Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

[Grizzly]

An American Respiratory therapist exposes the truth, really interesting stuff.

[overcoming hope]

is it becoming more and more likely that Our Furor DJT is set up as history's biggest patsy?

aside from the pathological narcissism and the criminal incompetence and self-delusional idiocy and everything else

it's one thing to be an imbecile and quite another to take the fall for the utter collapse of, well, everything

yes, I have thought the same as far as shifting blame from the system to this individual what luck that this guy is in charge, will be very easy to frame all fuck ups as coming from the anomaly of Trump instead of critiquing the system. Maybe I missed it, but anyone else been thinking about all those microbiologists that died years ago in a short period of time, I have no theories, but they popped into my mind at the beginning of this. Any hoo, It all sort of has the contradictory September 11th vibe of, 'remain vigilant at all times and if you see something say something and also get back to your normal routine and enjoy yourself.'

[liminalOyster]

Jack is this compatible with the CA antibody data from earlier this week?

Doesn't .1 put us in swine flu territory?

[Project Willow]

Dr. Erickson from Bakersfield California press briefing on their local ABC channel. Some paraphrasing from the video:

“We’ve studied this, each of us, for twenty years, and … we ask, are we following the science?

“When I look at the [current] data, do we still need to shelter in place? Emphatically no. We need testing and to get people back to work.

“The secondary effects, the child abuse, the domestic violence, alcoholism, loss of income, all of these are a significantly more detrimental threat to society than a virus that is similar in mortality to the seasonal flu.

“I can go into Costco and I can shop with people, and there are a hundred people in there, but I can’t go into Cafe Rio. Big businesses are open, little businesses are not, there’s no science behind that. That’s not science, there are other factors in play, but it’s not science.

“We need our hospitals and our furloughed doctors back on deck. There are hospitals that have closed two floors. When we lift this thing we will have significant disease. The data is showing us it is time to lift, so what’s preventing that?

“We need to put measures in place so economic shutdown like this does not happen again. We quarantine the sick, not the healthy. If you’re going to dance on somebody’s constitutional rights, you better have a good scientific reason, and not just theory.

[8bitagent]

is it becoming more and more likely that Our Furor DJT is set up as history's biggest patsy?

aside from the pathological narcissism and the criminal incompetence and self-delusional idiocy and everything else

it's one thing to be an imbecile and quite another to take the fall for the utter collapse of, well, everything

Bingo. Actually gives me chills to read as it's exactly the conclusion I was feeling in 2015 and a bit before. I wrote this 9 years ago about Trump looking like he'll be the next Republican president megastar, a few weeks later a humiliated Trump looked on as Obama spent most of his Correspondents Dinner monologue embarrassing him...all as Seals Team 6 went on their bin Laden raid, killing bin Ladens family and crashing an experimental helicopter in Abottabad Pakistan that was stolen by the Chinese government. viewtopic.php?f=8&t=31727

I mean did anyone see Back to the Future 2 in 1989? As the movie progresses, Donald Trump rules over a collapsed dystopic America from one of his casinos. I absolutely believe Donald Trump was meant to be the willing manchurian maestro MC game show tv host for the main event apocalypse collapse of America and the world. If people think Trump wondering if ingesting cleaning products on live tv could be "something interesting" today, just wait The mainstream MSNBCNN viewer, Fox News viewer, etc or even Chomsky-esque Atlantic columnist has no idea of the real horror show game plan.

:cheers: Hello friends, acquaintances, and frenemies alike!!

I've been seeing so many old screennames since I started lurking in February and I'm nostalgic for the bad old days of 2001 through 2008. The urgency and panic I felt then over 9/11 and the Great Recession seems almost quaint compared to the sheer terror I feel today about the Covid 19 pandemic and what may come of it all.

Is it possible that different strains of the virus are (partly) accounting for the wildly different experiences and perceptions everyone is having about this global crisis?

The South China Morning Daily reports Coronavirus’s ability to mutate has been vastly underestimated, and mutations affect deadliness of strains, Chinese study finds

Been following the main Covid Reddit update page. People downplay it as "viruses mutate and become weaker", but from all the data I'm seeing with the Covid mutations, it seems really bizarre. Like a real life Freddy Krueger that presents wildly bizarre and different symptoms to different people, geographics, areas, etc. A biological trickster. Ultimately maybe it wont matter the "true "origins"...a Wuhan lab or wet market, meat tainted by bat contamination(the 2011 Contagion movie theory) or mother nature lashing out. This virus is acting like the Joker in 1989's Batman spreading toxins or 2008 Dark Knight causing random havoc to the entire system.

[0_0]

from all the data I'm seeing with the Covid mutations, it seems really bizarre. Like a real life Freddy Krueger that presents wildly bizarre and different symptoms to different people, geographics, areas, etc. A biological trickster.

Maybe Covid presents such "wildly bizarre and different symptoms to different people, geographic, areas, etc" because there are wildly different circumstances and causes killing people in different ways in different areas that are now all counted under this narrative of one pandemic new virus. Wouldn't that be the most logical conclusion? And haven't official sources admitted as much for a while now? Like here for example:

[stickdog99]

An American Respiratory therapist exposes the truth, really interesting stuff.

Don't look now, but poof, it's gone.

[JackRiddler]

It's always possible to comment and summarize the theses, claims, evidence, and logic presented in words. First, from one who's watched it, what was the content of this video? Second, why might that content be poofed?

[identity]

Dr. Kaufman speaks with Dr. Jennifer Daniels about COVID-19 and more:
"Having COVID-19 does not increase your chances of death."


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7s9D78cnZ8

[JackRiddler]

Dr. Kaufman speaks with Dr. Jennifer Daniels about COVID-19 and more:
"Having COVID-19 does not increase your chances of death."

Beyond that thrilling teaser can you spare a few words in summary of the one-hour talk show, and perhaps tell those of us you'd like to watch it how she explains the levels of excess death in New York City (and other places) over the last two months? Because that would sort of come up automatically. To what does she attribute these data?

[Sounder]

Great vid, identity,

Dr. Jennifer Daniels exudes love, thanks. And smart too.

[JackRiddler]

Willow, was just coming over to post this video and your text for it. It's very compelling.

Dr. Erickson from Bakersfield California press briefing on their local ABC channel. Some paraphrasing from the video:

“We’ve studied this, each of us, for twenty years, and … we ask, are we following the science?

“When I look at the [current] data, do we still need to shelter in place? Emphatically no. We need testing and to get people back to work.

“The secondary effects, the child abuse, the domestic violence, alcoholism, loss of income, all of these are a significantly more detrimental threat to society than a virus that is similar in mortality to the seasonal flu.

“I can go into Costco and I can shop with people, and there are a hundred people in there, but I can’t go into Cafe Rio. Big businesses are open, little businesses are not, there’s no science behind that. That’s not science, there are other factors in play, but it’s not science.

“We need our hospitals and our furloughed doctors back on deck. There are hospitals that have closed two floors. When we lift this thing we will have significant disease. The data is showing us it is time to lift, so what’s preventing that?

“We need to put measures in place so economic shutdown like this does not happen again. We quarantine the sick, not the healthy. If you’re going to dance on somebody’s constitutional rights, you better have a good scientific reason, and not just theory.

My first response from elsewhere:

This is very compelling but I don't know why he doesn't at least frame the problems with using the viral testing data in medical treatment contexts as the basis for extrapolation to establish lethality (deaths/infections). That testing is not of a random sample but of those who show up for it thinking they might have it, so it doesn't tell you what proportion of the total population is or has been infected. It also doesn't tell you the negatives won't be infected from later exposure. (It also doesn't tell you the negatives HAVEN'T been infected earlier, and no longer show viral loads.) At the very high numbers we are reaching these testing numbers can be indicative, and certainly indicate there's been a huge amount of spread long before the measures were put in place. The first randomly sampied (or quasi randomly sampled) antigen tests in Boston, Santa Clara (notwithstanding method problems) and now New York are supporting his views, as there was a lot of reason to suspect. And there's a lot of logic behind his idea of best practices for the situation. So I don't see why he doesn't acknowledge the limitations of viral testing data as part of his opening (and thus defuse the concern he's missing something).

[JackRiddler]

Jack is this compatible with the CA antibody data from earlier this week?

Doesn't .1 put us in swine flu territory?

I FUCKED UP the math - horribly.

17,000/1,700,000 = 1 percent

corrected post - yes it was late night but still! Sorry!

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=41979&p=686531#p686531

[undead]

Dr. Kaufman speaks with Dr. Jennifer Daniels about COVID-19 and more:
"Having COVID-19 does not increase your chances of death."

Beyond that thrilling teaser can you spare a few words in summary of the one-hour talk show, and perhaps tell those of us you'd like to watch it how she explains the levels of excess death in New York City (and other places) over the last two months? Because that would sort of come up automatically. To what does she attribute these data?

I would guess environmental factors - air pollution, electromagnetic fields of various kinds that exhaust the adrenal glands, all that asbestos from 9/11 that is still around being cleaned up by remediation companies, processed food, transgenic food, even organic food contains environmental pollutants, social stress, work stress, fear. There are so many factors that get swept under the rug as insignificant, but when they are added up they are very significant. It could also be an affliction of affluence that having more access to pharmaceutical medicine throughout life also means racking up more cumulative negative side effects. There was a famous case written up in the New York Times of a Greek man from Ikaria who was diagnosed with terminal cancer, received no treatment, moved back to Ikaria, and had spontaneous remission just from leaving the city. It shouldn't be a surprise that New York City has it really bad.

Also the news about the 30 different mutations being discovered Wuhan alone suggests that New York could have a much worse strain of it that came from Europe. If the virus mutated into 30 different strains in Wuhan, how much mutation has occurred in the rest of the world? How much mutation in New York City alone? Probably a lot. The New York City version could be even worse than Europe.

[identity]

Dr. Kaufman speaks with Dr. Jennifer Daniels about COVID-19 and more:
"Having COVID-19 does not increase your chances of death."

Beyond that thrilling teaser can you spare a few words in summary of the one-hour talk show, and perhaps tell those of us you'd like to watch it how she explains the levels of excess death in New York City (and other places) over the last two months? Because that would sort of come up automatically. To what does she attribute these data?

Back from a few hours of sleep... Well, she does not single out NYC on the one-hour talk show, just mentions the CDC's year-over-year data for the entire country, showing the number of deaths this year being around 65% of what they were last year. It may be worth emailing her or Dr. Kaufman directly for their opinion on NYC. But if the excess death figures reported for NYC are reliable, and the rest of the country is showing a trend in the opposite direction, we do need to wonder what the hell is going on. NYC-specific environmental factors (particularly 9/11-related ones) and the chronic illnesses/underlying conditions resulting from them – as mentioned by undead and indeed myself here a while back – may be significant. Beliefs about personal physical vulnerability stemming from constantly-repeated media messages (media-induced trances) functioning as nocebos may also be a factor. One must always keep the following case – and the power of belief and expectation to dramatically impact one's physical condition – in mind:

Mr. Wright had a generalized far advanced malignancy involving
the lymph nodes, lymphosarcoma. Eventually the day came when
he developed resistance to all known palliative treatments. Also, his
increasing anemia precluded any intensive efforts with X-rays or
nitrogen mustard, which might otherwise have been attempted.
Huge tumor masses the size of oranges were in the neck, axillas,
groin, chest and abdomen. The spleen and liver were enormous. The
thoracic duct was obstructed, and between 1 and 2 liters of milky
fluid had to be drawn from his chest every other day. He was taking
oxygen by mask frequently, and our impression was that he was
in a terminal state, untreatable, other than to give sedatives to ease
him on his way.

In spite of all this, Mr. Wright was not without hope, even though
his doctors most certainly were. The reason for this was that the new
drug that he had expected to come along and save the day had
already been reported in the newspapers! Its name was "Krebiozen"
(subsequently shown to be a useless, inert preparation).

Then he heard in some way that our clinic was to be one of a hundred
places chosen by the Medical Association for evaluation of this
treatment. We were allotted supplies of the drug sufficient for treating
12 selected cases. Mr. Wright was not considered eligible, since
one stipulation was that the patient must not only be beyond the
point where standard therapies could benefit, but also must have a
life expectancy of at least three, and preferably six, months. He certainly
didn't qualify on the latter point, and to give him a prognosis
of more than two weeks seemed to be stretching things.

However, a few days later, the drug arrived, and we began setting
up our testing program which, of course, did not include Mr.
Wright. When he heard we were going to begin treatment with
Krebiozen, his enthusiasm knew no bounds, and as much as I tried
to dissuade him, he begged so hard for this "golden opportunity,"
that against my better judgment, and against the rules of the Krebiozen
committee, I decided I would have to include him.

Injections were to be given three times weekly, and I remember
he received his first one on a Friday. I didn't see him again until
Monday and thought as I came to the hospital he might be moribund
or dead by that time, and his supply of the drug could then be
transferred to another case.

What a surprise was in store for me! I had left him febrile, gasping
for air, completely bedridden. Now, here he was, walking around
the ward, chatting happily with the nurses, and spreading his message
of good cheer to any who would listen. Immediately I hastened
to see the others who had received their first injection at the same
time. No change, or change for the worse, was noted. Only in Mr.
Wright was there brilliant improvement. The tumor masses had
melted like snowballs on a hot stove, and in only these few days,
they were half their original size! This is, of course, far more rapid
regression than the most radio-sensitive tumor could display under
heavy X-ray given every day. And we already knew his tumor was
no longer sensitive to irradiation. Also, he had had no other treatment
outside of the single useless "shot."

This phenomenon demanded an explanation, but not only that,
it almost insisted that we open our minds to learn, rather than try
to explain. So, the injections were given three times weekly as
planned, much to the joy of the patient, but much to our bewilderment.
Within 10 days [Mr. Wright] was able to be discharged from
his "death-bed," practically all signs of his disease having vanished
in this short time. Incredible as it sounds, this "terminal" patient,
gasping his last breath through an oxygen mask, was now not only
breathing normally, and fully active, he took off in his plane and flew
at 12,000 feet with no discomfort!

This unbelievable situation occurred at the beginning of the "Krebiozen"
evaluation, but within two months, conflicting reports began
to appear in the news, all of the testing clinics reporting no results.
At the same time, the originators of the treatment were still blindly
contradicting the discouraging facts that were beginning to emerge.
This disturbed our Mr. Wright considerably as the weeks wore on.
Although he had no special training, he was, at times, reasonably
logical and scientific in his thinking. He began to lose faith in his last
hope which so far had been life-saving and left nothing to be desired.
As the reported results became increasingly dismal, his faith waned,
and after two months of practically perfect health, he relapsed to his
original state, and became very gloomy and miserable.

But here I saw the opportunity to double-check the drug and maybe,
too, find out how the quacks can accomplish the results that they
claim (and many of their claims are well substantiated). Knowing
something of my patient's innate optimism by this time, I deliberately
took advantage of him. This was for purely scientific reasons, in
order to perform the perfect control experiment which could answer
all the perplexing questions he had brought up. Furthermore, this
scheme could not harm him in any way, I felt sure, and there was
nothing I knew anyway that could help him.

When Mr. Wright had all but given up in despair with the recrudescence
of his disease, in spite of the "wonder-drug" which had
worked so well at first, I decided to take the chance and play the
quack. So deliberately lying, I told him not to believe what he read
in the papers, the drug was really most promising after all. "What
then," he asked, "was the reason for his relapse?" "Just because
the substance deteriorated on standing," I replied, "a new superrefined,
double-strength product is due to arrive tomorrow which
can more than reproduce the great benefits derived from the original
injections."

This news came as a great revelation to him, and Mr. Wright, as
ill as he was, became his optimistic self again, eager to start over.
By delaying a couple of days before the "shipment" arrived, his anticipation
of salvation had reached a tremendous pitch. When I announced
that the new series of injections was about to begin, he was
almost ecstatic and his faith was very strong.

With much fanfare, and putting on quite an act (which I deemed
permissible under the circumstances), I administered the first injection
of the doubly potent, fresh preparation—consisting of fresh water
and nothing more. The results of this experiment were quite unbelievable
to us at the time, although we must have had some suspicion
of the remotely possible outcome to have even attempted it at
all.

Recovery from his second near-terminal state was even more dramatic
than the first. Tumor masses melted, chest fluid vanished, he
became ambulatory, and even went back to flying again. At this time
he was certainly the picture of health. The water injections were continued,
since they worked such wonders. He then remained symptom-
free for over two months. At this time the final AMA announcement
appeared in the press—"nationwide tests show Krebiozen to
be a worthless drug in treatment of cancer."

Within a few days of this report, Mr. Wright was readmitted to
the hospital in extremis. His faith was now gone, his last hope vanished,
and he succumbed in less than two days.

Klopfer, B., Psychological variables in human cancer. Journal of Projective Techniques, 21, 331-340.