Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
Project Willow » 06 Apr 2020 10:15 wrote:Not sure if this has been posted yet.
“Well, I’m not paid by the government, so I’m entitled to actually do science. If the government, if there had been no intervention, the epidemic would have been over, like every other respiratory disease epidemic.”
Epidemiologist Dr. Knut Wittkowski makes the case that social distancing may result in higher death rates among the elderly as the rest of us are not able to develop herd immunity as we usually do within about 4 weeks of a respiratory epidemic.
JackRiddler » 12 Apr 2020 20:44 wrote:Definitively reliable data on actual death rates from C19 infection might tell you why, but that has yet to arrive. It's why I prefer Ioannides's more hedged version for the moment.
stickdog99 » 13 Apr 2020 08:58 wrote:JackRiddler » 12 Apr 2020 20:44 wrote:Definitively reliable data on actual death rates from C19 infection might tell you why, but that has yet to arrive. It's why I prefer Ioannides's more hedged version for the moment.
I have been playing thought experiments both ways (actual d[vimeo][/vimeo]eadly threat vs. purposefully overblown somewhat more deadly flu "threat") since this crisis began.
Either way, the current "response" -- hide yourself inside indefinitely (or else!) while we effectively do nothing to increase our capacity to handle a respiratory pandemic -- doesn't add up.
Were our current situation actually so deadly, wouldn't rich and powerful people would be demanWding that we implement steps to mitigate this pandemic (as well as future pandemics) beyond hide yourselves inside indefinitely or else?
Project Willow » 06 Apr 2020 20:15 wrote:Not sure if this has been posted yet.
“Well, I’m not paid by the government, so I’m entitled to actually do science. If the government, if there had been no intervention, the epidemic would have been over, like every other respiratory disease epidemic.”
Epidemiologist Dr. Knut Wittkowski makes the case that social distancing may result in higher death rates among the elderly as the rest of us are not able to develop herd immunity as we usually do within about 4 weeks of a respiratory epidemic.
Joe Hillshoist » 14 Apr 2020 08:33 wrote:Project Willow » 06 Apr 2020 20:15 wrote:Not sure if this has been posted yet.
“Well, I’m not paid by the government, so I’m entitled to actually do science. If the government, if there had been no intervention, the epidemic would have been over, like every other respiratory disease epidemic.”
Epidemiologist Dr. Knut Wittkowski makes the case that social distancing may result in higher death rates among the elderly as the rest of us are not able to develop herd immunity as we usually do within about 4 weeks of a respiratory epidemic.
So Im four minutes into this and I have some issues with it. On one hand we should only lock the old and vulnerable away. We shouldn't lock down as it will extend the epidemic. Europe has locked down.
One the other hand the epidemic is over anyway.
That's a bit of a double bind.
Also ... We have experience with SARS and MERS, both coronaviruses. One has a 10% mortality rate, the other is over 36%.
We're expected to potentially wear that many deaths just to build herd immunity. We might not have a herd left. Furthermore this virus is far more infectious than either of those two. And people are infectious before they show symptoms.
It just strikes me that its a little bit blase considering no one really knows what they are draling with yet.
I'll watch some more. But before I do ... China and SKorea are reporting what seems to be a secondary wave of infections. So the epidemic isnt over and this wave seems to follow relaxing of the isolation and quarantine policies.
What dis you expect? We cannot stop this virus from working its way through our populations. All social distancing can do is dampen and prolong the curve.
Joe Hillshoist » 14 Apr 2020 08:50 wrote:So I lasted another two minutes and he just seems to be talking shit. He doesn't take onto account the exponential rate of infection, just assumes it'll plateau where it is now. There's no where near enough testing in the US to have a clue what the real infection rates are and deaths at home are up by eight to ten times.
The us is testing with positive rates that are very high. Is most of the people tested have the virus. If you extrapolate that across the whole population then the numbers are extensive.
I'm not really prepared to waste any more time on this video because of that. It's either sloppy or deliberately misleading.
stickdog99 » 15 Apr 2020 05:06 wrote:Joe Hillshoist » 14 Apr 2020 08:50 wrote:So I lasted another two minutes and he just seems to be talking shit. He doesn't take onto account the exponential rate of infection, just assumes it'll plateau where it is now. There's no where near enough testing in the US to have a clue what the real infection rates are and deaths at home are up by eight to ten times.
The us is testing with positive rates that are very high. Is most of the people tested have the virus. If you extrapolate that across the whole population then the numbers are extensive.
I'm not really prepared to waste any more time on this video because of that. It's either sloppy or deliberately misleading.
You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what our current interventions can achieve at best, which is only to dampen the curve of infection so that our healthcare facilities are not overrun with so many victims at once that they cannot handle the load. The same number of people (billions) will be infected regardless over time. There is no intervention that can stop this from occurring.
Again, do you actually think that any intervention can stop this virus from infecting the vast majority of any population eventually? Even if we all hide in our homes until we are given forced vaccinations, the vaccine itself will be introducing the virus into us in some sort of attenuated form.
0_0 » 18 Apr 2020 22:49 wrote:Hey Joe, I understand you're in Australia and that Australia is in lockdown. Can you explain to me what the plan is exactly? Are you guys going to stay in lockdown until the virus has left Australia? And what then? Are you going to hermetically seal your continent with no incoming tourists or goods allowed ever? Or are you guys waiting for bloodtests for everyone wanting to travel, track and trace devices for the whole population and/or mass vaccination? I am genuinely curious.
stickdog99 » Sun Apr 12, 2020 3:35 pm wrote:
Thanks for this. I don't understand why I should disagree this guy. Can somebody tell me why?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 48 guests