John Doe wrote in news:r9gne5$l0a$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:
snip
You really are an abject idiot, Doe boy.
Brown is one of the smartest scientists in this group.
Unlike you, a twerp who adds group names to your retarded posts.
John Doe wrote in news:r9gnmc$l0a$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:
No. He did NOT say that at all.
WE ALL AROUND THE WORLD all but had it beat, and the anti-vaxers, of which all are retarded, and oh looky all are religious.
Remember the snake bite rattler preacher? Yeah... he died from snake bite.
We were doing fine eradicating these, and the "God will look over us" idiots brought it back.
So not responsible for the disease, but most certainly responsible for the fact that we have not completed fully achievable eradication efforts YET.
IOW STILL HERE THEIR FAULT.
AND WE MOST CERTAINLY DO KNOW WHY. It is fully documented.
There is a huge amount about this virus that we don't yet know - despite the large numbers of cases, it has not been around for very long. That is the whole point.
The only thing we can be sure of is that we cannot bet on it acting in some particular way.
/Maybe/ it will die down in the summer months. /Maybe/ it will increase. /Maybe/ it will mutate into something worse.
There has been /one/ influenza that was worse, the Spanish Flu. It killed more people than WWI. It didn't provoke the reactions we have now, because it was 100 years ago and in the middle of a world war, and because no one knew how to deal with it.
Look at the graph for New York. Normally, they have about 1300 deaths per week - including the flu. They have been peaking at nearly 7000. In places where it hits hard, that means four times as many people are dying as they do from all other causes put together. If it were not for the restrictions that are in place, every city in the USA would be like New York.
Why would you ask that? You seem to specialize in promoting ideas supporte d by zero evidence!
Which flus were worse than this coronavirus??? I don't recall any. I expe ct you are going to compare the total infection or death toll of a flu that lasted for some years to this disease that is just getting warmed up and s o far has infected and killed only a fraction of what will become the ultim ate death cost. That's what you have done so far... Only 20,000, the flu kills more than that every year! Only 40,000, influenza often takes larger tolls. Only 60,000, there have been flus worse than that! Only 80,000... well, now you are just claiming there have been some worse without any ide a of when other than 1918. That definitely created a major pan-ic in respo nse to the pan-demic.
Now we know enough to deal with this disease, but we can't seem to educate enough people to understand how bad it can be. We will see what happens in June as the country opens back up exposing more and more people to the vir us.
It's a good time to be in the medical business. Trump is sending a lot of business their way.
-- Rick C. -+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging -+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
How can something be unclear and false?
Why don't you complain about the font, too?
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc Science teaches us to doubt. Claude Bernard
er
cs
s
Throughout history the only factors that hit the world population in number s that are noticeable in a graph are diseases. None of the world wars has ever had much impact on population counts. The reason is obvious. Disease can spread through a population at exponential rates often with no cure or way to prevent it other than isolation.
They understood the importance of isolation in Medieval times and would shu n anyone from a city that had the plague lest they bring it with them. We can't seem to grasp the fact that we are responsible for the rapid spread o f this disease and the lack of the numbers lowering to a point where we can wipe it out. At least some of us can't grasp much about it.
-- Rick C. ++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging ++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Chart, halfway down.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc Science teaches us to doubt. Claude Bernard
There are several "charts" halfway down the page. It's not obvious which one John Larkin might have had in mind, or what he imagines it might mean to somebody who could think better than he does.
He does seem to have learned that it is safer for him to be unspecific.
The likeliest "chart" is labelled "The difference between the influenza mortality age distributions of the 1918 epidemic and normal epidemics." but that doesn't address any point that he might be trying to make.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
You cheated, using a plural when only one influenza pandemic qualifies. I'm dubious that was a slip, more likely it was a weasel-word trick to suggest multiples, but which meaning to take? It's unclear.
On Tuesday, May 12, 2020 at 10:09:22 AM UTC-7, snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrot e:
sponsible officials in government even knew it existed. The lesson learned is don't even think about lifting lockdown until adequate testing surveilla nce is in place. Why? Because second wave can be orders of magnitude worse than the first one.
html
Testing is a lagging indicator as it shows how much the virus has spread (m aybe, if done enough), but does not stop it from spreading. It is like usin g PE ratios to predict future company performance. Of course it is very use ful for hospitals to properly treat patients, but they were doing that w/o testing anyway.
There have been other flu's that have killed more people than Corona has /so far/. But that does not make them worse. It is only because we have lockdowns and travel restrictions across most of the world that this pandemic has only killed 300K+ people so far, in its first couple of months of pandemic.
Do you really not understand how this all works? Do you think national leaders across the world are locking down their countries for fun? Any responsible leader is doing everything they can to stop this raging through their population on a scale similar to or worse than the Spanish flu. In countries where there is an edjit in the top job, like USA and Brazil, it is up to state governors to do the job - but they are mostly doing what they can.
Corona is worse than any of these, except possibly the Spanish flu (it remains to be seen how they compare).
Lol, JL understands it better than most of America's leaders do, he's surely above average compared to them.
Maybe we are just doling out the fuel to the bonfire. The lockdowns must end, or we'll starve to death. When they end, there will be a fresh supply of fuel for the virus. That is the explanation for the multiple-bounce, W-curve predictions. Of course.
Nobody seems to, but nonlinear systems dynamics is my business.
Do you think national
No, because they don't have the guts or sense to optimize. They don't want to seem to be responsible for a single death. Cuomo said that.
Any
It doesn't seem to do that.
In countries where there is an edjit in the top job, like USA and
Look it up.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc Science teaches us to doubt. Claude Bernard
Nobody understands it now; maybe nobody can.
There is a large component of the US population that wants to get back to work and are willing to take a small risk to do that. Many are just doing it. I walk over the US101 freeway every day. A month go I made crossings and saw not a single car in either direction. It's jammed now.
Two psychological factors are at work: an initial, fear-driven overestimate of risk, and a slower effect "I haven't got this yet so I must be immune" or equivalently "I'm bored of being scared."
That second effect, in extreme, kills rock climbers and wing suiters. Every risk survived increases their risk threshold.
But do people still say LoL? How old *are* you?
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc Science teaches us to doubt. Claude Bernard
e:
other
ay.
ion
emics
to
less
ite
at
n
Who is starving? The only impact to the food supply I've seen is from meat factories being shut down from high infection rates. Workers don't want t o work if they are going to catch the disease and possibly be seriously mai med or die, or bring it home to their families so some of them can be serio usly maimed or die.
When we think of our food supply we like to think of sunshine softly fallin g on green crops in waving fields. The reality is most of our food product ion is dirty and not terribly sanitary such as meat packing plants. Just t he term "meat packing"... That's just what I'm looking for, packed meat! lol
The green crops growing in softly sunlit fields seem to be unaffected by th e shut down and hopefully will not be affected by the virus. I think most of the meat eaters can stand to eat a bit less of the bovine and porcine pr oducts, fish and fowl. Poor zucchini and tomato, we may end up eating them to extinction... nah, we'll just grow more on that huge expanse of soil re couped from growing crops to feed the non-human animals. The efficiency of animal nutrition is atrocious. It's like plopping an ECL gate onto a CMOS , coin cell powered board.
Lol! Starving!!! Indeed.
-- Rick C. --- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging --- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
e:
That's what the US and the UK seem to be doing, but not acting effectively enough to prevent new infections.
ll be a fresh supply of fuel for the virus. That is the explanation for the multiple-bounce, W-curve predictions. Of course.
Lock down doesn't seem to have much effect on mechanised agriculture. Meat packing plants are still working in Australia, though a few of them have ha d to close down after showing up as Vcovid-19 infection clusters.
Lock down - on it's own - doesn't seem to be enough to stop the epidemic. V igorous contact tracing is - at least in South Korea - and lock down does m ake contact tracing easier, and makes the subsequent 14-day isolation of th ose people who might have got infected by contact with an infected person r ather more acceptable.
Done right, you don't have to lock down for more than six weeks to clear th e locked-down population of the infection. You will have to jump on new inf ections if they show up, but contact tracing is enough to stop them starting a new epidemic.
It may be your business, but you have been woeful at understanding the impl ications of exponential growth, and keep on wittering on about Gaussian cur ves when they don't show up anywhere in the data.
Cuomo finally seems to have developed enough sense to hire and train an cre w of contact tracers. Why it took him so long when South Korea had demonstr ated that it worked back in March. Washington State already had them in Jan uary - which may explain why the first US Covid-19 patient - in Seattle on the 15th January - didn't start the US epidemic.
It hasn't got there yet. John Larkin really doesn't comprehend what a toler ably steady 30,000 per day new case rate implies.
John Larkin doesn't understand what the data means, so he think it supports his point of view. He compares the numbers killed after the Spanish flu ep idemic had run it course - which is to say had infected enough people to p roduce herd immunity - and can see that they are smaller than number Covid-
19 has killed so far, even though the total number infected is about a fact or of one hundred lower than that necessary to produce herd immunity.-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Lots of people understand it better than John Larkin - he's just too much of an egomaniac to admit it, even to himself.
Nobody has enough information to make an accurate estimate of their personal risk. Prudent people recognise that lock down reduces their risk of getting infected, and the risk that they might pass the infection on to other people. Rational anxiety may form part of the calculation, but certainly doesn't invalidate the conclusion.
That's less rational.
And makes it more likely that they will get killed next time they take that risk.
He claims to be in his thirties. Lol does get posted here from time to time.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Ricky C wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:
You forgot the comma after idiot. D'oh!
Er... no, the estimate of risk is data-driven. The slower effect being boredom, I suppose is accurate. No rational person thinks he "must be immune".
In the US, the risk was underestimated (and the Donald has publicly blamed WHO, and China, and will get around to blaming seventeen other bystanders before this is over). The CDC doesn't recommend action on the impulse of boredom alone, there's some data-dependence in the recommendations for lifting restrictions.
The data is terrible, and peoples' actions are seldom rational.
After careful experimentation, I have determined that the birds that frequent our kitchen deck prefer Classic Fritos to any other snack. Initially they were very afraid of me and would wait until I had returned indoors for many minutes before they would flit in and snatch one. Now they practically rip them out of my hands, and linger on the deck trying to decide which one looks tastiest, or take a while trying to pick up three to fly away with. How do they know I'm not fooling them and will kill them when they get too close? "Familiarity breeds contempt" is true.
Turns out some people seem to be immune. Antibodies that are effective against C19 have been found in years-old stored blood samples. That makes sense. Naming a thing "novel" doesn't make it totally different.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc Science teaches us to doubt. Claude Bernard
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.