Covid-19 Thread

[action]

Just now, Dazey said:

It doesn't necessarily matter what is or isn't the best social model. The issue is that we have what we have at this point in time and the impact that we will see on our lives as a result of this will be severe. Personally I'm really still not concerned personally about the health implications of this but I'm sure starting to worry about the potential financial impact.

I hope that, for all the bad that this epidemy will cause, something good will result out of all of this.

a worldwide shift in "consciousness". 

Oh, who am I kidding...

[SoulMonster]

6 minutes ago, action said:

I hope that, for all the bad that this epidemy will cause, something good will result out of all of this.

a worldwide shift in "consciousness". 

Oh, who am I kidding...

It is a good "training ground" for future, more deadly viruses. Now we get to test our capacity to deal with mass infections. We can identify weaknesses in how we respond and our ability to scale-up. Hopefully, this will make us more prepared for real viral threats in the future.

[action]

7 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

It is a good "training ground" for future, more deadly viruses. Now we get to test our capacity to deal with mass infections. We can identify weaknesses in how we respond and our ability to scale-up. Hopefully, this will make us more prepared for real viral threats in the future.

one such weakness being, ridiculing people who chose to take infections serious, against the consensus that it's "just an ordinary flu lol wut. more people die of the flu than of corona each year".

Stuff like that.

[SoulMonster]

Just now, action said:

one such weakness being, ridiculing people who chose to take infections serious, against the consensus that it's "just an ordinary flu lol wut. 

You have never been ridiculous for taking the infection seriously. Get over yourself, you whining child. You were ridiculed for insisting that face mask was a good idea despite you being told numerously that it wasn't and why it wasn't, and because you insisted that the disease is dangerous to children even to the point of misreading a graph, and for hilariously suggesting that all the governments are in on some absurd conspiracy to lie to the people about the real fatality rates for children. That's why you were ridiculed and deservingly so, not because you chose to take the disease seriously or even because you are a bit of a pessimist.

[action]

1 minute ago, SoulMonster said:

You have never been ridiculous for taking the infection seriously. Get over yourself, you whining child.

 

haven't learn a single thing, I see. Still as indecent as usual.

1 minute ago, SoulMonster said:

 

You were ridiculed for insisting that face mask was a good idea despite you being told numerously that it wasn't and why it wasn't,

 

see the scientific article I referenced yesterday. A scientist has argued that it's possible the virus spreads through air. In a scientific magazine. 

no need to ridicule me to advocate mouths masks, in advance of these scientific articles. I used common sense, and now scientists are starting to think the same.

1 minute ago, SoulMonster said:

 

and because you insisted that the disease is dangerous to children even to the point of misreading a graph,

 

yesterday a 2 year old child was admitted in a german hospital under critical conditions.

I have also argued why I didn't trust that graph, I don't believe there was anything ridiculous about that. You just feel offended because I didn't follow a graph, as is.

1 minute ago, SoulMonster said:

and for hilariously suggesting that all the governments are in on some absurd conspiracy to lie to the people about the real fatality rates for children. 

not only about the fatality rates for children, but about the nature of this virus in general. What governments tell us, does not match what we can all see in practise.

given what we see today, I had every right to be worried, panicking even. The way you constantly tried to belittle me, ridiculing me and questioning my mental state, was grossly offensive. I think you're as clueless as any of us. I'm not sure why everyone looks up at you as some kind of expert on this. You're not. You're just arrogant.

 

[SoulMonster]

Just now, action said:

see the scientific article I referenced yesterday. A scientist has argued that it's possible the virus spreads through air. In a scientific magazine. 

no need to ridicule me to advocate mouths masks, in advance of these scientific articles. I used common sense, and now scientists are starting to think the same.

Wearing face masks when the scientific body of literature doesn't support it and rather implies it makes things worse, is stupid. 

And the scientific community still advices against people wearing face masks. Nothing has changed even if a single professor of epidemology has suggested that viruses like SARA and corona might be able to be transmitted through the air. There is still no evidence for this being the case for corona and the large scientific and healthcare bodies, like the WHO, still maintain that it probably can't and that people who refuse to accept this and still wear face masks, are dumbasses (I am paraphrasing here).

3 minutes ago, action said:

yesterday a 2 year old child was admitted in a german hospital under critical conditions.

As I have stated numerous times, there will likely be children dying from this disease. Children also die from other diseases on rare occasions, when there are other illnesses involved. 

[SoulMonster]

 

4 minutes ago, action said:

I have also argued why I didn't trust that graph, I don't believe there was anything ridiculous about that. You just feel offended because I didn't follow a graph, as is.

I am not offended you can't read graphs. Why would I be? I even commended you for finding the graph and making a decent effort at reading it.

[action]

Just now, SoulMonster said:

Wearing face masks when the scientific body of literature doesn't support it and rather implies it makes things worse, is stupid. 

And the scientific community still advices against people wearing face masks. Nothing has changed even if a single professor of epidemology has suggested that viruses like SARA and corona might be able to be transmitted through the air. There is still no evidence for this being the case for corona and the large scientific and healthcare bodies, like the WHO, still maintain that it probably can't and that people who refuse to accept this and still wear face masks, are dumbasses (I am paraphrasing here).

you fail to understand the notion of "progressive understanding" in science.

you're basically a waste of my time.

[SoulMonster]

6 minutes ago, action said:

not only about the fatality rates for children, but about the nature of this virus in general. What governments tell us, does not match what we can all see in practise.

7 minutes ago, action said:

given what we see today, I had every right to be worried, panicking even. The way you constantly tried to belittle me, ridiculing me and questioning my mental state, was grossly offensive. I think you're as clueless as any of us. I'm not sure why everyone looks up at you as some kind of expert on this. You're not. You're just arrogant.

It is not my fault you chose to disclose what I asked you in private. That's on you.

As for people looking up to me as an expert? Well, maybe because I have a PhD in microbiology and have taught classes on the subject. That being said, I am NOT an expert of virology or epidemiology and I have never claimed to be. If people agree with what I write it is probably because it fits the facts and makes sense at some level. 

[Len Cnut]

Trumps a legend, his response to everything is like 'WOGS OUT!'   His policies are like NF graffiti from the 1980s.  Mr President, crime is up?  BUILD A WALL, WOGS OUT!  There's this new virus out here Mr President! 'WOGS OUT!'.

[SoulMonster]

2 minutes ago, action said:

you fail to understand the notion of "progressive understanding" in science.

You are saying that I don't understand that the greatest strength of science is the fact that it is a cumulative exercise where we build knowledge upon knowledge over generations, gradually expanding and revising what we know? I have actually worked as a scientist and have quite a few papers accepted, so I am quite familiar with all of this.

But the fact that, say, in 3 years, we will learn that the corona virus can transmit through air, doesn't make you less...informed for wearing face masks now when there is no evidence currently supporting this practise and we are warned that it will likely just increase our chance of getting infected. Trusting ones own "common sense" over empirical data and current theoretical morons, is the opposite of smart.

[Len Cnut]

Quote

As for people looking up to me as an expert? Well, maybe because I have a PhD in microbiology and have taught classes on the subject.

Did you really?  Oh great, I'm just gonna fuckin' use you as my GP now, saves calling the cunts up and getting an appointment, just drop you a PM like 'Soulie, I've got a bit of an itchy scrot' with a rash-like build up'

[SoulMonster]

Just now, Len Cnut said:

Did you really?  Oh great, I'm just gonna fuckin' use you as my GP now, saves calling the cunts up and getting an appointment, just drop you a PM like 'Soulie, I've got a bit of an itchy scrot' with a rash-like build up'

I have a PhD in bacterial genetics and taught classis in molecular biology, bioinformatics and biochemistry at the university here. It's a long time ago and the area where I am still an expert has shrunk quite a bit since then. I am NOT an expert on medicine and please don't gross me out by sending me rash pics! My automatic reply would just be that you have picked up some avian disease, probably swan pox or something.

[action]

25 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Trusting ones own "common sense" over empirical data and current theoretical morons, is the opposite of smart.

according to the scientist I referenced, who wrote a scientific article in a scientific magazine, it would be "wise" to assume it can be transmitted through air. Wise, is the opposite of stupid.

I have also referenced a legal rule in environmental law, the precautionary principle, with reference to the standard work in which it is outlined.

At the very worst, my opinion is a minority opinion, but to label it as moronic just shows what an arrogent, self indulgent person you are

Edited March 12, 2020 by action

[SoulMonster]

Just now, action said:

according to the scientist I referenced, who wrote a scientific article in a scientific magazine, it would be "wise" to assume it can be transmitted through air. Wise, is the opposite of stupid.

That's not what she said, here's is what she said: "It is therefore prudent to assume that transmission may be by contact, droplet and possibly airborne modes". Source: https://www.phrp.com.au/issues/march-2020-volume-30-issue-1/on-a-knifes-edge-of-a-covid-19-pandemic-is-containment-still-possible/#refList11 May, possibly be.

My point is: Among thousands of experts there will always be someone who questions established models. That's kind of what scientists are supposed to do. There will always be someone who says, "but what if?" This doesn't mean that the scientific community has changed their opinion on the matter. We still have no evidence suggesting corona virus is transmitted through air. It probably just means she has a grant proposal in the works where she applied for money to study it  

If you want to latch onto specific experts who imply that you could be right, and disregard the scientific consensus including guidelines from the WHO, then you aren't smart, at all. 

[SoulMonster]

5 minutes ago, action said:

At the very worst, my opinion is a minority opinion, but to label it as moronic just shows what an arrogent, self indulgent person you are

Oh, it seems that quite many people believe face masks have an effect. In that sense you are not in a minority. But the vast majority of scientists say we have no evidence for this virus being transmitted through the air. We also know that people wearing face masks tend to not put them on correctly, tend to touch their faces more frequently, and tend to not dispose of the masks correctly. In the face of all this, it is rather stupid to insist on wearing masks. Sorry!

[action]

2 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Oh, it seems that quite many people believe face masks have an effect. In that sense you are not in a minority. But the vast majority of scientists say we have no evidence for this virus being transmitted through the air. We also know that people wearing face masks tend to not put them on correctly, tend to touch their faces more frequently, and tend to not dispose of the masks correctly. In the face of all this, it is rather stupid to insist on wearing masks. Sorry!

I agree that there is no evidence that wearing masks helps to protect you.

if you want to look at this with science-tinted glasses, then indeed that is the only conclusion to make. The conclusion being "there is no evidence". That is worlds apart from claiming: the virus does not transmit through air.

do you understand this?

[action]

 

 

[Lio]

Everyone sneezing or coughing has to selfisolate now for 7 days. I hope it's enough to survive the virus. I do wonder about the selfemployed. I doubt they'll close shop for 7 days.

[action]

souls' reasoning is essential to the scientific method. you can't make statements without proof.... in a scientific context that is.

it's from his background, that he focuses on actual evidence so much, and he no doubt is a good scientist. But because he applies that same mindset to this epidemy, given the potential consequences to the people, he is a lousy advisor to people.

When it comes to national health, the precautionary principle should prevail over the scientific method of evidence. the precautionary principle, which souls ignores for some reason, advocates measures "just in case", "in the absence of evidence". It's not some moron that invented this, this is a respected and implemented principle in environmental law. First measures, then evidence. Because damage to the environment is largely irreversible. That's why you act without evidence. the same as with the corona virus: if you die, it's irreversible.

 

[soon]

Well, yesterday I completed a detailed care plan for my cat Beaker in the case of my absence. I already had a quicksheet that friends who already know him could use, but this larger document is addressed "to whom it may concern." Ive left a copy of it along with his adoption and medical records in his travel case.

Kind of a trip.

[Len Cnut]

1 hour ago, SoulMonster said:

I have a PhD in bacterial genetics and taught classis in molecular biology, bioinformatics and biochemistry at the university here. It's a long time ago and the area where I am still an expert has shrunk quite a bit since then. I am NOT an expert on medicine and please don't gross me out by sending me rash pics! My automatic reply would just be that you have picked up some avian disease, probably swan pox or something.

Thats not good enough I’m afraid, I’m going to have to insist that you look at my nob  

[Dazey]

Apparently the UK are going to avoid shutting down schools, mass gatherings etc. The plan is to delay things but allow it to spread slowly thus developing herd immunity across the country. 

Edited March 12, 2020 by Dazey

[DieselDaisy]

2 hours ago, Dazey said:

Personally I'm really still not concerned personally about the health implications of this but I'm sure starting to worry about the potential financial impact.

Same old Dazey haha.

[DieselDaisy]

The response of the United Kingdom is utterly baffling. Sing ''happy birthday'' whilst washing your hands and enjoy your visit to Cheltenham. I almost admire it for its stubborn idiocy.