Jump to content

Covid19 redux


Bosco-d-gama
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, dwilawyer said:

Are you able to get testing for the residents/patients, for yourselves?

 

They've not tested everyone, only ones (staff or clients) who had any symptoms. I don't know the number tested, but was told they all were negative. Testing has not been widely available in Chattanooga, but there are places to get it done, without a referral or symptoms. Not sure I could go to one of the testing spots as I am a Georgia resident. Our agency has worked closely with the Tennessee Dept. of Health as well as our county  health. One of our doctors  has held a few webinars on the subject, with thousands of direst support professionals signing in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, dwilawyer said:

That series is a must see in my opinion.

 

I agree, but was surprised by the final episode.  I expected to find it even more compelling than the earlier episodes, due to being set in Michigan and involving a court system in  which I practiced.  The individuals, other than the defendant, were known to me.  Perhaps the innocent defendant was less likable than the others.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
20 minutes ago, DizRotus said:

 

I agree, but was surprised by the final episode.  I expected to find it even more compelling than the earlier episodes, due to being set in Michigan and involving a court system in  which I practiced.  The individuals, other than the defendant, were known to me.  Perhaps the innocent defendant was less likable than the others.

 

The University of Michigan has a website where they track every exoneration in the United States, where is occurred, and the associated factors  (misidentification, prosecutorial misconduct, false confession, junk science, etc.). It happens everywhere. I believe that Texas has the most, to date, including defendant's who were on death row).

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dwilawyer said:

I'm not seeing any connection at all being made in that article.

 

"Dr. Fauci did not respond to Newsweek's requests for comment. NIH responded with a statement that said in part: "Most emerging human viruses come from wildlife, and these represent a significant threat to public health and biosecurity in the US and globally, as demonstrated by the SARS epidemic of 2002-03, and the current COVID-19 pandemic.... scientific research indicates that there is no evidence that suggests the virus was created in a laboratory."

 

There is out right now on Netflix, a documentary about Covid-19 (In top ten US section) that shows the following activity:

 

"The NIH research consisted of two parts. The first part began in 2014 and involved surveillance of bat coronaviruses, and had a budget of $3.7 million. The program funded Shi Zheng-Li, a virologist at the Wuhan lab, and other researchers to investigate and catalogue bat coronaviruses in the wild. This part of the project was completed in 2019."

 

Also in that documentary it showed how they classify the virus strains they find in bats (paraphrasing, no big deal, medium risk, and oh man, if this gets out we are going to have a pandemic on out hands and we better start working on a solution now for if/when that happens).

 

"Three years later, though—in December 2017—the NIH ended the moratorium and the second phase of the NIAID project, which included the gain-of-function research, began. The NIH established a framework for determining how the research would go forward: scientists have to get approval from a panel of experts, who would decide whether the risks were justified."

 

@tube fanatic I read that article twice and there is nothing in there that says anything about SARS-CoV-2 being created in a lab other than some unnamed "official" said it was possible. The article doesn't conclude anywhere that SARS-CoV-2 was created in a lab.

 

It does say that "gain of function" research is controversial because if you have an accident and release a pathogen that has been release after gain of function you could have developed a very deadly pathogen much more deadly, much more difficult to stop. The article also discusses the controversy among scientists in this field about whether the benefits possibly derived from gain of use methods are outweighed by the associated risks.

 
Travis, I appreciate your perspective.  However, I refuse to believe that research involving deadly pathogens is altruistic.  In the other thread I posted a link about the number of times medical experimentation using pathogens was conducted by our own people on our own citizens without their knowledge or consent.  Anyone interested can look up those references.  
 

I also offer this for consideration:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1326439/

 

 

Maynard

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After doing my own research for several hours I have come up with some more evidence to support my theory that the Covid-19 virus is much more prevelant out in the public domain than anyone had previosly thought possible at this time. Right now I could just bomb you with statistics from scientific studies from many different countries all using complicated technical terminology. Instead I will provide only one link.

L.A County.

University of Southern California study

Quote from the County of L.A Health Department "Based on results of the first round of testing, the research team estimates that approximately 4.1% of the county's adult population has antibody to the virus. Adjusting this estimate for statistical margin of error implies about 2.8% to 5.6% of the county's adult population has antibody to the virus- which translates to approximately 221,000 to 442,000 adults in the county who have had the infection. That estimate is 28 to 55 times higher than the 7,994 confirmed cases of COVID-19 reported to the county by the time of the study in early April.

http://publichealth.lacounty.gov/phcommon/public/media/mediapubhpdetail.cfm?prid=2328&fbclid=IwAR3MpnIeX6earYrGRwAGrMWpEr3K5MOk7zB29hgNHJW4krvpyeGJRGEHqT8

 

This is both good and bad news. Good news is the death rates are in fact dramatically lower for the general population when compared to overall infections rates. Bad news is you will be getting Covid-19 eventually. Just may not die, or even get sick. Most likely scenario, you just become a carrier and spread the disease. 

 

Remember this is a study that tested random public for antibodies for Covid-19. Most testing done now is for those showing symptoms, or are in critical positions. This is a virus that originated from wild animals in Asia. Absolutely nobody in L.A would have antibodies to this if they were not exposed to it by other humans.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 000 said:

------the article doesnt say whether these prison inmates are men or women , but usually men  do a lot of weight training ,and they are fed great food ,    they are all in relatively good physical shape , they got nothing else to do , but to train   and in theory , a stronger person with a stronger immune system has a better chance to survive , the only problem , is if all these cases worsen , then it is going to be catastrophic ---

It is the same problem with the aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt. The study groups, though isolated, are not statistically representative of the general population. It would be as bad to study covid19 in a nursing home. The results of a nursing home study would reflect the worst case scenario and the others the better case scenarios. As long as the results are presented with these confounding variables in mind they’d be slanted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 314carpenter said:

After doing my own research for several hours I have come up with some more evidence to support my theory that the Covid-19 virus is much more prevelant out in the public domain than anyone had previosly thought possible at this time. Right now I could just bomb you with statistics from scientific studies from many different countries all using complicated technical terminology. Instead I will provide only one link.

L.A County.

University of Southern California study

Quote from the County of L.A Health Department "Based on results of the first round of testing, the research team estimates that approximately 4.1% of the county's adult population has antibody to the virus. Adjusting this estimate for statistical margin of error implies about 2.8% to 5.6% of the county's adult population has antibody to the virus- which translates to approximately 221,000 to 442,000 adults in the county who have had the infection. That estimate is 28 to 55 times higher than the 7,994 confirmed cases of COVID-19 reported to the county by the time of the study in early April.

http://publichealth.lacounty.gov/phcommon/public/media/mediapubhpdetail.cfm?prid=2328&fbclid=IwAR3MpnIeX6earYrGRwAGrMWpEr3K5MOk7zB29hgNHJW4krvpyeGJRGEHqT8

 

This is both good and bad news. Good news is the death rates are in fact dramatically lower for the general population when compared to overall infections rates. Bad news is you will be getting Covid-19 eventually. Just may not die, or even get sick. Most likely scenario, you just become a carrier and spread the disease. 

 

Remember this is a study that tested random public for antibodies for Covid-19. Most testing done now is for those showing symptoms, or are in critical positions. This is a virus that originated from wild animals in Asia. Absolutely nobody in L.A would have antibodies to this if they were not exposed to it by other humans.

Dig deeper and you will find that this study along with another similar study from Stanford have been seriously criticized as to their methodology. That said this is work that needs to be properly conducted to understand the nature of the covid19 beast.

 

Which brings up another key point. The flu statistics widely quoted have had this sort of work done already. Medicine knows how to infer the seriousness of a flu season because they have the formulas that allow them to mathematically take the actual patient data from hospitals and compute how many people got the flu and how many died. For example during the flu season of 2018-19 the CDC reports 34,500 deaths from 35,500,000 infections. Do you think we conducted 35.5 million flu tests that came up positive? No that did not happen. We also did not have 34,500 dead bodies from the flu either. Both of those values were calculated based on what we know about the flu. The actual numbers, the real dead body count was much much lower.

 

This has become problematic when people compare the flu to covid19. They’ve been comparing actual covid19 dead bodies to calculated flu dead bodies. If they compared actual flu dead bodies to actual covid19 dead bodies the information would be more accurate. So - in the modern era the highest number of actual flu ‘dead bodies’ was 15,000 for the h1n1 season. This is the number to be compared with covid19 victims which now stands at over 61,000. 
 

While it is important to get these epidemiological studies done for covid19 they are merely academic at this juncture because so far the real fatality rate for covid19 is 400% greater than the worst flu season in this century.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found a piece of paper stating that all restrictions have been lifted. It's kind of old, though. It's dated September 25, 1789, and written in cursive.

 

An excerpt:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I added up the numbers in that chart.

 

Covid-19

54,131

 

Flu 2018

57,938

 

Again, keep in mind the Covid numbers are for three months while the Flu numbers are for a whole year. We've also been staying at home more and social distancing, which is keeping the numbers lower than they might have been.

 

The Covid-19 number is from the 26th. Since then, there have been 8,444 more deaths for a total of 62,575. We are averaging 2000 deaths a day. The average deaths per day is starting to climb again, and will continue to climb as things open back up.

 

If we stay with 2000 deaths per day, and I see no reason for them to drop, especially with this push back to normality and no vaccine -- we could expect to see 490,000 more deaths between tomorrow and the end of December. Add current total for a grand total of 552,575 dead. 

 

If infections climb and start to double every week like they were, the final number will be worse, much worse. We could be looking at near a million dead.

 

I suppose it could just disappear. Right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Sancho Panza said:

How many in Atlanta?

 

If you look at that link for GA, it has the county breakdown. The top 4 counties are the Atlanta area. Not sure exactly what makes up Atlanta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Atlanta is Fulton County.

 

We have the same thing here in Ohio. The county I'm in only has 260 confirmed cases. Just east of us is 30 confirmed. The closer you get to Cleveland and Baltimore the worse it gets, same as you head south to Cincinnati. So, I totally get being in a county with a dozen cases and no deaths and simply not understanding why you have to "get with the program". 

 

The problem is that once people start moving around, you aren't just going to have a few hot spots per state, they are going to start popping up everywhere. That's the way it works.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • dtel locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...