to so-called experts without discernment is foolish.   

Look at what's happening now with moving forward.  Everyone is guessing using the best information they have right now.  But that info isn't complete.  Plus this disease is new.  No one can guarantee anything other than if you stay in your house and avoid contact with anyone, you'll be less likely to get it.  Well, that doesn't help much when officials have to make decisions.  The experts just don;t have all the answers.

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #735 on: April 16, 2020, 09:35:27 pm »

It's not name calling, it's a very serious question.
You often complain about pretty obvious stuff and what irks me the most, you forget what was discussed just a few pages before.
I wonder, how do you decide if what an expert at something says, is BS? You need some modicum of knowledge of that subject to be able to say that. Oh, wait, you just read it on the internet.


Last obvious stuff?
The masks usage: it was stated in the beginning that the general population should not use it in order to preserve them for the medical staff. Later, it was quite clearly said that you should use a mask to try to reduce the chance of infecting the others if you are asymptomatic, not to protect yourself.
The above were stated in these forums multiple times, and yet you start questioning those statements as if you just joined this forum, and you wonder why I question your understanding? How about you read what others are saying, for starters.
The experts said early on that masks won't help you from getting the disease so there's no point wearing them.  I believe part of the reason was to preserve the masks which were in limited quantity for the medical people.

« Reply #714 on: Today at 02:56:19 pm »
ReplyQuote
Quote from: Alan Klein on Today at 01:53:00 pm
In America, the experts were saying originally, that masks should only be worn by people who have the virus.  Now they say it's better if everyone wears them.  Maybe they said that originally to save the low stocked masks for medical workers.  Or maybe they didn't know what they were talking about.  Like I said, liars, damn liars and experts.

Les responds: They said it to conserve the masks for the professionals. However, if you make your own mask, you'll be protected and won't be taking the masks from the medical workers.. 

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #736 on: April 16, 2020, 09:46:53 pm »

As of today, number of US Covid-19 deaths (34580) exceeded the 2019-2019 flu deaths (34200), so if anybody still thinks this virus is less harmful than the flu, they should re-examine the virus information or their sanity.  Worldwide deaths up to this date exceeded 145,000. At the current rate, by end of April we may see globally 4-5 million cases and over 250,000 deaths.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2018-2019.html
Re-check your statistics.  You're not looking at them clearly.  Regarding flu there were 1 billion cases and 291,000 to 646,000 deaths worldwide.  So while Covid is serious, and all the deaths are not in yet, it doesn;t seem worse than seasonal flu.  In fact there are more deaths with flu than covid. 

Infections
COVID-19: Approximately 2,076,015 cases worldwide; 639,664 cases in the U.S. as of Apr. 16, 2020.*

Flu: Estimated 1 billion cases worldwide; 9.3 million to 45 million cases in the U.S. per year.

Deaths
COVID-19: Approximately 138,008 deaths reported worldwide; 30,985 deaths in the U.S., as of Apr. 16, 2020.*

Flu: 291,000 to 646,000 deaths worldwide; 12,000 to 61,000 deaths in the U.S. per year.
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/coronavirus-disease-2019-vs-the-flu

chez

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2501
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #737 on: April 16, 2020, 09:50:54 pm »

I went to three doctors for "second" opinions of what to do with a cancer I had once.  I got three different solutions which was the best course to follow. Anyone who listens to so-called experts without discernment is foolish.   

Look at what's happening now with moving forward.  Everyone is guessing using the best information they have right now.  But that info isn't complete.  Plus this disease is new.  No one can guarantee anything other than if you stay in your house and avoid contact with anyone, you'll be less likely to get it.  Well, that doesn't help much when officials have to make decisions.  The experts just don;t have all the answers.

Yes the experts don't know all the answers. So again...who would you listen to for advice...if not the expert? Say for your cancer, if not the expert in cancers...who would you rather get your advice from...the bar tender at your favourite bar.

Many things in the world don't have a binary answer...but my gut says the experts in the area are much more likely to get things right than someone who knows nothing about the subject.
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15850
    • Flicker photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #738 on: April 16, 2020, 10:10:16 pm »

Yes the experts don't know all the answers. So again...who would you listen to for advice...if not the expert? Say for your cancer, if not the expert in cancers...who would you rather get your advice from...the bar tender at your favourite bar.

Many things in the world don't have a binary answer...but my gut says the experts in the area are much more likely to get things right than someone who knows nothing about the subject.
Well of course. After all, my wife and I have been isolating at home for four weeks now.  But I take experts with a grain of salt. 

RichDesmond

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 105
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #739 on: April 16, 2020, 10:11:17 pm »

... yet, it doesn;t seem worse than seasonal flu.  In fact there are more deaths with flu than covid... 
From something I posted on another forum:

For the "it's just the flu" and "lots more people die in car accidents" crowd:

In NYC, over an average 30 day period, about 4400 people die. Over the last 30 days, over 9500 have. Far more than died even in September, 2001.
Of those ~5000 excess deaths, only about 3000 were officially counted as due to CV-19. Which means that the official tally is likely significantly low.
Think about this. The mortality rate in NYC is over double what it normally is. That means that CV-19 is killing more people in NYC than all other causes of death, combined.

Nationally last week, CV-19 was the second leading cause of death, behind only heart disease. (and not by much, 12,626 vs 12,392) Flu and pneumonia were about 1250, car accidents in a typical week claim about 600-650.

While social distancing is working to flatten the curve, the number of deaths each day is still rising. Imagine what it would be like if we had carried on with business as usual.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 126   Go Up