Not really. The more you breath into a mask it retains moisture and becomes less efficient and poses a bigger risk to the person wearing it.
COVID-19 Pandemic: Transmissions, Deaths, Treatments, Vaccines, Interventions and More...
- Thread starter RU848789
- Start date
- Status
Save it. You have about a dozen posters, most of them in permanent residence on the CE Board who agree with you on things and everyone else knows you
for the GOP operative, ignorant and arrogant troll that you are.
Whenever I see the quote below, you are the first person that comes to mind:
It Ain’t What You Don’t Know That Gets You Into Trouble. It’s What You Know for Sure That Just Ain’t So
Mark Twain
Wrong again - your penchant for spreading misinformation is annoying. The studies, which I've posted about here several times, show that some percentage of people unexposed to the virus have a certain level of memory T cells active against the coronavirus in cell cultures. That does not mean any of these people are immune or partially protected from the virus. They could be (which would be fantastic), but there is no data showing that to be the case. Yet.
https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...ocial-distancing.191275/page-137#post-4581916
Nope, plenty of studies have proven this point. Many folks have some protection due to past corona-based infections. Not a debate point.
They're not supposed to be, but it's been going on at the CDC and 11 other states for reasons I can't fathom and it's just one more black mark against the CDC, who have at least said they would correct this practice, as have several other states. The antibody tests should never be lumped in with the PCR viral tests.
https://fox4kc.com/tracking-coronav...e-mixing-results-of-viral-and-antibody-tests/
You're such a goddamned idiot. Do you really enjoy sowing disinformation this much? Do you really like being known as nothing more than a troll? Read the friggin' research. There is zero proof of immunity "due to past corona-based infections." Here's an excerpt from the Cell paper, where it clearly says "may" and "could" about immunity.
CD4+ T cell responses were detected in 40%–60% of unexposed individuals. This may be reflective of some degree of cross-reactive, preexisting immunity to SARS-CoV-2 in some, but not all, individuals. Whether this immunity is relevant in influencing clinical outcomes is unknown—and cannot be known without T cell measurements before and after SARS-CoV-2 infection of individuals—but it is tempting to speculate that the cross-reactive CD4+ T cells may be of value in protective immunity, based on SARS mouse models (Zhao et al., 2016). Clear identification of the cross-reactive peptides, and their sequence homology relation to other coronaviruses, requires deconvolution of the positive peptide pools, which is not feasible with the cell numbers presently available, and time frame of the present study.
https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0092-8674(20)30610-3
Read the studies, not debatable. Many people have this protection. Great to know why so many people are lightly impacted by the virus.
.
I just showed you the seminal study on this and it showed there is no proof yet of immunity in these people - there might be, but not yet. Why don't you show whatever "studies" you're referring to? I'm sure it will be a long wait, since there aren't any.
The WHO have not distinguished themselves in this pandemic, as they were late to call it a pandemic, weren't forceful enough with China and now have put out this flawed guidance on masks. But even if one didn't criticize the WHO before is irrelevant to whether one would criticize them over this highly flawed directive on masks. As several experts have posited, it's very likely they're simply acknowledging there aren't enough masks for everyone in the world (especially some of the harder hit 3rd world countries) and trying to preserve masks for health care workers - however, they could have worked some wording to that effect into the guidance.
Wow, you are literally too stupid to argue with, but I'll try one last time. The section I quoted was all about "potential immunity." Since you seem to only be able to read and digest 1-2 sentences, here's the key sentence from the conclusion of that paper: "Importantly, pre-existing SARS-CoV-2-cross-reactive T cell responses were observed in healthy donors, indicating some potential for pre-existing immunity in the human population." Please tell me how you go from "some potential for pre-existing immunity" to your position that "it's not even debatable" that these people are immune?
Thanks for proving the protection POV once again. I don't understand why you are getting so mad. Seems like we are aligned on this.
Posted about the fall from grace of the CDC last week, above (and 3 months ago), and then out comes an article from WaPo detailing how Commissioner Redfield now has the gall to suggest that the CDC "kept eyes" on the spread of the coronavirus and implying widespread testing wouldn't have done much good.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/heal...nds-failure-spot-early-coronavirus-spread-us/
The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Friday defended the agency’s failure to find early spread of the coronavirus in the United States, noting that surveillance systems “kept eyes” on the disease.
“We were never really blind when it came to surveillance” for covid-19, the disease caused by the virus, CDC chief Robert R. Redfield said. Even if widespread diagnostic testing had been in place, it would have been like “looking for a needle in a haystack,” he said.
Redfield's attempt to create a rationalization to shift the focus from the Trump Administration’s grossly and historically incompetent handling of the coronavirus is simply clumsy and transparent. Essentially, the argument seems to be that "nothing could have been done" and the resulting pandemic tragedy in the US was unavoidable. None of that is accurate.
As I and others have detailed countless times, if we had simply followed the South Korea/Taiwan model (which we already had in our pandemic playbook) of early aggressive testing, tracing and isolating, augmented by mask-wearing and distancing, we would have likely saved at least tens of thousands of American lives if not 90,000 or more. This is another embarrassment for the CDC.
Historically, in the regulatory oversight world, "capture" meant that regulatory agencies, like the EPA, OSHA, CDC, etc., were being or at risk of being "captured" by industrial concerns intent on weakening/negating regulations they saw as burdensome and that cut into profits, even if they were protecting safety and/or the environment for the greater public good.
But now we have the Administration being the drivers of such capture and it's gone beyond capture to pure whitewashing of this situation, despite the obvious science that testing would have revealed how much the virus had spread and allowed a much earlier response, probably saving most of the American lives lost. As Michael Worobey, an evolutionary biologist and author of a recent paper detailing the early spread of the virus said in the article:
“It would be absurd to not recognize that there were some failings in the way testing was rolled out,” Worobey said. He said details of the introduction and spread of the virus are crucial to understanding exactly what happened and what could be done to prevent future outbreaks.
“When a plane crashes, it’s very impressive the way these thing are investigated right down to every single fragment of debris so that we figure out what went wrong without trying to brush anything under the carpet,” he said.
I was all for 100% testing right from the start... cost me nothing to think that.. would have cost a lot to actually do it.
But it is fairly easy to see the limitations of that. It's not like we can test 330 million people in one day.,, and isolate them all before we get results. Even with the most abundant and rigorous testing regimen there would be cases of people getting exposed after testing.. or just before where the test would give a false negative. Then you have the false results.. the margin of error.
Then you have seniors were tested, came up positive and then were sent to nursing homes to infect other vulnerable seniors. We have no idea what kind of idiocy would have gone on with mass testing and a mass of people coming up positive.
More testing would have been nice.. but China made sure anything we'd try to do in that regard would be too late.. imagine if we started testing and quarantining all international travelers BEFORE the virus showed up here. Even then.. who knows how much virus came in on goods shipped here from China.. or Italy..
Bottom line is we cannot know what wearing masks sooner or testing more and sooner would have actually accomplished because CHINA (and our economic policies for a generation) prevented us from doing just that.
You've done it. Whitebus is the only person on the planet who knows the truth... PPE, whether gloves or masks, do not serve any purpose. How does it feel knowing the rest of mankind is wrong?
I saw this article and wondered what people with more knowledge than me feel about it
https://elemental.medium.com/corona...isease-which-explains-everything-2c4032481ab2
https://elemental.medium.com/corona...isease-which-explains-everything-2c4032481ab2
Interesting. Two big issues here with this terrible disease and death tolls
1. Nobody in the world knows enough about it and how to treat it, test for it early on, or even contain it in the early weeks / months
2. It’s all Trumps fault on a global level lmao
Politics made this way worse than it needed to be. Dumb Fuks. This is bad and I’m not downplaying it but the panic and the cries for ventilators and everything else has been a sham.
My outlook is different- you deal with what you know at the time and adjust as new data and information comes in. You are as transparent as possible with the public, correct errors as they are identified and treat it as serious as possible.
Err on the side of safety and adjust based on reasonable criteria. Also leaders place the interest of their constituency above their own political fortune.
Last edited:
yet you were rallying behind the WHO when you slammed the CDC (and Trump for no reason at all) for not using their test kits
Studies now underway to see is asymptomatic folks are contagious to others. We’ll see.
That's nonsense. I wasn't "rallying" behind the WHO - it was simply that they had approved a coronavirus test kit developed by German scientists in mid-January that became the standard viral PCR test worldwide by early February, when the CDC was still dicking around trying to develop a test. The fact that it then took 6 more weeks for the CDC test to become widely available, while the virus was spreading throughout the US without our knowledge, due to the lack of testing, was the biggest failure in the history of the CDC and, by extension was the biggest failure of the Administration (closely followed by not having a tracing/isolating infrastructure in place, like SK did), as they could've easily dual-sourced the WHO-approved German test so we at least had something in place, in parallel with working out the bugs of the CDC test.
Either you've willfully ignored all of this or maybe truly haven't seen it, but I'm going to repeat some stuff I've probably said 100 times on this board and not just in this thread. South Korea and the US both had their first cases on Jan 20th. South Korea's government jumped into action and ensured they had 4 different manufacturers producing the WHO-approved test kits by early February, capable of running hundreds of tests per day, and then thousands of tests per day by mid-February. The US didn't reach 1000 tests per day (in a country with ~7X SK's population) until about 3/10.
By 2/4, about 2 weeks after their first case, they had already run about 500 tests and detected about 20 cases and they continued to ramp up testing, such that when they finally started seeing exponential growth around 2/18, they were running over 1000 tests per day and just one week later they were running over 10,000 tests per day. During that week, their aggressive testing revealed that their cases grew quickly from about 20 to almost 1000.
Their ability to "see" the early exponential growth, combined with their aggressive contact tracing and isolating infrastructure (and mask-wearing culture) enabled them to quickly control their major outbreak within a few weeks, leveling off at about 10-11K total cases and about 5 deaths per 1MM by mid/late March. Since then, they've largely kept both cases and deaths very low, stamping out hotspots as they pop up, without ever enforcing widespread stay-at-home orders, generally keeping their economy going. We could've achieved all of that if we had just followed our own damn playbook, like SK did. And keep in mind, Seoul is very similar to NYC Metro in terms of total population and population density, so it's not like controlling the outbreak was far easier there.
In contrast, the US had only run a handful of tests by early March, when there were already tens of thousands of cases, based on retrospective analysis. The US had run less than 200 tests by 3/1 with about 50 positives at that point - that high of a positive rate at that point is strongly indicative of there being far more actual positives. Even once the US ramped up testing by mid-March, we were always seeing 15-25% of tests coming back positive whereas SK generally never got above 5% positives, meaning they were always testing enough to see their outbreak, while we were not.
The two graphics, below, really show a great apples-to-apples comparison of tests, positives, and deaths per 1MM in population for each country. The most glaring difference in testing vs. cases is the much larger separation in time between the test curve and the positive case curve. For SK, they hit 1, 10 and 100 tests per 1MM about 17-20 days before their cases hit 1, 10, and 100 positives per 1MM, whereas in the US, the separation between tests hitting 1/10/100 per 1MM and positive cases hitting those levels was only 6-7 days, meaning the US was simply not testing anywhere near enough to see the early part of the exponential growth well. And these comparisons are even more stark for NY/NJ, since our area was hit harder and earlier that the rest of the US, due to this area being, by far, the biggest hub for travel from Europe, where about 3/4 of our cases came from, combined with our very high population density and extremely high density commuting patterns.
There's little doubt that if the US had been running thousands of tests per day in early March, we would've seen hundreds of positives, like SK did at that point in their outbreak and known how bad it was. Without a good contact tracing/isolation infrastructure, tthe US would've still likely had to rely on stay at home orders to control the outbreak, but those orders in NY, NJ (and many other hard hit states, like MA, CT, RI, MI, LA, etc) could've come 1-2 weeks earlier if the US had had adequate testing - and modeling has shown that 30-40% of lives could've been saved with a week earlier SAH order and 75-90% of deaths could've been prevented with a 2-week earlier SAH order.
https://covidly.com/graph?country=United States&state=#total
https://covidly.com/graph?country=South Korea&state=#total
Last edited:
Story on Vietnam and how they’ve kept it under pretty good control and without the advance health systems of other countries. 328 cases and no deaths thus far.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/05/29/asia/coronavirus-vietnam-intl-hnk/index.html
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/05/29/asia/coronavirus-vietnam-intl-hnk/index.html
Data tied to testing - some states just simply behind due to a lack of infrastructure (belief in small government). This should have been managed at the federal level.
Testing done early would have simply resulted in separating the sick from the healthy - would have simply mitigated the disastrous and distorted results.
Testing done early would have simply resulted in separating the sick from the healthy - would have simply mitigated the disastrous and distorted results.
Florida will be a blip compared to the major Metro cities experiencing riots
CV will ravage those cities soon enough.
And we were flattening the curve...
We don't know that for sure.
It's irrelevant unless you're interested for political purposes
Well that is complete crap. Florida test#/positive% still very low at less than 3%.
no its very relevant to know people are willing to lie about risk to public and stats to open up sooner.
No it isn't. Just look at the JH report today. I have facts! You have social media fear posts.
I don’t know and at this point it is not something I’m going to lose sleep over. Greatly appreciate reading reports but unless you are in science , medicine or biological ,chemical engineering most of this data means nothing for awhile . My understanding is their are 7 known corona viruses... Is that factual? Most people have probably had at least 6 of these by adulthood. There also has been chatter that some patients who are asymtomatic or suffer mild versions of Covid19 may harbor some antibodies.What is your opinion on the study in France with the 1300 male patients who were type 2 and the others who were type1... It appears cardio vascular and severe respiratory is the issue In the US.while pre diabetes can also play a significant role .
My thoughts from yesterday on this...fascinating article...this quoted sentence from Dr. Mehra, in particular, was very insightful:
The concept that’s emerging is that this is not a respiratory illness alone, this is a respiratory illness to start with, but it is actually a vascular illness that kills people through its involvement of the vasculature,” says Mehra.
https://rutgers.forums.rivals.com/t...ocial-distancing.191275/page-140#post-4585929
I have the CDC’s statement and data. You have a dashboard that updates based on what Florida says the very people faking the numbers. Go cry about it
- Status
Similar threads
