COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events - Page 762

starting strength gym
Page 762 of 1036 FirstFirst ... 262662712752760761762763764772812862 ... LastLast
Results 7,611 to 7,620 of 10358

Thread: COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events

  1. #7611
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Murphysboro, IL
    Posts
    30,143

    Default

    • wichita falls texas february 2021 seminar
    • starting strength seminar april 2021
    • starting strength seminar february 2021
    Quote Originally Posted by Jovan Dragisic View Post
    It seems Western Europe is determined to enter a strong statist era, unlike anything in history. My guess is that they want to increase public debt by issuing as many state and EU bonds as possible, thus trying to get the euro closer on par with the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. They probably see this as the last chance they will get. In order to do this, they need to find a reason to run up the debt by fucking up threat economies as much as possible. In normal times, you would get the US treasury secretary or maybe even the president come and explain the rules of the game - think Obama and Geithner during the euro crisis. But we are not living in normal times, are we? Since the US is heavily divided internally and will have to run a huge deficit of its own starting next week, the time is ripe. It’s as if Keynes, Stalin and Alexander Hamilton had a bastard child that came back eighty years later with a vengeance.
    Methinks you need to leave Hamilton out of this. Now Jefferson? That fucker was capable of anything.

    Even if true, so what? Those voting districts with the population density to use voting machines will vote reliably blue anyway.

  2. #7612
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David A. Rowe View Post
    How do you just talk past the obvious, JF? I only had time for a cursory look today before linking. That's the article discussing the paper (which I also linked to save time). Bacterial pneumonia is the most fatal element across many, many diseases -- especially in elderly populations. Especially aerosol respiratory viruses, and it has been this way historically.

    SARS-COV-2 may be the gun, but bacterial pneumonia is the bullet. Why masks, then? What do they do for:

    1. Physically expelling bacteria and fluid through normal breathing and coughing.

    2. Preventing the spread of bacteria already present in the throat, mouth and nose.

    First of all, you are assuming that the observations about bacterial pneumonia and influenza in the PRE-ANTIBIOTIC ERA have some applicability to covid in 2020. Thats quite a leap.

    You imply, I think, that bacteria are the real culprit in covid because of masks, because masks can get full of saliva and probably bacteria, and maybe its the bacteria from masks that are killing people, not covid. Again, a huge leap for which there should be ample evidence if it were true, but there is not.

    All the germs that are in your mask are also already in your mouth and throat all the time, since thats where they came from. Your immune system keeps them at bay. Unless, perhaps, you have something else causing immunosuppression or inflammation that allows the bacteria to flourish. Like maybe you aspirate some stomach acid, or have HIV, or have a viral infection of the respiratory tract like flu or maybe covid.

    Masks probably do accumulate germs, but theyre the germs you already have, and they are already making (or not making) you sick before you put on the mask. That seems obvious to me. If you have evidence showing otherwise, Im open to changing my opinion. But the paper you linked to didnt say what you claimed it did.

    Masks are annoying, and if theyre harmful its only politically. Nobody using a mask properly is getting sick from it.

  3. #7613
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    44,194

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark E. Hurling View Post
    Those voting districts with the population density to use voting machines will vote reliably blue anyway.
    Wichita County uses voting machines. They are ubiquitous now.

    Quote Originally Posted by jfsully View Post
    Nobody using a mask properly is getting sick from it.
    1. How many people are using a mask properly? You can't even get the nursing staff to wash their hands, much less rely on the 105s to use a mask properly.

    2. The premise of the whole goddamn thing is false: COVID-19 has an average survival rate of 99.97%, making it a disease the general public needs to go ahead and contract, not avoid.

  4. #7614
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jfsully View Post
    Which of these papers discusses masks? I'm not finding it.
    Quote Originally Posted by jfsully
    First of all, you are assuming that the observations about bacterial pneumonia and influenza in the PRE-ANTIBIOTIC ERA have some applicability to covid in 2020. Thats quite a leap.
    You are being rather obtuse. That leap is the main point of the paper, stated in the abstract:
    If severe pandemic influenza is largely a problem of viral-bacterial copathogenesis, pandemic planning needs to go beyond addressing the viral cause alone (e.g., influenza vaccines and antiviral drugs). Prevention, diagnosis, prophylaxis, and treatment of secondary bacterial pneumonia, as well as stockpiling of antibiotics and bacterial vaccines, should also be high priorities for pandemic planning.
    This paper is (casually) cited not for its content on masks, but for its attention to second-order factors.
    These are utterly ignored in our pandemic response. It is possible that masks, through their primary, overt mechanism, inhibit the spread of disease. (Intuitively. Its complicated.) It is also possible that the perfunctory, 2-week old masks sitting in car door sills are an unintended, covert risk to health, not to mention other aspects of existence. What is most evident is the shocking inability to openly, rigorously account for both costs and benefits of mandatory public health measures.

  5. #7615
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    768

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva Kaul View Post
    You are being rather obtuse. That leap is the main point of the paper, stated in the abstract:

    This paper is (casually) cited not for its content on masks, but for its attention to second-order factors.
    These are utterly ignored in our pandemic response. It is possible that masks, through their primary, overt mechanism, inhibit the spread of disease. (Intuitively. Its complicated.) It is also possible that the perfunctory, 2-week old masks sitting in car door sills are an unintended, covert risk to health, not to mention other aspects of existence. What is most evident is the shocking inability to openly, rigorously account for both costs and benefits of mandatory public health measures.
    Thank you, Shiva. And no offense was intended, JF. Sometimes I don't express my thoughts well in writing.

    My point is... the total body of evidence for and against is lacking, and there are far more (and larger) assumptions required to accept masks as valid. There are some assumptions in what I say, but here's the rub:

    If I'm right, masks were murderous. If I'm wrong, then they were just worthless. Both are travesties. And if people were right about masks, then Rip has pointed out that no body wears the damn things "properly" in the best of times.

  6. #7616
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    1. How many people are using a mask properly? You can't even get the nursing staff to wash their hands, much less rely on the 105s to use a mask properly.
    Let me elaborate: nobody using a mask properly, and the vast majority using the mask improperly, are not getting sick from the mask. I havent heard of a confirmed illness due to a mask, but theres always somebody out there doing something like wearing underwear on their face to make a point, right?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    2. The premise of the whole goddamn thing is false: COVID-19 has an average survival rate of 99.97%, making it a disease the general public needs to go ahead and contract, not avoid.
    Well, the number in the US is probably more like 99.3%, as the overall IFR is looking like 0.7% in the US, and around 1% for developed countries in general, as some European countries have more old people than we do. Of course this is because the survival is about 95% for people over 70 and essentially 100% for kids, so the overall IFR isnt that useful. Healthy young people shouldnt worry for themselves if they get covid. Older people are rolling a 1/20 chance of death if infected, and a higher chance of getting pretty sick but surviving, and should act accordingly, whatever that means to them.


    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva Kaul View Post
    You are being rather obtuse. That leap is the main point of the paper, stated in the abstract:

    This paper is (casually) cited not for its content on masks, but for its attention to second-order factors.
    These are utterly ignored in our pandemic response. It is possible that masks, through their primary, overt mechanism, inhibit the spread of disease. (Intuitively. Its complicated.) It is also possible that the perfunctory, 2-week old masks sitting in car door sills are an unintended, covert risk to health, not to mention other aspects of existence. What is most evident is the shocking inability to openly, rigorously account for both costs and benefits of mandatory public health measures.
    The paper was mentioned thusly:

    Fauci, legitimately, co-authored a paper discussing how masks exacerbated the primary condition driving fatality in Spanish Flu: bacterial pneumonia.
    Except the paper didnt mention masks. So, casually misleading, sure.

    My other point was that bacterial pneumonia is not likely to be nearly the factor today as compared to 1918, precisely because we know about antibiotics. Nobody working in doctors offices or hospitals caring for patients with breathing problems is unaware of the likelihood of bacterial pneumonia as a cofactor.

    Yes, there is a theoretical risk of illness from moldy masks, or whatever, but this remains theoretical. If your mask is gross, wash it or throw it out. Not hard. Mask use is very high up here in Massachusetts, but we are not seeing any pattern yet of mask-related illness. Exactly how helpful masks are to contain spread of Covid is debatable, but the downsides arent health-related.

  7. #7617
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    RS WY
    Posts
    919

    Default

    Excess Deaths Associated with COVID-19

    Anybody looked at the cdc excess mortality data?

    1) it looks like covid excess mortality is converging with standard threshold

    2) highest category for excess deaths is Alzheimer disease and dementia

    excess.jpg
    dimentia.jpg

  8. #7618
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    America
    Posts
    128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    IF???
    Hilarious if it wasn't so true.

    "So why does it really matter if somebody pretends to be Kamala Harris? Kamala Harris herself is pretending to be Kamala Harris. The cold-blooded prosecutor sending people to state prison for marijuana offenses has become the proud pot-smoking crusader for criminal justice reform. The privileged mixed-race scion of a Stanford professor and an Indian cancer researcher now poses as a devout Baptist who loves Tupac. Given Harriss abominable polling numbers last year, its entirely possible that an actor will be able to play the role better than the candidate herself. In fact, the only downside to having a Kamala Harris impersonator is that it seems like a suboptimal use of resources. The campaigns would be far better off training an army of body doubles for more popular Democrats like Barack Obama, Bernie Sanders, or The Rock. The last thing the Biden campaign needs to do is remind everyone that come January shes as likely to be president as Biden himself."

    Will the real Kamala Harris please stand up? | Spectator USA

  9. #7619
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    335

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David A. Rowe View Post
    And if people were right about masks, then Rip has pointed out that no body wears the damn things "properly" in the best of times.
    Thats something that has come up in this thread previously, and is why most studies on masks are laughable (due to lab simulations.)

    I will repeat, NO SCIENTIST WORKING IN A BSL 3 or 4 LAB WOULD EVER WEAR A CLOTH MASK.

    Why is that? Seriously, why not? A handkerchief? A sock? Surgical masks do help surgeons to keep from spitting on their patients open wounds and they also protect from back splatter on the surgeon.

    When it comes to aerosolized viral particles, its laughable any physician would think masks work on the street, in a grocery store, in a pub.

    And alas, like you implied, wearing a mask (that doesnt work) improperly really doesnt work at all.

    When Trump got the Rona, the media went ballistic saying he got it because he never wore a mask.

    But masks protect others, not you!

  10. #7620
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    44,194

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by jfsully View Post
    Older people are rolling a 1/20 chance of death if infected, and a higher chance of getting pretty sick but surviving, and should act accordingly, whatever that means to them.
    But they're not being allowed to, because this is a deadly pandemic that kills everybody. For example, they might choose to see their kids one last time, but they're not being allowed to.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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