Jump to content

Coronavirus

spartansaver

By spartansaver
in General Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 8.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

cubsfan Newbie

cubsfan

Posted
Posted

I already explained that in a previous post. Did you not see it or just didn't understand what I said.

 

If you want to call people names how about you back it up and show me where I lied. or are you just all mouth?

 

Here you go bold faced liar:

 

Quote from: cwericb on April 04, 2020, 03:21:02 PM

You have already said the poor of Cuba don't deserve help to fight the virus, right. Well there you go.

 

 

 

And I said to you:

 

You really don't need to be a boldfaced liar because we disagree on politics.

 

Feel free to show me anything remotely close to your accusation. .

 

I've said the Communist government of Cuba has failed their people for 60 years

and the welfare of the people is the responsibility of the Cuban government.

 

So grow up already.

 

Show me where I said ANY SUCH THING

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cwericb Newbie

cwericb

Posted
Posted

CUBS:

 

I tried to explain that the embargo you support is against the PEOPLE of Cuba not the government they are doing just fine.

The embargo is starving the PEOPLE of Cuba - not the government they are doing just fine.

The embargo is limiting medicine and equipment to the PEOPLE of Cuba, not the government they are doing just fine.

You fully support Trump’s embargo and in doing so you support punishing the PEOPLE of Cuba, not the government they are doing just fine.

 

Got it now Cubs?  Probably not, but others do.

 

Now you also say: “I can see debate is not your strong suit”

 

Well Cubs your eloquence and command of language is impressive. Here are just a couple of examples of how you have debated others:

 

“Listen bold faced liar,” To me (regarding the above)

 

“More of your bullshit once again.” to Ericopoly

 

“Are you crazy or what?” and “What the fuck is your problem?” To StubbleJumper

 

“Very funny Mr. Know-it-all...”  To  RichardGibbons

 

And numerous other brilliant remarks to some of the respected members of this board who it seem to longer respond to your childish posts.

 

I hope you are intelligent enough to be embarrassed.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cubsfan Newbie

cubsfan

Posted
Posted

CUBS:

 

I tried to explain that the embargo you support is against the PEOPLE of Cuba not the government they are doing just fine.

The embargo is starving the PEOPLE of Cuba - not the government they are doing just fine.

The embargo is limiting medicine and equipment to the PEOPLE of Cuba, not the government they are doing just fine.

You fully support Trump’s embargo and in doing so you support punishing the PEOPLE of Cuba, not the government they are doing just fine.

 

Got it now Cubs?  Probably not, but others do.

 

Now you also say: “I can see debate is not your strong suit”

 

Well Cubs your eloquence and command of language is impressive. Here are just a couple of examples of how you have debated others:

 

“Listen bold faced liar,” To me (regarding the above)

 

“More of your bullshit once again.” to Ericopoly

 

“Are you crazy or what?” and “What the fuck is your problem?” To StubbleJumper

 

“Very funny Mr. Know-it-all...”  To  RichardGibbons

 

And numerous other brilliant remarks to some of the respected members of this board who it seem to longer respond to your childish posts.

 

I hope you are intelligent enough to be embarrassed.

 

I'm never embarrassed to defend myself against someone like you that tells bold faced lies about me and yet is NOT MAN ENOUGH TO ADMIT IT.

 

At least Stubble, when he made an HONEST mistake, was a real man, unlike yourself.

 

Like I suggested to you before - grow up already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ERICOPOLY Newbie

ERICOPOLY

Posted
Posted

Indeed, Obama is the Divider in Chief. His division and derision for the middle class brought us Trump.

 

THAT IS EXACTLY RIGHT.

 

Many people still do not understand populism - you can be a billionaire and still be a populist.

 

And in that regard, I have to hand it to Bernie Sanders - he's a genuine populist, not an community organizer turned elitist like Obama.

 

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/02/what-is-populist-trump/516525/

 

As a result, “Populists in power tend to undermine countervailing powers, which are courts, which are media, which are other parties,” Mudde said. “And they tend to do that through a variety of mostly legal means, but not classic repression.” In Hungary, for instance, Orban hasn’t banned opposition newspapers; rather, his government has directed advertising by state-run organizations away from critical media outlets and toward friendly ones.

 

And when Trump says "many people do not understand"...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LongHaul Newbie

LongHaul

Posted
Posted

Good point Eric about the unknown diabetes. 

 

How are people getting the virus that people know of?  What has everyone heard?

Totally serious question as I have not seen any analysis of this but would love to.

 

I have heard of a few cases.

1.  From an opthamalogist

2.  Large gatherings - choir in churches, likely near people.

3.  Sitting in a seat someone else sat in 3 days prior in a church in Singapore.

 

How else are people hearing others are becoming infected?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LongHaul Newbie

LongHaul

Posted
Posted

Also - on Fauci's point about the primary way a mask helps is so he doesn't infect others.

I think he is totally wrong.  Commonsense is that masks trap respiratory droplets coming in and out.  The First Lady is right!  Mask help reduce your chance of becoming infected.

Isn't that amazing - America's top doctor on that is probably completely wrong on what could be the most effective way to lower the R0.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ERICOPOLY Newbie

ERICOPOLY

Posted
Posted

It's interesting reading about the internal debate over hydroxychloroquine -- I thought Fauci had explained this well enough already at a press briefing weeks ago.

 

 

While discussing the latest on hydroxychloroquine this weekend, an exasperated Navarro lashed out at Dr. Anthony Fauci, one of the advisers who has urged caution about the drug, a person familiar with the meeting told CNN.

 

Navarro had brought a stack of paperwork with him into the Situation Room on the drug, arguing it was proof that it could work to treat coronavirus, which Fauci, the nation's top infectious disease expert, disagreed with because it was not data.

"What are you talking about?" Fauci asked -- a question that set Navarro off. He became indignant, and at one point, accused Fauci of opposing Trump's travel restrictions on China, which confused many in the room, given Fauci was one of the initial few to agree with Trump on the move, the source said.

 

Several aides later said they were unfazed by Navarro's outburst, given he has them regularly.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/05/politics/white-house-malaria-drug-hydroxychloroquine-disagreement/index.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KCLarkin Newbie

KCLarkin

Posted
Posted

Also - on Fauci's point about the primary way a mask helps is so he doesn't infect others.

I think he is totally wrong.  Commonsense is that masks trap respiratory droplets coming in and out.  The First Lady is right!  Mask help reduce your chance of becoming infected.

Isn't that amazing - America's top doctor on that is probably completely wrong on what could be the most effective way to lower the R0.

 

EDIT: BASED ON THE ARSTECHNICA ARTICLE POSTED BY LIBERTY LATER IN THIS THREAD, I NOW DOUBT THEIR EFFECTIVENESS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KCLarkin Newbie

KCLarkin

Posted
Posted

Navarro had brought a stack of paperwork with him into the Situation Room on the drug, arguing it was proof that it could work to treat coronavirus, which Fauci, the nation's top infectious disease expert, disagreed with because it was not data.

 

Not to feed the trolls, but I go back to my comment from a couple weeks ago. They are already using these drugs in Fance and Italy. The CFR in Italy and Italy is over 10%! It seems obvious that if these drugs are effective, they are only minimally effective (so any effect would only be seen in large, well-designed trials).

 

I understand the desire for a miracle drug, but there are much more promising candidates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
randomep Newbie

randomep

Posted
Posted

Can we go back to bitching about nasty viruses and the crappy economy, please, please!

 

Before we do that though, can someone tell me who the people are in each corner? Is this a one on one boxing match or is it like a tag team? or is it 2 or 1?

 

I am mildly curious.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bearprowler6 Newbie

bearprowler6

Posted
Posted

Also - on Fauci's point about the primary way a mask helps is so he doesn't infect others.

I think he is totally wrong.  Commonsense is that masks trap respiratory droplets coming in and out.  The First Lady is right!  Mask help reduce your chance of becoming infected.

Isn't that amazing - America's top doctor on that is probably completely wrong on what could be the most effective way to lower the R0.

 

Two points:

- Scientists and doctors rely on evidence. There is little evidence that masks protect the wearer in low-risk situations. There are two reasons why there is little evidence. One, they probably are less effective than you think (see below). But mostly, ethics boards tend not to approve research studies where you intentionally expose someone to an infectious disease.

 

- Common sense is that masks droplets coming in and out. So they should provide equal protection in either case. But if you think about it, you will see that Fauci is right.

 

Let's say a homemade mask reduces 50% of the droplets you inhale. But you can also get infected through the eyes, so let's say that reduces your protection by 1/3. You can also get infected by fiddling with an infected mask or improper washing. So maybe a mask is 25% effective. But respiratory droplets are probably not the primary transmission mechanism. Infection also occurs when you touch an infected person or item. Let's say that is 50% of transmissions. So a mask only reduces your odds of infection by 12.5%. (all numbers made up but roughly based on the limited research I have seen)

 

But what happens if you put that mask on the infected person? The mask basically eliminates the airborne virus. Any droplets are unlikely to be expelled with enough force to enter your eyes, mouth, or nose. It will also reduce the number of droplets on nearby items. So a mask on an infected person might be 75% effective.

 

Imagine you are in a crowded grocery store. There are 99 susceptible people and 1 infected person. If you put a mask only on the 99 susceptible people, the infected person will be walking around shedding virus on the shopping cart, breathing out droplets and aerosols, breathing on the veggies, touching the boxes, coughing on the checkout counter, touching the PIN pad.... So you can see why the Fauci and the CDC recommended masks for the infected people only! Now the problem was underestimating asymptomatic transmission and the lack of testing. The CDC advice is correct, but only if you can tell who is infected!

 

KCL using your numbers...

 

--masks worn by non-infected persons are 12.5% effective in preventing infection

 

--masks worn by infected persons are 75% effective in eliminating transmission

 

Have you not just made the case for everyone wearing a mask? And that is just to assist with lowering the spread of the corona virus let alone the impact on assisting with lowering the spread of other infections/ diseases.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dalal.Holdings Newbie

Dalal.Holdings

Posted
Posted

Also - on Fauci's point about the primary way a mask helps is so he doesn't infect others.

I think he is totally wrong.  Commonsense is that masks trap respiratory droplets coming in and out.  The First Lady is right!  Mask help reduce your chance of becoming infected.

Isn't that amazing - America's top doctor on that is probably completely wrong on what could be the most effective way to lower the R0.

 

Two points:

- Scientists and doctors rely on evidence. There is little evidence that masks protect the wearer in low-risk situations. There are two reasons why there is little evidence. One, they probably are less effective than you think (see below). But mostly, ethics boards tend not to approve research studies where you intentionally expose someone to an infectious disease.

 

Doctors/scientists love to say: "there is no evidence that...".

 

But we should remember what useless Taleb says: "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

 

After all, there's a reason there haven't been too many randomized controlled trials studying the impact of mask wearing on a pandemic involving spread via respiratory droplets.

 

Again, invoking Taleb/or a trader's POV: wearing a mask provides asymmetric payoffs for the individual: little downside, lots of potential upside: (i.e. like the asymmetry Trump gets with his loyalists)

 

For Fauci and the government, lots of downside if people start hoarding masks because they did not prepare our stockpiles and have burned a few bridges with nations who can produce them for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cwericb Newbie

cwericb

Posted
Posted

I think the question of masks is pretty simple. Surely it is a fact that if everyone wore a mask when outside of their home and in proximity to others the rate of spread would be reduced. And agin is it not better to err on the side of caution?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Parsad locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...