Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 244

Thread: Covid Discussion

  1. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    1,373

    Default

    Both France and Spain just announced results of major widespread antibody testing, which determines if someone has been exposed to a virus or not.

    Both countries found ~5% of people exposed, 95% not.

    Both of those countries have been hit much harder (measured in deaths) than the USA. Spain has 581 deaths (per million), France is 415, USA is 254.

    Even Europe's hardest hit major countries and early hot spots have a long way to go to reach herd immunity. This test is also further evidence against the hypothesis that COVID-19 was secretly circulating broadly for weeks or months before it became public knowledge.


  2. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    7,448

  3. #28
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    San Diego, Ca.
    Posts
    7,730

    Default

    I think I know the answer but could someone explain how tracing works? Is it with cell phones, ankle bracelets or a Bill Gates microchip?

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    7,448

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZagaZags View Post
    I think I know the answer but could someone explain how tracing works? Is it with cell phones, ankle bracelets or a Bill Gates microchip?
    I believe that it is through cell phones. They can keep track of all cell phones, anonymously, and when 1 person is identified, see which other cell phones were within a proximity of that individual within a definitive time frame.

    At least that is what I read somewhere.
    It's not funny.

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,478

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by willandi View Post
    I believe that it is through cell phones. They can keep track of all cell phones, anonymously, and when 1 person is identified, see which other cell phones were within a proximity of that individual within a definitive time frame.

    At least that is what I read somewhere.
    That doesn't elicit any level of concern?

    Combine that with contact tracers and forced quarantines and...there will be no end to government control.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    1,373

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Markburn1 View Post
    That doesn't elicit any level of concern?

    Combine that with contact tracers and forced quarantines and...there will be no end to government control.
    "tracing" is a broad term that means many different things in many places. South Korea's tracing has largely happened via smart phone apps. Here is some information on it.

    ( https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-...ontact-tracing )

    I don't not desire, or expect that the USA generally or even any state will attempt a large scale phone-based tracing system. Too many people without phones or without a willingness to join such a program.

    If any government official at a state or federal level have seriously proposed large scale domestic electronic tracing of Americans, I haven't heard of it but would be interested in reading such proposals. They would be very unpopular.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    7,448

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Markburn1 View Post
    That doesn't elicit any level of concern?

    Combine that with contact tracers and forced quarantines and...there will be no end to government control.
    Death concerns the hell out of me. An executive run amok concerns the hell out of me.



    it's a GIF. Maybe this will work.
    https://www.alucinoconfeisbuk.com/20...bBiWE.facebook
    It's not funny.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    1,373

    Default

    My biggest COVID takeaways from the last couple days, following some very broad testing of Antibodies (who has been exposed to this new virus) in France, Spain, and the USA:

    Only 4-6% of people in those countries have been exposed and we now (fairly well) estimate the total absolute number of people who have been infected, and compare that against the dead, to determine the death rate of infected in western democracies with fairly honest reporting. The death rate of those who have been infected in each of those countries without overwhelmed medical systems is 1.15% - .75%.

    This also works out very closely for USA stats. Our official death count is 85K but recent broader mortality studies put it at 107k.
    [IMG][/IMG]


    Some widespread antibody tests are showing 4.5% of americans have been infected (20-25% in NYC).

    330million
    x
    4.5% infected
    =

    14million 850,000 thus far infected


    14,850,000 x .75%
    =

    111,375 deaths

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Opportunity, WA
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LTownZag View Post
    "tracing" is a broad term that means many different things in many places. South Korea's tracing has largely happened via smart phone apps. Here is some information on it.

    ( https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-...ontact-tracing )

    I don't not desire, or expect that the USA generally or even any state will attempt a large scale phone-based tracing system. Too many people without phones or without a willingness to join such a program.

    If any government official at a state or federal level have seriously proposed large scale domestic electronic tracing of Americans, I haven't heard of it but would be interested in reading such proposals. They would be very unpopular.
    I believe it would be an Apple-Google collaboration that people opt in to.
    https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/...ng-technology/
    Agent provocateur

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,478

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by willandi View Post
    Death concerns the hell out of me. An executive run amok concerns the hell out of me.



    it's a GIF. Maybe this will work.
    https://www.alucinoconfeisbuk.com/20...bBiWE.facebook
    Then stay self quarantined. Nobody is forcing you to open your business or get out amongst the people. It's your choice. The wrong people are being forced to curtail their lives. Suggesting I find it acceptable that people die is disgusting. Those at highest risk should do everything they can to avoid getting sick. The longer the economy is shut down, the more people die from other causes.

    Let those that are at least risk help those at higher risk by creating herd immunity. If someone is in the lower risk category and doesn't want to expose themselves, let them make that choice. Realistically, I'm the droid you are looking for. I'm willing to take my chances and to help this virus burn out. If we don't get exposure to approximately 70% of the population this lockdown will be extended forever by people of your opinion because a vaccine is probably never going to happen.

    The virus is not the only killer. Poverty is. Depression is. Not taking care of other health problems is.

    Let's make a deal. How about avoiding calling me an uncaring killer because I disagree with keeping the economy closed. Can we start with that?

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    1,373

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Markburn1 View Post
    How about avoiding calling me an uncaring killer because I disagree with keeping the economy closed. Can we start with that?
    Mark, did WillandI or anyone on these forums call you that? I hope not.

    I think I agree with you in general now about the desirability of mostly removing government-enforced closure orders. We didn't overwhelm any local medical systems, and delaying things for any vaccine could be a countdown to eternity. At this point it's a slow march toward something closer to herd immunity.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Opportunity, WA
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Markburn1 View Post
    Then stay self quarantined. Nobody is forcing you to open your business or get out amongst the people. It's your choice. The wrong people are being forced to curtail their lives. Suggesting I find it acceptable that people die is disgusting. Those at highest risk should do everything they can to avoid getting sick. The longer the economy is shut down, the more people die from other causes.

    Let those that are at least risk help those at higher risk by creating herd immunity. If someone is in the lower risk category and doesn't want to expose themselves, let them make that choice. Realistically, I'm the droid you are looking for. I'm willing to take my chances and to help this virus burn out. If we don't get exposure to approximately 70% of the population this lockdown will be extended forever by people of your opinion because a vaccine is probably never going to happen.

    The virus is not the only killer. Poverty is. Depression is. Not taking care of other health problems is.

    Let's make a deal. How about avoiding calling me an uncaring killer because I disagree with keeping the economy closed. Can we start with that?
    I understand the theory here is that we'd be very successful if we allowed the people who wanted that risk to build toward the herd immunity. You might suppose the people with the lowest risk would choose this freedom but I'm actually not so sure about it.

    Because, if the idea is it's a choice we all make, what do you do with the essential workers who want to opt out of this scenario where the spread of the virus is encouraged? What do you do to keep a grocery store open if a large percentage of workers decide they don't want to work there? What do you do with people whose job is to interact with high risk people?

    I'm not saying this "let people be free" idea can't work, but it still seems incredibly cumbersome and complicated to make this about freedom of choice. Because if it is really a choice, it seems that would mean you're willing to let society do what's necessary to protect the people who don't want the risk, including supporting them fully in their self-quarantine.
    Agent provocateur

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,478

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LTownZag View Post
    Mark, did WillandI or anyone on these forums call you that? I hope not.

    I think I agree with you in general now about the desirability of mostly removing government-enforced closure orders. We didn't overwhelm any local medical systems, and delaying things for any vaccine could be a countdown to eternity. At this point it's a slow march toward something closer to herd immunity.
    I don’t think I misinterpreted the point of Will’s gif.

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,478

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sonuvazag View Post
    I understand the theory here is that we'd be very successful if we allowed the people who wanted that risk to build toward the herd immunity. You might suppose the people with the lowest risk would choose this freedom but I'm actually not so sure about it.

    Because, if the idea is it's a choice we all make, what do you do with the essential workers who want to opt out of this scenario where the spread of the virus is encouraged? What do you do to keep a grocery store open if a large percentage of workers decide they don't want to work there? What do you do with people whose job is to interact with high risk people?

    I'm not saying this "let people be free" idea can't work, but it still seems incredibly cumbersome and complicated to make this about freedom of choice. Because if it is really a choice, it seems that would mean you're willing to let society do what's necessary to protect the people who don't want the risk, including supporting them fully in their self-quarantine.
    Right now we are supporting everyone with transfers of wealth whether they need it or not. We are also picking winners and losers in the business world with arbitrary designations of who is essential and who isn’t. It would be a lot cheaper to let businesses and individuals to make common sense choices about getting their lives and livelihoods back while supporting those that can’t or won’t take the risk. Some will always take advantage. For those, supporting them will be the price to pay until herd immunity or an effective treatment is found.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Opportunity, WA
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Markburn1 View Post
    Right now we are supporting everyone with transfers of wealth whether they need it or not. We are also picking winners and losers in the business world with arbitrary designations of who is essential and who isn’t. It would be a lot cheaper to let businesses and individuals to make common sense choices about getting their lives and livelihoods back while supporting those that can’t or won’t take the risk. Some will always take advantage. For those, supporting them will be the price to pay until herd immunity or an effective treatment is found.
    What do you do about a grocery store or a meat packing plant if the majority of workers choose to stay home? Do you require more precaution for those that interact with high risk people as a part of their job? In general, if a business tells its workers they have to come in or lose their job, do you think they should get unemployment if they don't?
    Agent provocateur

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    1,373

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sonuvazag View Post
    What do you do about a grocery store or a meat packing plant if the majority of workers choose to stay home? Do you require more precaution for those that interact with high risk people as a part of their job? In general, if a business tells its workers they have to come in or lose their job, do you think they should get unemployment if they don't?
    I know you were asking Mark, but if it were up to me:

    If workers want to not come to work for the same wage as pre-Covid, then the store/plant/etc would just have to start increasing offered wage or shut down. In either option, I don't see why the federal or state government ought to be involved. Work (especially some kinds of environments) is much riskier than it was 4 months ago. That ought be be allowed to be reflected in the price of workers.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    7,448

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Markburn1 View Post
    I don’t think I misinterpreted the point of Will’s gif.
    When the individual believed that 70 to 700 deaths...70 was OK, then the 70 was his family, it became zero.

    At no point did I name you or suggest that you were in favor of letting people die. Your vehemence in coming up with that suggests a measure of self doubt.

    I am quarantining, and continuing to do so, but...life IS like a swimming pool. Every one is in it, and some people seem to think having a peeing section is OK.

    The problem is that no one knows where anyone else has been. There is no reliable testing, so the individual that seemed to be fine, may just be asymptomatic, and now the next group are infected and so on.

    This country has not had a lock down quarantine. Some states started earlier than others, and some have not had any. Interstate travel has never been stopped, so the virus has continued to travel. The ONE thing that would have really helped would have been if every state, at the same time, had had a 2-3 week quarantine, Essential workers exempted and all others short trips and masked. That never happened..


    But don't forget. My comment, including the gif, was in response to yours about concern of government control .
    It's not funny.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Opportunity, WA
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LTownZag View Post
    I know you were asking Mark, but if it were up to me:

    If workers want to not come to work for the same wage as pre-Covid, then the store/plant/etc would just have to start increasing offered wage or shut down. In either option, I don't see why the federal or state government ought to be involved. Work (especially some kinds of environments) is much riskier than it was 4 months ago. That ought be be allowed to be reflected in the price of workers.
    I agree that hazard pay is not only a possible solution but something that should be done anyway, but I see a real risk that truly essential businesses break down in this scenario where we have freedom to choose our risk while the virus runs rampant. In the polling I've seen there's not a very high percentage of people that are eager, like Markburn, to get infected.

    Plus, I know you've given up on any path but herd immunity through mass infection, but most epidemiologists that I follow have not thrown in that towel and believe that a test-trace-isolate path is not only still a possibility for many if not most regions in the United States but possible in a way that would substantially save lives.
    Agent provocateur

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,478

    Default

    It seems I have more faith that the American people will ultimately choose to work and live their lives.

    Fear of death has caused a lot of people to be afraid to live. That concerns me. What’s the point of being alive? Everyone takes risks every day. A large majority of people infected with this virus have little to no risk of dying. Those that have a high risk should take the appropriate cautions. Those that don’t should take common sense precautions but live their lives to the fullest.

    Once again Will, if you don’t want to get in the swimming pool, don’t. Then you won’t get peed on.

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    1,373

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sonuvazag View Post
    I agree that hazard pay is not only a possible solution but something that should be done anyway, but I see a real risk that truly essential businesses break down in this scenario where we have freedom to choose our risk while the virus runs rampant. In the polling I've seen there's not a very high percentage of people that are eager, like Markburn, to get infected.

    I think it's unfair, inaccurate and derails respectful conversation to claim that Mark is "eager to get infected".

    Quote Originally Posted by sonuvazag View Post
    Plus, I know you've given up on any path but herd immunity through mass infection, but most epidemiologists that I follow have not thrown in that towel and believe that a test-trace-isolate path is not only still a possibility for many if not most regions in the United States but possible in a way that would substantially save lives.
    I agree that a test/treat/isolate path, if possible, would be better for the economy and for public health.

    My question is: How would such a path be achieved in the USA at this point? We have had over 10 million positive cases, we are 50 diverse states, we have thousands of miles of land borders, and we have a political and social ethic opposed to government surveillance and lockdown. It's not that I don't prefer some idealized version of test/treat/isolate, such as New Zealand or Australia or Iceland has so far managed quite well. It's that I don't see how such an option is still realistically on the table for our country. Convince me otherwise.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Opportunity, WA
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LTownZag View Post
    I think it's unfair, inaccurate and derails respectful conversation to claim that Mark is "eager to get infected".
    Maybe you missed where Markburn said, explicitly, the following:
    Quote Originally Posted by Markburn1 View Post
    Let those that are at least risk help those at higher risk by creating herd immunity. If someone is in the lower risk category and doesn't want to expose themselves, let them make that choice. Realistically, I'm the droid you are looking for. I'm willing to take my chances and to help this virus burn out. If we don't get exposure to approximately 70% of the population this lockdown will be extended forever by people of your opinion because a vaccine is probably never going to happen.
    Quote Originally Posted by LTownZag View Post
    I agree that a test/treat/isolate path, if possible, would be better for the economy and for public health.

    My question is: How would such a path be achieved in the USA at this point? We have had over 10 million positive cases, we are 50 diverse states, we have thousands of miles of land borders, and we have a political and social ethic opposed to government surveillance and lockdown. It's not that I don't prefer some idealized version of test/treat/isolate, such as New Zealand or Australia or Iceland has so far managed quite well. It's that I don't see how such an option is still realistically on the table for our country. Convince me otherwise.
    I'm essentially paraphrasing epidemiologists who are far more knowledgable than me. Using my own Spokane County as an example, we have had less than 10 new cases a day for quite awhile and our own health commissioner believes we are ready to do it.

    As for the smartphone surveillance, my own two cents would be that I believe a substantially large percentage of people already share pretty sensitive location data with particular apps on their phones. Maybe they don't trust it if the government has blanket access to it, but if it was an offshoot of Google Maps or Apple Maps, I suspect a lot of people would trust it. But I don't know for sure. You might be right.
    Agent provocateur

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    7,448

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Markburn1 View Post
    It seems I have more faith that the American people will ultimately choose to work and live their lives.

    Fear of death has caused a lot of people to be afraid to live. That concerns me. What’s the point of being alive? Everyone takes risks every day. A large majority of people infected with this virus have little to no risk of dying. Those that have a high risk should take the appropriate cautions. Those that don’t should take common sense precautions but live their lives to the fullest.

    Once again Will, if you don’t want to get in the swimming pool, don’t. Then you won’t get peed on.
    We are all in the same pool, like it or not. Anytime one goes out, it is the same pool.
    It's not funny.

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,478

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by willandi View Post
    We are all in the same pool, like it or not. Anytime one goes out, it is the same pool.
    That’s just factually wrong. If you don’t go out you aren’t in the pool. And that’s your right.

    My mom isn’t in the pool. I don’t want her in the pool. My elderly neighbors aren’t in the pool. I wade into the pool (grocery store) for them. The fact that I am in the pool doesn’t mean you or anyone else needs to be.

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    7,448

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Markburn1 View Post
    That’s just factually wrong. If you don’t go out you aren’t in the pool. And that’s your right.

    My mom isn’t in the pool. I don’t want her in the pool. My elderly neighbors aren’t in the pool. I wade into the pool (grocery store) for them. The fact that I am in the pool doesn’t mean you or anyone else needs to be.
    If you go into the pool, they are in the pool. Everything you touch should be disinfected.

    I am not a fanatic about it. I go out, masked. I maintain social distancing and wipe off with alcohol when I get back to my car, including wiping down gas pumps etc.

    I am 71 and in pretty good shape. My 60 yr old wife has a severely compromised immune system. If everybody had quarantined and masked, this would be doing so much better. They didn't. So you never know where the 'water' has come from when you go in. Everything that anybody else has touched, and then you touch, has the potential to be contaminated.

    The point of the gif was that when it was his family, zero deaths was the right number. You can do what you want, where you want and when you want.

    What is the acceptable number of deaths in your family? That was the sole point of the gif.
    It's not funny.

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,478

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by willandi View Post
    If you go into the pool, they are in the pool. Everything you touch should be disinfected.

    I am not a fanatic about it. I go out, masked. I maintain social distancing and wipe off with alcohol when I get back to my car, including wiping down gas pumps etc.

    I am 71 and in pretty good shape. My 60 yr old wife has a severely compromised immune system. If everybody had quarantined and masked, this would be doing so much better. They didn't. So you never know where the 'water' has come from when you go in. Everything that anybody else has touched, and then you touch, has the potential to be contaminated.

    The point of the gif was that when it was his family, zero deaths was the right number. You can do what you want, where you want and when you want.

    What is the acceptable number of deaths in your family? That was the sole point of the gif.
    You are assuming that I find death in any family acceptable. You are also assuming lockdown isn’t causing deaths and misery that may outpace the virus in the long run.

    If everybody had quarantined and masked it may have bent the curve more but it wouldn’t have stopped the eventual spread of the virus. It is going to run it’s course and it’s arrogant to think we can stop it unless herd immunity is achieved.

    One more thing you are assuming. I don’t go about willy nilly without disinfecting things and not taking reasonable precautions designed to protect others like my mother and neighbors that are in higher risk categories.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •