Corona

[JIMDINI]

An island huh? That gives me an idea. I should have done it earlier, not just for the pandemic. A moat. I submit to you that a moat will protect me. But, I have to stay inside the moat's perimeter, and keep everyone out. Yeah, that would be my idea. Every moat their homes. Or, just dig out a circle, fill it with water, and stand in the middle. Moats.

Just as long as you don't leave your keys on the wrong side Shan, swimming in bondage is a shade difficult.

[OrgasmAlley]

I do find it truly fascinating that people will see a list of all three peer reviewed studies of lockdowns -- all of which found that they had no effect on the number of infections -- and claim that nonetheless lockdowns are effective to prevent the spread of the COVID. This would appear to be the ultimate anti-science position.

"That freedom was earned through lockdown. "

Actually, that freedom was earned through living on an island with relatively little inbound travel, allowing effective contact tracing and mitigation of the potentially infected once the virus was revealed by China and it's WHO. Locking up people who were not infected nor exposed is unlikely to have has any impact at all... at least according to the global studies that assessed lockdowns across many different populations. If part of New Zealand's mitigation strategy were to dye their water supply blue, you would have exactly as much evidence that drinking only blue water was an effective anti-COVID strategy.

[lj]

I do find it truly fascinating that people will see a list of all three peer reviewed studies of lockdowns -- all of which found that they had no effect on the number of infections -- and claim that nonetheless lockdowns are effective to prevent the spread of the COVID. This would appear to be the ultimate anti-science position.

these admirable studies were carried out by the wrong (ie not government-appointed) scientists, so the studies must be wrong too. I told you I was a cynic...

[OrgasmAlley]

A thing I find interesting, at least here in the US, is that the cry of "follow the science" actually means "follow the opinion of our anointed experts." In particular, Fauci, Birx, and the WHO. When people conduct actual science, that gets ignored or disputed unless it matches and supports this prevailing expert opinion base.

However, these anointed ones have basically been wrong about everything, according to sound scientific research. Not just lockdowns, but masks, fomite spread, spread by asymptomatic individuals, outdoor gatherings, fatality rates, and so on. At least 90% of their claims and projections have been proven wrong, by time or research.

But hey... they're experts. Of course, they're on the side of government, and the victors write the history.

[Shannon SteelSlave]

I can't argue with that, although, according to my local National Public Radio, people polled said they will trust their own physician the most for advice.

[OrgasmAlley]

Yeah, I could see that. However, people with that opinion are placing extra weight on their physician's knowledge of THEM, when they should be placing extra weight on the expertise of specialists in the subject of the opinion. It's kind of an extension of the theory that every thinks they are special, just like everyone else.

Medically, one human is almost always exactly like any other human. Of course, there are exceptions to everything.

[Shannon SteelSlave]

I would have to say that I would sooner respond to my doctor's word, rather than a letter in the mail from someone, or the people at the drug store recommending me to take it. Heck, by July, 2021, we'll have department store greeters asking everyone if they've had their Corona shot. Whatever it takes, I suppose.

[OrgasmAlley]

If you had heart disease, would you listen to your GP, an ER nurse, or a specialized cardiologist? I'll take the latter, every time.

If we're relating this to the COVID vaccines, I don't know of any vaccine scientist, Infectious Disease Specialist, or similar expert in relevant field that has expressed any concern with the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines* following Stage II results, or the process they've undergone to reach approval. Again, both have been through large Stage III trials with exceptional success.... the process to get approved has been expedited, not achieved through any shortcut.

In other news, Operation Warp Speed just announced that they expect to get 70% of the US population vaccinated for COVID by the end of May (if people will get it). Totally incredible achievement.

* At the population level. There are concerns of a low-instance anaphylactic reaction in some portion of treated parties who have previously had anaphylactic reaction to a food allergy. This exact sort of reaction is typical of most vaccines, at a similar level of prevalence.

[lj]

In the UK, we have also been "following the science" - we have "SAGE", a group of un-named epidemiologists and other unspecified "scientists".

It is evident our politicians have miniscule or no scientific knowledge and simply accept what SAGE tells them Only now are people starting to ask for cost-benefit analysis (not just money but mortality resulting from lockdowns etc) and politicians are slowly realising that they need to widen the sources of information. After all, if you were an epidemiologist, your prime concern is reducing infection, all the other consequences are irrelevant.

Early on, one of the most senior scientistst said masks are a waste of time. Now he is saying they are essential, and will probably be needed well into 2022.

It is inherent in science that you form a hypothesis, establish an experimental process to examine the hypothesis (positive or negative results are perfectly acceptable), adjust the hypothesis if necessary, carry out more experiments until results prove the hypothesis is correct beyond all reasonable doubt. BUT no scientist will say a hypothesis is guaranteed correct, because the next experiment may prove it wrong. That's when politicians (or project managers) must make a rational decision based on all the available evidence, not just "the science"

[Shannon SteelSlave]

Total Cases 72,446,947 , Global Deaths 1,616,191
With the holidaze coming, combined with a sense of security that the vaccine is on the way, it is important to understand that it will take time to distribute the vaccine, and that no one is encouraged to drop their guard about masks, distancing, ect, even if one is vaccinated. Maybe sometime next year, the virus will have been herded out and things can return to normal. That date is not January 1, 2021, though. Be safe, have fun, but not too much fun.

[Gregovic]

The Netherlands just announced another hard lockdown starting Wednesday that will last till 18 January (iirc) so no large Christmas gatherings here. (Max 3 guests. I doubt many people are going to stick to that)

[Shannon SteelSlave]

Good luck stopping that around here. I was even tempted, but ultimately cancelled the holiday weeks ago.

[OrgasmAlley]

Early on, one of the most senior scientistst said masks are a waste of time. Now he is saying they are essential, and will probably be needed well into 2022.

Exactly the same from Fauci here. Early, it was masks should only be worn by people in close contact with a known case, and could actually make things worse otherwise. Then everyone has to wear masks (and "I was just saying that to preserve a limited supply for heathcare workers").

Mostly, it turns out he was right the first time. We have a very sound study (I think I posted it earlier) concluding that wearing a mask is not effective in protecting the wearer. The notion that a mask protects others is highly questionable in light of the primary means of spread... extended exposure to exhaled air of infected persons in an enclosed space. A mask will contain fomites (droplets), but unless extremely well-fitted and of very high filtration grade it does nothing to stop airborne viral particulate. Cloth masks in particular are almost certainly worthless.

Is it highly suspicious that we don't have a single study assessing the utility of masks worm as containment of the COVID? Hell yes. The "masks as protection from COVID" study was mysteriously held for months before publication, and the companion study is something we should obviously have as well. No one wants to face the grinder one gets for disagreeing with the powers that be, IMO.

New York contact tracing released some interesting data, especially related to the question of lockdowns and business closures (46,000 data points). What environments are known to cause spread?

Household: 74%
Heath care delivery: 8%
Higher ed: 2%
Educational employee: 1.5%
Restaurant/bar: 1.4%
Travel: 1%
Sports: 1%
Police/Fire/EMS: 1%
Transit: 0.9%
Manufacturing: 0.8%
Religion: 0.6%
Less includes: construction, retail, professional services, elementary student, high school, prison, middle school, auto dealer, hair care, wholesale, building services, real estate, arts/entertainment, gyms, etc...

[OrgasmAlley]

I found this article pretty insightful: https://www.glennbeck.com/contributor/h ... s-ignoring

Ziegler typically writes for left leaning Mediaite, but they wouldn't publish this article. It is apparently forbidden to ask why certain questions are forbidden. IMO, he raises some good points... not answers, but topics.

[Kinbaku]

In Belgium this week was the first lawsuit for people who held lock-down parties. The fines have also been tightened: 750 euros instead of 250 euros for the participants, 4,000 euros instead of 750 euros for the organizers, plus the possibility of seizure of cars and music systems. Prison sentences are also provided. Plus it gets on your criminal record, which can cause problems if you have to look for work somewhere.