Coronavirus

[LongHaul]

FYI

 

Terminology

A mortality rate — often confused with a CFR — is a measure of the number of deaths (in general, or due to a specific cause) in a population scaled to the size of that population per unit of time.[2] A CFR, in contrast, is the number of dead among the number of diagnosed cases.[3]

 

Technically, CFRs, which take values between 0 and 1 (or 0% and 100%, i.e., nothing and unity), are actually a measure of risk — that is, they are a proportion of incidence. They are not rates, incidence rates, or ratios (none of which are limited to the range 0-1). Hence, even though the terms “case fatality rate” and “CFR” appear often in the scientific literature, if one wishes to be very precise, they are incorrectly used, because they do not always, in every instance, take into account time from disease onset to death.[4][5]

 

Sometimes the term case fatality ratio is used interchangeably with case fatality rate, but they are not the same. Case fatality ratio is the comparison between two different case fatality rates, expressed as ratio. It also can be used to compare different diseases or to assess the impact of an intervention.[6]

 

The term infection fatality rate (IFR) also applies to infectious disease outbreaks, and represents the proportion of deaths among all the infected individuals. It is closely related to the CFR, but attempts to additionally account for all asymptomatic and undiagnosed infections.[7] The IFR differs from the CFR in that it aims to estimate the fatality rate in all those with infection: the detected disease (cases) and those with an undetected disease (asymptomatic and not tested group).[8] (Individuals who are infected, but always remain asymptomatic, are said to have "inapparent" — or silent, or subclinical — infections.) The IFR will always be lower than the CFR as long as all deaths are accurately attributed to either the infected or the non-infected class.

[Cigarbutt]

No, that doesn't address my question. I'm not questioning the discrepancy between the projection and actual data here (although that is also important). I'm curious how the experts came to project a much lower number of deaths with the mitigation in place.

KCLarkin suggested that the projection of 1.5M-2.2M deaths was based on:

328M * 0.7 * .0067 = 1.5M

assuming that people die until the US reaches the herd immunity, without any mitigation measures.

But how is the number reduced to 100,000-240,000 with the mitigation measures? Does this mean we do not reach the herd immunity in this case? Then, why would the death number stop at 100,000-240,000?

Are they banking on a potential cure or vaccine? If so, have they indicated this at any time?

"There are other factors that are modeled in mitigation other than compliance such as reasonable ramp up of testing and tracing to bring the overall R0 down during and after the shelter in place is slowly removed. Clearly experts were wrong on how dysfunctional the policy response will be even after 2 months of this."

 

"Those measures would slow down the infection rate, not the total number of deaths. Unless you get a vaccine or cure, the number of deaths would simply get stretched out over time. The area under the flattened curve can still the same as a sharp one.

So the projections must have taken account some scenario that the virus would be mostly irradicated. Or not? None of the journalists ever asked this question??

Maybe the projections are time bound? What is the time period then?"

 

-----)

You're combining many factors. Let's try to unpack.

The goal when a virus comes (assuming its initial R0 is above 1) is to bring the R0 below 1.

This can be achieved many ways (ways that can be combined)

-reach herd immunity (definition varies but let's say it means that population has enough immunity in members to prevent spread, R0 gets lower than 1)

-use a vaccine (variable efficacy)

-use policy (from mild social distance to quarantine and lock-down, and tracing)

If the virus is contained, herd immunity is not reached and efforts are allocated to watching and tracing.

If the virus is not contained, go to mitigation and herd immunity may not be reached, which seems to be the rationale behind the models, with many variables including various levels of application and efficacy of measures (speed and extent that the R0 is brought below 1).

There are many scenarios where herd immunity is never reached so then you would expect less total deaths (in addition to the potential prevention of deaths related to overloaded healthcare capacity).

[patience_and_focus]

if you look back at past flu epidemics (and there were 80K deaths in US in 2018), there was more fatalities for children and non-elderly than covid.  so what we did here was panic, based upon an assumed 3-4% mortality rate of those infected, not appreciating the number of infected without symptoms was much greater than assumed, and instituted an unprecedented lock down of our entire economy, when we should have realized based upon early covid evidence that a focus upon elderly was most efficacious.  and then we ignored the elderly largely by not ordering a no-visitation policy until late in the game.

 

Okay, this is the last time I will correct you for a few weeks. The experts prediction of both mild/asymptomatic cases and IFR are accurate. Maybe it is your lack of expertise that is the issue (for example not knowing the difference between IFR and CFR)?

 

The original model presented by the White House estimated 1.5M-2.2M deaths, if there was no mitigation. Guess how many deaths there would be assuming your 0.67% "mortality rate" and an attack rate of 70% (rough estimate of infection rate needed for herd immunity)?

 

328M * 0.7 * .0067 = 1.5M

 

Seems pretty accurate to me. Maybe the experts know more about this pandemic than Cerzeca?

 

Something doesn't seem right though, so help me understand. The same White House model projected that 100,000 and 240,000 would die with the mitigation measures in place. Are they speculating that there will be a vaccine available before the US reaches the attack rate?

 

Another possible explanation -- If you flatten the curve, you might be able to avoid some deaths due to the healthcare system overflow, but I expect that the area under the curve would still be similar (compared to when you have a spike). So are they saying that they would save an order of magnitude of lives by keeping the health care system below the threshold?

 

Part of my problem with these projections is that there is no transparency or explanation whatsoever...

The reason for the discrepancy is that in the white house models and what we see is that in those models they assumed a 50% compliance with the shelter in place/whatever you may call them orders. What was observed is that the compliance rate is around 90%. So big miss on the assumption there.

 

You basically have the numbers coming below the model because the quarantine is working way better because the people are behaving much, much better than assumed. They are taking it more seriously than the government assumed and that is making the quarantine much more effective.

 

No, that doesn't address my question. I'm not questioning the discrepancy between the projection and actual data here (although that is also important). I'm curious how the experts came to project a much lower number of deaths with the mitigation in place.

 

KCLarkin suggested that the projection of 1.5M-2.2M deaths was based on:

328M * 0.7 * .0067 = 1.5M

assuming that people die until the US reaches the herd immunity, without any mitigation measures.

 

But how is the number reduced to 100,000-240,000 with the mitigation measures? Does this mean we do not reach the herd immunity in this case? Then, why would the death number stop at 100,000-240,000?

 

Are they banking on a potential cure or vaccine? If so, have they indicated this at any time?

 

There are other factors that are modeled in mitigation other than compliance such as reasonable ramp up of testing and tracing to bring the overall R0 down during and after the shelter in place is slowly removed. Clearly experts were wrong on how dysfunctional the policy response will be even after 2 months of this.

 

Those measures would slow down the infection rate, not the total number of deaths. Unless you get a vaccine or cure, the number of deaths would simply get stretched out over time. The area under the flattened curve can still the same as a sharp one.

 

So the projections must have taken account some scenario that the virus would be mostly irradicated. Or not? None of the journalists ever asked this question??

 

Maybe the projections are time bound? What is the time period then?

 

I think a lot of people should pay attention to other than Faux news and do a proper DD into what is actually being done and reported. These model (one by white house and other) have been very well reported. And they get updated as new data comes in -

 

http://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america

 

http://www.healthdata.org/covid/data-downloads

 

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf

[Gregmal]

Im just curious how those that claimed Trump fucked up big time and that the US was destined to be as bad or worse than Italy, now still sing that tune when the only state that looks like Italy, is....

[TwoCitiesCapital]

Im just curious how those that claimed Trump fucked up big time and that the US was destined to be as bad or worse than Italy, now still sing that tune when the only state that looks like Italy, is....

 

I think the bulk of the US straightened up after seeing what was happening in NYC. NYC is the perfect storm - high density, high public transit, and late in response.

 

Not to say that other places would have been AS bad, but I'd think most metropolitan areas would've been similar had they not seen what was happening in NYC and shutdown earlier in th curve.

 

Anecdotally - I was on a ski trip in early March with a healthcare professional from NYC. At that time, she was still saying this was comparable to the flu and that the media was over-hyping it. This was March 8th - plenty of time for us to have observed what was happening in Europe.

 

Obviously, her opinion changed within a week of returning, but the fact that healthcare professionals in NYC still thought that as late as early-March goes to show just how unprepared and ignorant the country/city was to the dangers.

 

For whatever reason, it's only real to most people once it hits home. And for the U.S., Washington and NYC were the first two places to really get hit and the rest of the country paid attention.

[Jurgis]

At last... another potential cure!

 

After a Homeland Security official mentioned the ability of disinfectants like bleach to kill the coronavirus on surfaces, Trump remarked on the effectiveness.

 

“And then I see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning?” Trump said during his daily press briefing at the White House. “Because you see it gets on the lungs, and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it’d be interesting to check that. So that you’re going to have to use medical doctors, but it sounds — it sounds interesting to me.”

 

Yes, I see it now: intravenous bleach infusion, bombardment with UV rays, gamma rays, etc etc and patients will be straight up cured!

 

Perhaps Donnie could personally demonstrate how this works for all of us.

 

I've heard bleach infusion and gamma radiation makes the orange skin color even more beautiful.

 

It would be a win win demonstration!

 

I'm fine if he volunteers Mikey for it too.

[arcube]

At last... another potential cure!

 

After a Homeland Security official mentioned the ability of disinfectants like bleach to kill the coronavirus on surfaces, Trump remarked on the effectiveness.

 

“And then I see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning?” Trump said during his daily press briefing at the White House. “Because you see it gets on the lungs, and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it’d be interesting to check that. So that you’re going to have to use medical doctors, but it sounds — it sounds interesting to me.”

 

Yes, I see it now: intravenous bleach infusion, bombardment with UV rays, gamma rays, etc etc and patients will be straight up cured!

 

Perhaps Donnie could personally demonstrate how this works for all of us.

 

I've heard bleach infusion and gamma radiation makes the orange skin color even more beautiful.

 

It would be a win win demonstration!

 

I'm fine if he volunteers Mikey for it too.

 

Dr. Birx's reaction was priceless!

[writser]

At last... another potential cure!

 

After a Homeland Security official mentioned the ability of disinfectants like bleach to kill the coronavirus on surfaces, Trump remarked on the effectiveness.

 

“And then I see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning?” Trump said during his daily press briefing at the White House. “Because you see it gets on the lungs, and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it’d be interesting to check that. So that you’re going to have to use medical doctors, but it sounds — it sounds interesting to me.”

 

Yes, I see it now: intravenous bleach infusion, bombardment with UV rays, gamma rays, etc etc and patients will be straight up cured! And his apologists were out defending hydroxychloroquine because this guy was behind it...

 

We now proudly celebrate ignorance in our culture--and you see the manifestation here on this forum and in the population at large. The consequences of said ignorance unfortunately does not merely fall on the ignorant, but spreads to the wider population via collateral damage. Oh well.

 

A really sad state of affairs. When he was just being elected, some smarter republicans argued that Trump's rhetoric was a deliberate case of playing 3d chess to win the election and anger the libs. And that he would soften, that they could right the ship from within, etc. Gradually this line of thinking disappeared and rather than acknowledging their mistake it morphed into something else: tacit and complicit acceptance of utter idiocy.

[thowed]

Yes, I don't want to wade in on the politics, but last night (and at other times in the briefings), he just sounds like a confused grandad, rambling on incoherently.

[UK]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-24/reckitt-warns-against-using-disinfectants-to-treat-coronavirus?srnd=premium-europe

[meiroy]

At last... another potential cure!

 

After a Homeland Security official mentioned the ability of disinfectants like bleach to kill the coronavirus on surfaces, Trump remarked on the effectiveness.

 

“And then I see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning?” Trump said during his daily press briefing at the White House. “Because you see it gets on the lungs, and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it’d be interesting to check that. So that you’re going to have to use medical doctors, but it sounds — it sounds interesting to me.”

 

Yes, I see it now: intravenous bleach infusion, bombardment with UV rays, gamma rays, etc etc and patients will be straight up cured! And his apologists were out defending hydroxychloroquine because this guy was behind it...

 

We now proudly celebrate ignorance in our culture--and you see the manifestation here on this forum and in the population at large. The consequences of said ignorance unfortunately does not merely fall on the ignorant, but spreads to the wider population via collateral damage. Oh well.

 

A really sad state of affairs. When he was just being elected, some smarter republicans argued that Trump's rhetoric was a deliberate case of playing 3d chess to win the election and anger the libs. And that they could right the ship from within. Gradually this line of thinking disappeared and rather than acknowledging their mistake it morphed into something else: tacit and complicit acceptance of utter idiocy.

 

There's nothing really new here as all along because of the way they see it, the end justifies the means. Fundamentalism. The writing has been on the wall for years now.

 

 

 

 

 

[Liberty]

The stupid sh.. we have to waste time on:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2020/04/24/coronavirus-latest-news/

 

President Trump is facing widespread backlash after musing during a White House briefing that disinfectants could be injected into coronavirus patients’ bodies to kill the virus. Medical professionals and makers of household cleaning products responded by urging people not to inject or ingest disinfectants, which are highly toxic.

The outcry over the president’s remarks came as the covid-19 death toll in the United States approached 50,000, with more than 869,000 confirmed cases. Globally, the reported death toll is nearing 200,000, and more than 2.7 million infections have been confirmed

 

Birx reaction: https://v.redd.it/048ery4q0ou41

[Spekulatius]

Yes, I don't want to wade in on the politics, but last night (and at other times in the briefings), he just sounds like a confused grandad, rambling on incoherently.

 

The best political ads the democrats  can run for the election are just going to be short clips from his daily WH COVID-19 news briefings.

[rb]

At last... another potential cure!

 

After a Homeland Security official mentioned the ability of disinfectants like bleach to kill the coronavirus on surfaces, Trump remarked on the effectiveness.

 

“And then I see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning?” Trump said during his daily press briefing at the White House. “Because you see it gets on the lungs, and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it’d be interesting to check that. So that you’re going to have to use medical doctors, but it sounds — it sounds interesting to me.”

 

Yes, I see it now: intravenous bleach infusion, bombardment with UV rays, gamma rays, etc etc and patients will be straight up cured! And his apologists were out defending hydroxychloroquine because this guy was behind it...

 

We now proudly celebrate ignorance in our culture--and you see the manifestation here on this forum and in the population at large. The consequences of said ignorance unfortunately does not merely fall on the ignorant, but spreads to the wider population via collateral damage. Oh well.

 

I read this and and first i thought that cwericb and dalas were having a bit of fun.

 

...But then I saw the video.

 

What.... the fuck?!

[clutch]

if you look back at past flu epidemics (and there were 80K deaths in US in 2018), there was more fatalities for children and non-elderly than covid.  so what we did here was panic, based upon an assumed 3-4% mortality rate of those infected, not appreciating the number of infected without symptoms was much greater than assumed, and instituted an unprecedented lock down of our entire economy, when we should have realized based upon early covid evidence that a focus upon elderly was most efficacious.  and then we ignored the elderly largely by not ordering a no-visitation policy until late in the game.

 

Okay, this is the last time I will correct you for a few weeks. The experts prediction of both mild/asymptomatic cases and IFR are accurate. Maybe it is your lack of expertise that is the issue (for example not knowing the difference between IFR and CFR)?

 

The original model presented by the White House estimated 1.5M-2.2M deaths, if there was no mitigation. Guess how many deaths there would be assuming your 0.67% "mortality rate" and an attack rate of 70% (rough estimate of infection rate needed for herd immunity)?

 

328M * 0.7 * .0067 = 1.5M

 

Seems pretty accurate to me. Maybe the experts know more about this pandemic than Cerzeca?

 

Something doesn't seem right though, so help me understand. The same White House model projected that 100,000 and 240,000 would die with the mitigation measures in place. Are they speculating that there will be a vaccine available before the US reaches the attack rate?

 

Another possible explanation -- If you flatten the curve, you might be able to avoid some deaths due to the healthcare system overflow, but I expect that the area under the curve would still be similar (compared to when you have a spike). So are they saying that they would save an order of magnitude of lives by keeping the health care system below the threshold?

 

Part of my problem with these projections is that there is no transparency or explanation whatsoever...

The reason for the discrepancy is that in the white house models and what we see is that in those models they assumed a 50% compliance with the shelter in place/whatever you may call them orders. What was observed is that the compliance rate is around 90%. So big miss on the assumption there.

 

You basically have the numbers coming below the model because the quarantine is working way better because the people are behaving much, much better than assumed. They are taking it more seriously than the government assumed and that is making the quarantine much more effective.

 

No, that doesn't address my question. I'm not questioning the discrepancy between the projection and actual data here (although that is also important). I'm curious how the experts came to project a much lower number of deaths with the mitigation in place.

 

KCLarkin suggested that the projection of 1.5M-2.2M deaths was based on:

328M * 0.7 * .0067 = 1.5M

assuming that people die until the US reaches the herd immunity, without any mitigation measures.

 

But how is the number reduced to 100,000-240,000 with the mitigation measures? Does this mean we do not reach the herd immunity in this case? Then, why would the death number stop at 100,000-240,000?

 

Are they banking on a potential cure or vaccine? If so, have they indicated this at any time?

 

There are other factors that are modeled in mitigation other than compliance such as reasonable ramp up of testing and tracing to bring the overall R0 down during and after the shelter in place is slowly removed. Clearly experts were wrong on how dysfunctional the policy response will be even after 2 months of this.

 

Those measures would slow down the infection rate, not the total number of deaths. Unless you get a vaccine or cure, the number of deaths would simply get stretched out over time. The area under the flattened curve can still the same as a sharp one.

 

So the projections must have taken account some scenario that the virus would be mostly irradicated. Or not? None of the journalists ever asked this question??

 

Maybe the projections are time bound? What is the time period then?

 

I think a lot of people should pay attention to other than Faux news and do a proper DD into what is actually being done and reported. These model (one by white house and other) have been very well reported. And they get updated as new data comes in -

 

http://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america

 

http://www.healthdata.org/covid/data-downloads

 

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf

 

Well, I live in Canada and don't watch Fox. And not sure what this question has anything to do with it.

 

The first two resources you share show data and not any of the assumptions/parameters used in the models. So they don't answer my question.

 

I did find an answer in the paper you shared:

"The major challenge of suppression is that this type of intensive intervention package –

or something equivalently effective at reducing transmission – will need to be maintained until a

vaccine becomes available (potentially 18 months or more) – given that we predict that transmission

will quickly rebound if interventions are relaxed."

 

If this is the assumption behind the government's projections, does the public know? You can't expect people to look up and read these scientific papers.

 

Also, say we keep on with this intervention approach for 18 months -- do people realize what the total death numbers would be like IF there was no vaccine? In the end, it will be pretty much similar to the number as the case without the intervention (minus the number of deaths due to healthcare system overload). That is because the number of people who get infected and die will still be the same, just stretched over a much longer period -- the area under the two curves are about the same. All this while the entire economy is shut down.

 

 

So really, this intervention approach is in there to buy us time. Hoping that a vaccine is developed. It's a reasonable approach given that we could potentially save more lives this way than just letting everyone gets infected within a short period of time. But I never hear any government official or press communicates this important assumption... which leads me to believe that most of the public do not know what the "flatten the curve" strategy really entails.

[Dalal.Holdings]

At last... another potential cure!

 

After a Homeland Security official mentioned the ability of disinfectants like bleach to kill the coronavirus on surfaces, Trump remarked on the effectiveness.

 

“And then I see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning?” Trump said during his daily press briefing at the White House. “Because you see it gets on the lungs, and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it’d be interesting to check that. So that you’re going to have to use medical doctors, but it sounds — it sounds interesting to me.”

 

Yes, I see it now: intravenous bleach infusion, bombardment with UV rays, gamma rays, etc etc and patients will be straight up cured! And his apologists were out defending hydroxychloroquine because this guy was behind it...

 

We now proudly celebrate ignorance in our culture--and you see the manifestation here on this forum and in the population at large. The consequences of said ignorance unfortunately does not merely fall on the ignorant, but spreads to the wider population via collateral damage. Oh well.

 

I read this and and first i thought that cwericb and dalas were having a bit of fun.

 

...But then I saw the video.

 

What.... the fuck?!

 

This is no joke. The real joke is that some people keep rationalizing/defending this guy’s conduct.

 

50K dead. Not much else to say.

[Investor20]

There is no need to do all these complicated calculations to compare flu and Covid.

 

Take Sweden with low mitigation efforts.

 

They had 213 deaths/million or 72000 deaths for 340 million (US population).

 

Take Japan with low mitigation efforts.

 

They had 3 deaths/million or 1,020 deaths for 340 million (US population).

 

When Dr. Fauci said Covid has 1.0% deaths rate, ten times more than Flu, that to most people would mean 10 times 50,000 flu deaths or predicted 500,000 deaths for US without mitigation.

 

The 500K deaths prediction by Dr. Fauci is off with Sweden by 7 fold, let alone Japan by 500 fold, both countries with low mitigation efforts.

 

And Japan had very low mitigation.

 

https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2020/04/826fe0930a43-only-18-of-japanese-stopped-going-to-work-due-to-covid-19-poll.html?via=webuproar

Only 18 percent of people in Japan have stopped going to work due to the novel coronavirus, the lowest level in 26 countries and territories covered in a recent survey.

The United States stood at 32 percent.

[DooDiligence]

At last... another potential cure!

 

After a Homeland Security official mentioned the ability of disinfectants like bleach to kill the coronavirus on surfaces, Trump remarked on the effectiveness.

 

“And then I see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning?” Trump said during his daily press briefing at the White House. “Because you see it gets on the lungs, and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it’d be interesting to check that. So that you’re going to have to use medical doctors, but it sounds — it sounds interesting to me.”

 

Yes, I see it now: intravenous bleach infusion, bombardment with UV rays, gamma rays, etc etc and patients will be straight up cured! And his apologists were out defending hydroxychloroquine because this guy was behind it...

 

We now proudly celebrate ignorance in our culture--and you see the manifestation here on this forum and in the population at large. The consequences of said ignorance unfortunately does not merely fall on the ignorant, but spreads to the wider population via collateral damage. Oh well.

 

I read this and and first i thought that cwericb and dalas were having a bit of fun.

 

...But then I saw the video.

 

What.... the fuck?!

 

This is no joke. The real joke is that some people keep rationalizing/defending this guy’s conduct.

 

50K dead. Not much else to say.

 

"Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer claimed Friday that the controversy over Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s suggestion that states should be allowed to declare bankruptcy amid the pandemic has given new momentum to a federal bailout."

 

If we get another 4 years of this fat orange pinhead, the USA will likely be divided & destroyed.

 

Hopefully McConnell & his ilk will get the boot as well.

[bobp]

If you've ever wondered for whom we put do not drink labels on bleach you've found your man.

[DooDiligence]

Pro tip, for anyone who's been contemplating shoving a flashlight up their keister to kill COVID.

As tempting as it may sound, use a candle instead.

 

Sincerely,

 

Donnie

[StubbleJumper]

If you've ever wondered for whom we put do not drink labels on bleach you've found your man.

 

 

Christ, I just about shot coffee out my nose when I read that!

 

 

SJ

[ERICOPOLY]

It will be interesting to watch for the orange to disappear now that he's been thoroughly schooled on the effectiveness of light therapy on viral infections.

 

[Liberty]

Podcast episode on who's organizing the lockdown protests..

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/22/podcasts/the-daily/coronavirus-lockdown-protests.html

 

Of course a bunch of wealthy people and political operatives and law firms directly tied to the white house:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/22/podcasts/the-daily/coronavirus-lockdown-protests.html

[Investor20]

Pro tip, for anyone who's been contemplating shoving a flashlight up their keister to kill COVID.

As tempting as it may sound, use a candle instead.

 

Sincerely,

 

Donnie

 

You guys should not talk junk without knowing what you are saying.

 

Photodynamic therapy is an established therapy.  Its used to treat cancers in lung or digestive systems by shinning light onto the tumors using optical fiber inserted into the body with light wavelength that the tumor is sensitive. Read about it below.

 

https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/lung-cancer/treatment/photodynamic-therapy-pdt

 

You could definitely shine UV light that the virus is sensitive to in lungs.  Is it effective?  I dont know.

 

Anyway, Trump was asking a question to the scientist "may be you can, may be you can't", means he actually doesnt know it.

 

 

 

 

[Liberty]

There is no need to do all these complicated calculations to compare flu and Covid.

 

Take Sweden with low mitigation efforts.

 

They had 213 deaths/million or 72000 deaths for 340 million (US population).

 

Take Japan with low mitigation efforts.

 

They had 3 deaths/million or 1,020 deaths for 340 million (US population).

 

When Dr. Fauci said Covid has 1.0% deaths rate, ten times more than Flu, that to most people would mean 10 times 50,000 flu deaths or predicted 500,000 deaths for US without mitigation.

 

The 500K deaths prediction by Dr. Fauci is off with Sweden by 7 fold, let alone Japan by 500 fold, both countries with low mitigation efforts.

 

And Japan had very low mitigation.

 

https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2020/04/826fe0930a43-only-18-of-japanese-stopped-going-to-work-due-to-covid-19-poll.html?via=webuproar

Only 18 percent of people in Japan have stopped going to work due to the novel coronavirus, the lowest level in 26 countries and territories covered in a recent survey.

The United States stood at 32 percent.

 

You do know that this is just the beginning of the pandemic, its been hitting most western countries for 1-2 months, and it's a bit early to calculate IFR and CFR, right?

 

Also, to compare Japan with the US is funny. Here's a very collectivist country where people follow rules to a fault, don't shake hands, wear masks, where everything is constantly cleaned and social distance is the normal state of things... Does that sound like the US?