Pages: 1 ... 54 55 [56] 57 58 ... 126   Go Down

Author Topic: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS  (Read 76572 times)

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15851
    • Flicker photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1100 on: May 11, 2020, 09:37:46 pm »

In Australia yes and yes. They check you are there daily and if not $1000 first offence.
How was the rule made?  Who made the rule and penalty?

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15851
    • Flicker photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1101 on: May 11, 2020, 09:44:52 pm »

This reminds me of of Bloomberg when he was mayor of NYC.  He wanted to limit the size of sweet soda you can buy to 16 ounces because people were getting obese and diabetes from all the sugar. So he had the chief doctor of the city rule that it was unhealthy and that containers over 16 ounces could no longer be used.  He was sued in court by Coca Cola I think, McDonalds and others.   The NY State Appeals or Supreme Court maybe both,  judged his rule unconstitutional.  It was never approved by the NY City Counsel as required.  The mayor is not a king.

Curious how Australia handled it?

chez

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2496
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1102 on: May 11, 2020, 10:06:42 pm »

This reminds me of of Bloomberg when he was mayor of NYC.  He wanted to limit the size of sweet soda you can buy to 16 ounces because people were getting obese and diabetes from all the sugar. So he had the chief doctor of the city rule that it was unhealthy and that containers over 16 ounces could no longer be used.  He was sued in court by Coca Cola I think, McDonalds and others.   The NY State Appeals or Supreme Court maybe both,  judged his rule unconstitutional.  It was never approved by the NY City Counsel as required.  The mayor is not a king.

Curious how Australia handled it?

Well he had the right intentions...the obesity wave continues. Sometimes right is wrong.
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15851
    • Flicker photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1103 on: May 11, 2020, 10:10:31 pm »

Well he had the right intentions...the obesity wave continues. Sometimes right is wrong.
Leaders have to follow the rule like everyone else.  everyone thinks their thinking is right.  Don;t we see it here in the forums?  yet we rely on elections and democracy to make the rules we want to live by.

By the way, the NY City Counsel never passed the rule Bloomberg wanted.  So New Yorkers are still getting obese. :)

BobShaw

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2136
    • Bob Shaw Photography
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1104 on: May 11, 2020, 10:20:35 pm »

How was the rule made?  Who made the rule and penalty?
Normally laws take 6 mths to a year. These are being made overnight under State of Emergency provisions.
Each state Premier gives a Press conference each morning.
All rules and penalties are state based except for entry and exit of the country.
Logged
Website - http://BobShawPhotography.com
Studio and Commercial Photography

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15851
    • Flicker photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1105 on: May 11, 2020, 10:42:22 pm »

Normally laws take 6 mths to a year. These are being made overnight under State of Emergency provisions.
Each state Premier gives a Press conference each morning.
All rules and penalties are state based except for entry and exit of the country.
Can Premier do whatever they want?  What are their constraints?  Where do State of Emergency provision begin and end?  Are there legal challenges? What if a farmer wants to till his field or check hs fences?   Would they arrest him even if by himself? 

BobShaw

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2136
    • Bob Shaw Photography
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1106 on: May 11, 2020, 11:47:59 pm »

Can Premier do whatever they want?  What are their constraints?  Where do State of Emergency provision begin and end?  Are there legal challenges? What if a farmer wants to till his field or check hs fences?   Would they arrest him even if by himself?
> Can Premier do whatever they want?  What are their constraints?  Where do State of Emergency provision begin and end?  Are there legal challenges?
All above my pay grade. Suffice to say they can get away with most things as the opposition is supporting the government on the basis of common sense.
It really helps if both sides of politics work in the national interest.

>What if a farmer wants to till his field or check hs fences?   Would they arrest him even if by himself?
Interesting question. OK on his own property, but one government minister drove a 100km to another property and was fined I believe.
Logged
Website - http://BobShawPhotography.com
Studio and Commercial Photography

Manoli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2261
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1107 on: May 12, 2020, 08:04:44 am »

Once again, you really should be using your "playpen" thread for these bizarre rhetorical rants.
If you don't have an answer to the question, just let others give it a try instead of resorting to insults.

Chris Kern is always unfailingly courteous and has provided plenty of insightful and valuable commentary, at the risk of being impolite, you have not, and persist in diluting this thread with your quasi monopolistic approach. 21 out of the last 47 posts, (44%), despite repeated requests to not treat this thread as a chat room, have clearly fallen on deaf ears.

Try and control yourself, pretty please.
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15851
    • Flicker photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1108 on: May 12, 2020, 09:17:33 am »

Chris Kern is always unfailingly courteous and has provided plenty of insightful and valuable commentary, at the risk of being impolite, you have not, and persist in diluting this thread with your quasi monopolistic approach. 21 out of the last 47 posts, (44%), despite repeated requests to not treat this thread as a chat room, have clearly fallen on deaf ears.

Try and control yourself, pretty please.
Chris's criticism of my question about the legality of arresting or fining people who don't stay home deserved a response from me.  His calling my post "a bizarre rhetorical rant" is demeaning.  Just because you started this thread, you don't have the right to tell people how and what to post because you don't agree with the poster.  Silencing people with who you disagree with is not what this forum is about.   

Manoli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2261
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1109 on: May 12, 2020, 09:41:38 am »

Cute but poor attempt to divert from what I said.

This is not about telling you how and what to post, even less about disagreeing with you. It's asking you, yet again, to give some consideration to 'what' you post and not let rip with your abundance of questions - questions that could often easily be answered by the simplest of google searches or even reading the odd newspaper. It's a question of consideration for many contributing here, myself included, who don't feel that a hit ratio of 44% is within the bounds of forum civility.

It's a forum, not a chat room - there's a difference.


Chris's criticism of my question about the legality of arresting or fining people who don't stay home deserved a response from me.  His calling my post "a bizarre rhetorical rant" is demeaning.  Just because you started this thread, you don't have the right to tell people how and what to post because you don't agree with the poster.  Silencing people with who you disagree with is not what this forum is about.   

Edit: ... and Chris is correct, you posted in the wrong forum. Legality etc etc is for your own carefully curated thread.
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15851
    • Flicker photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1110 on: May 12, 2020, 11:33:35 am »

Cute but poor attempt to divert from what I said.

This is not about telling you how and what to post, even less about disagreeing with you. It's asking you, yet again, to give some consideration to 'what' you post and not let rip with your abundance of questions - questions that could often easily be answered by the simplest of google searches or even reading the odd newspaper. It's a question of consideration for many contributing here, myself included, who don't feel that a hit ratio of 44% is within the bounds of forum civility.

It's a forum, not a chat room - there's a difference.


Edit: ... and Chris is correct, you posted in the wrong forum. Legality etc etc is for your own carefully curated thread.
You can't fine tune how you want others to post their thoughts. It's too narrow.  In any case, discussing whether actions are legal has little to do with politics.  How can you discuss what procedures government should implement without including the legal basis of those rules?  Whether they're legal or not has huge implications of what a government can do and how you attack the virus.  Additionally, this being an international forum, the laws are different from nation to nation.  What might be allowed in one country is prohibited in another.  Not being able to comment on legal application does not add to the discussion.

Paulo Bizarro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7031
    • http://www.paulobizarro.com
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1111 on: May 12, 2020, 12:02:06 pm »

Recently, one of the most brilliant scientists/researchers dies in Portugal, age 80, from C-19. She left an open letter as a testimony for future generations. I used an online translator, so apologies, but the general meaning is clear.

"Posthumous testimony by the 80-year-old scientist Maria de Sousa, who died on April 14 with covid-19.
Prof. of the Medical School of Univ. from Lisbon and researcher at the João Lobo Antunes Institute of Molecular Medicine
She realized the organized migration of lymphocytes, cells of the immune system, has her name in the manuals about this system.
 This text is an important lesson, of knowledge and lucidity, that Maria de Sousa leaves to all of us.
This testimony should be given to be read and explained to all young people, in schools and in families (not to mention adults, rulers or ordinary citizens) because it represents a sure warning and alert pointed to the problems of today and the immediate future.

Open letter from an optimistic scientist to new generations

 The scientist Maria de Sousa, upon learning that she was infected with covid-19 and aware of her high-risk situation, said goodbye saying:

"I hope to endure through those who stay alive". As painful and sad as death is, life as we know it on Earth is infinite. The new generations succeed one another cyclically and it is always up to them to build our collective future.
It is part of being young to be convinced that we will be able to change the world for the better.
I am no longer chronologically young, but I still believe in an optimistic scenario for the future of humanity!
It takes courage to change, especially when our current lifestyle is so comfortable.
However, the scientific evidence is irrefutable: man's exploitation of nature is unsustainable.
We are obsessed with economic growth, but it is not possible for the economies of all countries to continue to grow indefinitely. I believe it is essential that today's young people become aware of the inevitable short-term risks and make their voices heard, putting pressure on society for change.
I believe that science and technology will become even more essential in our lives. We need rigorous observations and measurements of everything that is happening in all places on the planet to be alert and know where to act. But above all, we need new solutions to live in harmony with the Earth, from new ways of moving to new ways of eating and recycling the garbage we produce. New solutions to a problem do not suddenly appear out of nowhere. Years of intense scientific research are needed, and many problems are still to be solved.
For example, regarding the current pandemic, it is important to remember that between 1918 and 1919 there was an outbreak of infection caused by a new influenza virus that killed around 50 million people worldwide. Protective masks, disinfectants and social distancing were already used, but there were no diagnostic tests, no medications, no ventilators. The first flu vaccine was developed in 1940 and applied only to the military. In 1960 alone, after a pandemic caused by a new influenza virus that killed more than a million people between 1957 and 1958 worldwide, vaccination programs for high-risk groups (ie people with chronic illnesses) began or older than 65). A vaccine confers immunity against a specific type of virus. Now, the flu virus changes its genetic information very often, giving rise to new forms of viruses that escape the effect of the vaccine. This genetic diversity also gives rise, occasionally, to more aggressive forms of viruses that cause pandemics. It happened again in 1968, with more than one million deaths worldwide, and just ten years ago, in 2009, causing the death of around 600 thousand people worldwide. Because the ability to reinvent itself genetically is a characteristic of all viruses, humanity has always been and will continue to be subject to outbreaks of infection by new viruses. This was the case of HIV - human immunodeficiency virus, which causes AIDS. This new disease began to be detected in 1981 in the USA and has already killed 32 million people worldwide. In 1994, AIDS was, in the USA, the main cause of death for people between 25 and 44 years old. It was only in 1995 that the first drugs began to be tested, which would have great success, preventing deaths and turning AIDS into a chronic disease.

More recently, in 2003, the first cases of a new respiratory disease called SARS, caused by a coronavirus related to the current SARS-CoV-2, were reported in China. In the midst of a pandemic, society is asking scientists for effective drugs and vaccines.
What lessons can be learned for the future? Above all, new generations must be aware that they are going to be faced with great challenges. The lack of respect for wild animals, victims of capture and commercialization, favors human infection by new viruses (or other pathogenic microorganisms) that could cause mortality rates much higher than the current pandemic. Many models still practiced in the agricultural industry encourage the destruction of forests, interfere with soil quality, are polluters and favor the spread of epidemics in plants and animals. There will certainly be major natural disasters like fires, storms and earthquakes. Climate change is an installed reality. It will run out of water and increase pollution. The societies of the future will depend on science and technology to deal with disasters. But today's societies insist on ignoring scientists' multiple warnings of imminent dangers that can still be avoided.
For this reason, I leave here my appeal to the new generations to end once and for all the illusion that it will be possible to continue living with today's habits and doing the usual business. My other appeal is to value and cultivate science. All young people, regardless of their future professions, must be trained to apply the scientific method to the problems they encounter on a daily basis. Strict observation, logical reasoning in deductions, conclusions based on experimentation. In parallel, science-related professions must be attractive and desirable. This implies organization, infrastructure and resources that are constantly updated.
Finally, a warning: all areas of knowledge are equally important. The most transformative technological advances resulted from discoveries that might, at first glance, seem irrelevant. For the advancement of science there are no useless research topics, as long as the questions are well formulated.
And science cannot fail to advance, otherwise we will not be able to solve the immense challenges that we will face!"

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4344
    • A Goldhammer Photography
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1112 on: May 12, 2020, 05:34:13 pm »

Can it be proven as efficacious by the first of the year so people can start getting it?
the plan is to do human challenge experiments in young healthy people at some point.  These involve giving them the vaccine and after an appropriate time exposing them to COVID-19 and see if they get sick.  There is a lot of pressure to get a vaccine approved ASAP and this will likely be a political call by FDA.  The fastest development time for a human vaccine in the US was just under four years for the mumps vaccine.  If one or more vaccines is approved next January it will be 9 months.  I think there will be several different vaccines approved and we won't have all the safety data that is usually acquired in vaccine trials.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13949
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1113 on: May 12, 2020, 08:57:47 pm »

https://www.cambridge.org/engage/coe/article-details/5ead2b518d7bf7001951c5a5?fbclid=IwAR37L9_paTS2PusRlqtCrUSUqwWQEiKtC-kEVb4KXctXa8GqQAKPVSHUtN4

I am not sure about the degree of peer review this article has undergone and I would lie if I claimed that I have put the time in needed to understand all of it.

But what I understand it says is extremely interesting.
- It is based on Japan situation but can be extended to other countries
- It relies on the analysis of competing viruses, for example between flu and covid19. By monitoring the amount of flu infections it would be possible to guess the presence of another virus even if there are no clear symptoms yet
- the analysis of flu infection curve could have been used to trigger public health measures as early as January
- a Canadian AI system called Global Early Warning system detected the Wuhan pneumonia outbreak on 31-Dec
- There are probably 3 types of Corona: S, K and G in increasing levels of severity (G probably being a later mutation deriving from K)
- Contagion for S and K type probably started late 2019, G appeared globally in February and entered some specific parts of Japan early March but didn't spread to the whole country
- People who had K type are mostly immune to the most severe G type, but people who had S type could actually be more at risk relative to type G
- There is a high probability that many prefectures in Japan already have K type herd immunity
- Some countries, in particular the US, are likely to have been in contact with S type but not K type (since the inflow of people from China was stopped early) which would explain the high mortality
- It stressed the importance of taking the right measures in the right timing to both allow the spread of low severity forms to build herd immunity but then prevent the spread of high severity forms.

Cheers,
Bernard

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15851
    • Flicker photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1114 on: May 12, 2020, 09:13:20 pm »

the plan is to do human challenge experiments in young healthy people at some point.  These involve giving them the vaccine and after an appropriate time exposing them to COVID-19 and see if they get sick.  There is a lot of pressure to get a vaccine approved ASAP and this will likely be a political call by FDA.  The fastest development time for a human vaccine in the US was just under four years for the mumps vaccine.  If one or more vaccines is approved next January it will be 9 months.  I think there will be several different vaccines approved and we won't have all the safety data that is usually acquired in vaccine trials.
Sounds very iffy.  Thanks.

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15851
    • Flicker photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1115 on: May 12, 2020, 09:14:39 pm »

https://www.cambridge.org/engage/coe/article-details/5ead2b518d7bf7001951c5a5?fbclid=IwAR37L9_paTS2PusRlqtCrUSUqwWQEiKtC-kEVb4KXctXa8GqQAKPVSHUtN4

I am not sure about the degree of peer review this article has undergone and I would lie if I claimed that I have put the time in needed to understand all of it.

But what I understand it says is extremely interesting.
- It is based on Japan situation but can be extended to other countries
- It relies on the analysis of competing viruses, for example between flu and covid19. By monitoring the amount of flu infections it would be possible to guess the presence of another virus even if there are no clear symptoms yet
- the analysis of flu infection curve could have been used to trigger public health measures as early as January
- a Canadian AI system called Global Early Warning system detected the Wuhan pneumonia outbreak on 31-Dec
- There are probably 3 types of Corona: S, K and G in increasing levels of severity (G probably being a later mutation deriving from K)
- Contagion for S and K type probably started late 2019, G appeared globally in February and entered some specific parts of Japan early March but didn't spread to the whole country
- People who had K type are mostly immune to the most severe G type, but people who had S type could actually be more at risk relative to type G
- There is a high probability that many prefectures in Japan already have K type herd immunity
- Some countries, in particular the US, are likely to have been in contact with S type but not K type (since the inflow of people from China was stopped early) which would explain the high mortality
- It stressed the importance of taking the right measures in the right timing to both allow the spread of low severity forms to build herd immunity but then prevent the spread of high severity forms.

Cheers,
Bernard

Isn't that a little late?  The train's already pulled out of the station.

degrub

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1811
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1116 on: May 12, 2020, 09:48:40 pm »

If it proves out, it is useful hindsight and understanding. Gives us avenues to explore for the next one.
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10348
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1117 on: May 13, 2020, 07:32:16 am »

There seems to be a significant paradox involving the benefits of Vitamin D from sun exposure, and the risk of Melanoma and other skin cancers from sun exposure. I would deduce, by applying a bit of logic, that prolonged deficiency in Vitamin D will reduce the body's ability to resist the damaging effects of sun burn when a person occasionally lies on the beach during holidays or a long weekend, hence the advice to always apply sun screen lotion.

Dr Rachel Neale has promoted the greater use of sun screen lotion in the past, but recently appears to have changed her mind.

"Rachel Neale did her PhD in skin cancer prevention and has done plenty of research into the dangers of sunlight. Yet every day around noon the professor strips down into shorts, or maybe pulls up her skirt, exposes a bit of belly if there’s no one around, and bares as much of her skin as she can to the hard Brisbane sun.

It’s only for five to 10 minutes. But having last year published the most comprehensive review and meta-analysis of the effect that vitamin D has on acute respiratory tract infections, she’s in a good position to judge what may be helpful if she ever gets exposed to COVID-19.

In Neale’s review, which encompassed 78,000 participants, it was found that those with low levels of vitamin D — the “sunshine vitamin” — were almost twice as likely as those with high vitamin D levels to get the type of extreme lung infections that now are killing COVID-19 sufferers, and they were even more likely again to be sicker for longer.

And so how does this translate to the pandemic? “Now, more than ever, is not the time to be vitamin D deficient,” Neale says from Brisbane’s QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute. “It would make sense that being vitamin D deficient would increase the risk of having symptomatic COVID-19 and potentially having worse symptoms. And that’s because vitamin D seems to have important effects on the immune system.”

For all vitamin D’s advantages, Neale doesn’t take vitamin D pills. She is cognizant of the emerging evidence that the sun provides more benefits than just the sunshine vitamin."


Unfortunately the link to this information, which includes lots of related articles, seems to be behind a paywall, but I'll provide it, just in case it's useful.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/inquirer/sunlights-role-in-containing-the-coronavirus/news-story/ea0104fac291d253e4fd6b06629ab74b
Logged

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4344
    • A Goldhammer Photography
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1118 on: May 13, 2020, 09:33:46 am »

https://www.cambridge.org/engage/coe/article-details/5ead2b518d7bf7001951c5a5?fbclid=IwAR37L9_paTS2PusRlqtCrUSUqwWQEiKtC-kEVb4KXctXa8GqQAKPVSHUtN4

I am not sure about the degree of peer review this article has undergone and I would lie if I claimed that I have put the time in needed to understand all of it.

But what I understand it says is extremely interesting.
- It is based on Japan situation but can be extended to other countries
- It relies on the analysis of competing viruses, for example between flu and covid19. By monitoring the amount of flu infections it would be possible to guess the presence of another virus even if there are no clear symptoms yet
- the analysis of flu infection curve could have been used to trigger public health measures as early as January
- a Canadian AI system called Global Early Warning system detected the Wuhan pneumonia outbreak on 31-Dec
- There are probably 3 types of Corona: S, K and G in increasing levels of severity (G probably being a later mutation deriving from K)
- Contagion for S and K type probably started late 2019, G appeared globally in February and entered some specific parts of Japan early March but didn't spread to the whole country
- People who had K type are mostly immune to the most severe G type, but people who had S type could actually be more at risk relative to type G
- There is a high probability that many prefectures in Japan already have K type herd immunity
- Some countries, in particular the US, are likely to have been in contact with S type but not K type (since the inflow of people from China was stopped early) which would explain the high mortality
- It stressed the importance of taking the right measures in the right timing to both allow the spread of low severity forms to build herd immunity but then prevent the spread of high severity forms.

Cheers,
Bernard
I have not seen any paper (and I have probably read more than 1000 abstracts over the past eight weeks) that makes these kinds of claims about differing strains and mortality.  the Hokkaido experience argues against herd mortality.  We also are seeing new outbreaks in China and all residents of Wuhan are now going to be tested (11 million tests!!!).
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15851
    • Flicker photos
Re: COVID-19 | science, damage limitation, NO POLITICS
« Reply #1119 on: May 13, 2020, 10:09:41 am »

I have not seen any paper (and I have probably read more than 1000 abstracts over the past eight weeks) that makes these kinds of claims about differing strains and mortality.  the Hokkaido experience argues against herd mortality.  We also are seeing new outbreaks in China and all residents of Wuhan are now going to be tested (11 million tests!!!).
Does China have different tests?  Are they better or worse?  Can we produce enough of the tests required?  Is the problem getting trained people to give the tests? 
Pages: 1 ... 54 55 [56] 57 58 ... 126   Go Up