Claim That Covid-19 Came From Lab In China Completely Unfoun

[Bill Sloman]

On Sunday, April 19, 2020 at 8:54:13 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:

On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 14:12:33 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 3:06:35 PM UTC-4, Winfield Hill wrote:
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say


--
Thanks,
- Win

Despite the deference to "scientists," I didn't see any scientific
arguments, merely "scientists" speculating, and their speculations
being tossed around non-scientifically by non-scientists.

ISTM it's a forensic matter rather than scientific. If China were
a free country, we'd simply scour their labs' collections for traces
of the Wuhan Scourge. If it's not there, the lab's excluded. And
we'd look at personnel records too, maybe, to find the first cases.
However, China won't allow it.

Absent that, it's entirely possible this group -- known to have been
studying coronavirus reservoirs in the wild -- collected SARS-CoV2,
then lost control. Or synthesized something, or collected, then
modified something wild, etc. Or that none of that happened.

Maybe they just transported some bat virus from a cave for research
purposes, and it infected a lab tech and got loose.

If your local food market sells bats as food, there are going to lots more bats moving through it than any research lab.

There was a guy on NPR this morning, a bat collector who does crawl
into caves and traps bats and takes varuous iccky samples to look at
their viruses. Bats host huge ranges of viruses that apparently do
them little or no harm. Like another virus I could name.

Covid-19 doesn't seem to have John Larkin any harm yet - he's had addled ideas on lot of subjects for years now.

There are manifold possibilities that can't be excluded -- it's a
mystery.

The NYU Shanghai prof's Twitter thread is full of gaping holes.

Shanghai resident Assistant Professor? Of course he is an objective
expert.

He's not at liberty to be entirely expert, but he's still going to know a lot more than John Larkin or Flyguy, much as they may want to pose as our resident experts.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Sunday, April 19, 2020 at 8:57:38 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:

On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 15:25:58 -0700 (PDT), George Herold
ggherold@gmail.com> wrote:

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 5:12:39 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 3:06:35 PM UTC-4, Winfield Hill wrote:
https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say


--
Thanks,
- Win

Despite the deference to "scientists," I didn't see any scientific
arguments, merely "scientists" speculating, and their speculations
being tossed around non-scientifically by non-scientists.

ISTM it's a forensic matter rather than scientific. If China were
a free country, we'd simply scour their labs' collections for traces
of the Wuhan Scourge. If it's not there, the lab's excluded. And
we'd look at personnel records too, maybe, to find the first cases.
However, China won't allow it.

Absent that, it's entirely possible this group -- known to have been
studying coronavirus reservoirs in the wild -- collected SARS-CoV2,
then lost control. Or synthesized something, or collected, then
modified something wild, etc. Or that none of that happened.

There are manifold possibilities that can't be excluded -- it's a
mystery.

The NYU Shanghai prof's Twitter thread is full of gaping holes.


Cheers,
James Arthur

I agree. Say James, what news sources do you read? I find most news
almost impossible to read, because of the 'slant' of the source.
It's not that the 'slants' have gotten worse, but my tolerance is
much lower. (grumpy old man complex)

No, the slants are extreme lately. You can read the first paragraph of
a news report and predict which camp it came from.

Or John Larkin thinks he can. which isn't quite the same thing.

There must be a new Recommended Insults appendix to the NY Times Style
Book.

Trump does place unusual demands on news reporters. His spectacular performance on Fact Checker is unprecedented, and getting the right superlatives must take an effort.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydnay

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Sunday, April 19, 2020 at 8:45:37 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:

On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 14:54:44 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com
wrote:

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 1:38:59 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:

The problem now is too little observation, too little reliable data,
and too many opinions and simulations that are having gigantic
consequences.

Nonsense, as usual. You've also said there's too much news coverage.
We have a pandemic on a globe with 7.8 billion inhabitants
and you pronounce a finding of 'too many opinions'?

There are death projections that cover a 20:1 range.

Most of them extremely dubious. John Larkin doesn't do critical judgement so he can't reject the rubbish.

Some people say it will be with us for 18 months, only stopping when have a vaccine in mass production. Some people want to go back to work in two weeks.
Some want to go back now.

It depends how far out of touch with reality they are. John Larkin is not discriminating between the various levels of idiocy on display - the way above his pay grade.

Some people suggest a second, bigger case surge in the fall. One big
name simulated a bouncing-ball curve of infections, multiple declining
peaks.

Nobody whose name that John Larkin can recall.

> We are just now starting to get some antibody data.

And it is looking remarkably dubious.

The follow-up books, a year or so from now, will be fun.

Oh, you have some supporting data and a good model that predicts that?

You don't think anyone will write books about this? You don't think
they might be fun? Barry's book about the 1918 epidemic is great
reading.

Me, I'm predicting a practical vaccine for 'a year or so from now'. That's
my idea of fun.

New cases seem to have peaked, and faded way down, in the places where
it started earliest. Look at the JHU new-case curves. Lots of European
countries are below 1/10 of peak now.

Name one. Spain is a 18.5% of its peak, but it has taken almost a month to get there, and the decline is very lumpy. Italy is still a 34% of it's peak and it has taken just as long to get there.

> It may well be gone before a vaccine is available or useful, like most colds.

Only in John Larkin's private cloud-cuckoo land.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:14:39 +0100, Tom Gardner
<spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 21/04/20 00:37, Ricky C wrote:
Did the doctor go blind and can't see??? This is the 21st century. We can
do video calls on our cell phones now. Why would a doctor not be able to
examine a patient over the phone?

Only if the patient has a suitable device and can use it at
the relevant time.

It's tough to do a spinal tap over Skype.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 21/04/20 12:58, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:14:39 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 21/04/20 00:37, Ricky C wrote:
Did the doctor go blind and can't see??? This is the 21st century. We can
do video calls on our cell phones now. Why would a doctor not be able to
examine a patient over the phone?

Only if the patient has a suitable device and can use it at
the relevant time.

It's tough to do a spinal tap over Skype.

That's a little bit more than an examination!

Aficionados could probably do a Spinal Tap over Skype

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 21/04/20 15:07, Ricky C wrote:

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 5:14:44 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 21/04/20 00:37, Ricky C wrote:
Did the doctor go blind and can't see??? This is the 21st century. We
can do video calls on our cell phones now. Why would a doctor not be
able to examine a patient over the phone?

Only if the patient has a suitable device and can use it at the relevant
time.

You mean a smart phone? Or a friend/relative with a smart phone? I think in
the US smart phones are >90% of the phones used. Ok, so some small
percentage of the population can't use this. Some small percentage of the
population can't use a car to reach a doctor either.

Think it through...

Someone who doesn't have a smartphone won't be able to
operate it sufficiently well for it to be useful. The
owner would have to be right next to the user.

Over here we are required to stay more than 2m from
people not in our household.

See the incompatibility?

My mother will never have a smartphone, nor equivalent.

I guess it is far too much bother for you to help your mother with your
phone.

She is 98, and we are keeping outside contact to a minimum.

See the incompatibility mentioned above.

In addition, you are assuming I live anywhere near her.

If I'm really laid low by something, I may well not be in any state to
operate high tech. If I'm gasping for breath I'm not even sure I could make
myself heard when phoning for an ambulance.

Do you really think the ambulance and emergency room aren't available if you > need them?

Have you considered that I would have to phone for an
ambulance to get there? Then re-read my point.

 

[Ricky C]

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 5:14:44 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 21/04/20 00:37, Ricky C wrote:
Did the doctor go blind and can't see??? This is the 21st century. We can
do video calls on our cell phones now. Why would a doctor not be able to
examine a patient over the phone?

Only if the patient has a suitable device and can use it at
the relevant time.

You mean a smart phone? Or a friend/relative with a smart phone? I think in the US smart phones are >90% of the phones used. Ok, so some small percentage of the population can't use this. Some small percentage of the population can't use a car to reach a doctor either.


> My mother will never have a smartphone, nor equivalent.

I guess it is far too much bother for you to help your mother with your phone.

If I'm really laid low by something, I may well not be in
any state to operate high tech. If I'm gasping for breath
I'm not even sure I could make myself heard when phoning
for an ambulance.

Do you really think the ambulance and emergency room aren't available if you need them?

I'm sorry, if that's true we need to cut California off and push it into the Pacific. Let it drift over to China and they can have it. At least you will get medical care. Try a doctor in Wuhan.

--

Rick C.

+++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Ricky C]

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 5:27:02 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 21/04/20 06:03, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 11:34:44 AM UTC+10, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 7:31:55 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 5:43:01 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:

What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown, however
long, that they won't get sick (same as without a lockdown)?

They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things we
weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing, contact
tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we do impose
literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone infected. Do it with
the force of law, no exceptions.

That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people carrying
it won't even know they have it.

James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in contact
with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it) you get told
to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.

Just so.

In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to
isolate themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used
(yet). I wonder if it is actually practical legislation.


"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632 deaths,
and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.

Yet.

The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple
peaks, months apart.

Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???

China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.. Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside. They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return without being hunted down immediately.

--

Rick C.

---- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 21/04/20 15:14, Ricky C wrote:

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 5:27:02 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 21/04/20 06:03, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 11:34:44 AM UTC+10, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 7:31:55 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 5:43:01 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:

What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?

They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.

That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.

James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.

Just so.

In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.


"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.

Yet.

The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.

Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???

China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.

Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.

Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.

 

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 7:58:31 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:14:39 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 21/04/20 00:37, Ricky C wrote:
Did the doctor go blind and can't see??? This is the 21st century. We can
do video calls on our cell phones now. Why would a doctor not be able to
examine a patient over the phone?

Only if the patient has a suitable device and can use it at
the relevant time.

It's tough to do a spinal tap over Skype.

It's tough to do any sort of exam over Skype.

ICU nurses can tell an awful lot about someone just by their
'color'. And after spending lots of time in the ICU myself,
I was able to do it too. You can tell almost on inspection
who's in big trouble, and who's doing well. That doesn't work
on video -- it's not even close.

Dad spent some time in the jungle photographing dermatological
afflictions. Same story.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 10:40:29 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 21/04/20 15:14, Ricky C wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 5:27:02 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 21/04/20 06:03, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 11:34:44 AM UTC+10, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 7:31:55 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 5:43:01 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:

What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?

They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.

That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.

James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.

Just so.

In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.


"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.

Yet.

The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.

Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???

China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.


Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.

Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.

Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down something
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It's
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's not
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.

And yes of course there will be a resurgence when people start
circulating again -- it's unavoidable. So we manage it. Look for
vaccines. Test treatments. And we get back to work.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 2020-04-21 12:24, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:40:24 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 21/04/20 15:14, Ricky C wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 5:27:02 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 21/04/20 06:03, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 11:34:44 AM UTC+10, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 7:31:55 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 5:43:01 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:

What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?

They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.

That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.

James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.

Just so.

In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.


"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.

Yet.

The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.

Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???

China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.


Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.

Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.

It's always interesting to hear people, especially amateurs, do
control theory by guesswork. Most people say A causes B and B causes A
so it must oscillate.

There are all sorts of crazy waveforms predicted for this one. The
most common viral infection curve, a mostly Gaussian impulse, is
rarely seen in the press.

Or if you want exponential rather than Gaussian tails, a hyperbolic
secant. (Q-switched laser pulses are often modelled as sech curves.)

Interestingly, both the Gaussian and sech pulses are their own Fourier
transform, which makes them convenient to handle on paper.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs


--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 07:57:16 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 10:40:29 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 21/04/20 15:14, Ricky C wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 5:27:02 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 21/04/20 06:03, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 11:34:44 AM UTC+10, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 7:31:55 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 5:43:01 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:

What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?

They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.

That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.

James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.

Just so.

In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.


"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.

Yet.

The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.

Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???

China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.


Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.

Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.

Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down something
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It's
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's not
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.

But seasonal colds and flu do go away. This one is almost gone from a
lot of countries.

And yes of course there will be a resurgence when people start
circulating again -- it's unavoidable. So we manage it. Look for
vaccines. Test treatments. And we get back to work.

I'm at work!



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard

 

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:40:24 +0100, Tom Gardner
<spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 21/04/20 15:14, Ricky C wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 5:27:02 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 21/04/20 06:03, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 11:34:44 AM UTC+10, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 7:31:55 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 5:43:01 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:

What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?

They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.

That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.

James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.

Just so.

In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.


"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.

Yet.

The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.

Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???

China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.


Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.

Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.

It's always interesting to hear people, especially amateurs, do
control theory by guesswork. Most people say A causes B and B causes A
so it must oscillate.

There are all sorts of crazy waveforms predicted for this one. The
most common viral infection curve, a mostly Gaussian impulse, is
rarely seen in the press.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 21/04/20 15:57, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:

On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 10:40:29 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 21/04/20 15:14, Ricky C wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 5:27:02 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 21/04/20 06:03, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 11:34:44 AM UTC+10, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 7:31:55 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 5:43:01 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:

What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?

They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.

That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.

James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.

Just so.

In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.


"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.

Yet.

The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.

Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???

China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.


Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.

Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.

Right -- you're absolutely right. There's no way to hunt down something
lying hidden in the overwhelming majority of people harboring it. It's
everywhere, and like kudzu, privet, fire ants, and killer bees, it's not
going away. The genii's out of the bottle.

And yes of course there will be a resurgence when people start
circulating again -- it's unavoidable. So we manage it. Look for
vaccines. Test treatments. And we get back to work.

And the big unanswered (currently unanswerable) questions are
- what stages of relaxation are valid (by some defined criteria)
- what are the preconditions for relaxation
- what are the preconditions for re-imposition of restrictions

I'm distressed that our fragrant PM, Boris Johnson, has opined
from his convalescent bed that he won't relax restrictions while
there could be another wave.

Either his cognitive powers have declined and he can no longer
comprehend the IC report, or he is being knowingly disingenuous.
Given his track record, probably both.

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 21/04/20 17:24, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:40:24 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 21/04/20 15:14, Ricky C wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 5:27:02 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 21/04/20 06:03, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 11:34:44 AM UTC+10, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 7:31:55 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 5:43:01 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:

What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?

They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.

That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.

James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.

Just so.

In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.


"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.

Yet.

The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.

Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???

China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.


Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.

Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.

It's always interesting to hear people, especially amateurs, do
control theory by guesswork. Most people say A causes B and B causes A
so it must oscillate.

There are all sorts of crazy waveforms predicted for this one. The
most common viral infection curve, a mostly Gaussian impulse, is
rarely seen in the press.

Nobody cares what the exact shape will be!

Unless there is /reason/ (i.e not emotion, not hope) to
believe otherwise, then history is a reasonable starting
point.

History indicates several peaks over years rather than months.

 

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 18:07:25 +0100, Tom Gardner
<spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 21/04/20 17:24, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:40:24 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 21/04/20 15:14, Ricky C wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 5:27:02 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 21/04/20 06:03, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Tuesday, April 21, 2020 at 11:34:44 AM UTC+10, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 7:31:55 PM UTC-4, Ricky C wrote:
On Monday, April 20, 2020 at 5:43:01 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com
wrote:

What makes you think that when people come out of lockdown,
however long, that they won't get sick (same as without a
lockdown)?

They will if we exit the lock down too soon. If we wait until the
current case numbers are low enough we will be able to do the things
we weren't able to do in January and February and March... testing,
contact tracking and testing. Oh yeah, with MORE testing. Then we
do impose literal quarantine on anyone in contact with anyone
infected. Do it with the force of law, no exceptions.

That doesn't work. The virus will still be there, and most people
carrying it won't even know they have it.

James Arthur doesn't understand contact tracing. If you've been in
contact with somebody who was infectious (even if they didn't know it)
you get told to self isolate for 14 days after the contact.

Just so.

In the UK there is legislation that can compel people to isolate
themselves, but I haven't heard of it being used (yet). I wonder if it is
actually practical legislation.


"Flattening the curve" in China meant that they ended up with 4,632
deaths, and nobody seems to be dying of Covid-19 there any more.

Yet.

The IC study and previous flu epidemics have had multiple peaks, months
apart.

Do you understand the difference between a disease that is allowed to roam
the earth freely and one that is tracked and hunted down and killed???

China and South Korea have both reduced the number of infected to adequately
low numbers that they can reopen their businesses at least to some extent.
Once the virus is eliminated it can't come back other than from the outside.
They take adequate measures to assure the disease is not allowed to return
without being hunted down immediately.


Your big unproven assumption is that is can be completely "hunted
down and killed" or "eliminated". I, and the WHO amongst others,
don't believe that.

Without that, there /will/ be several waves of peaks, months apart.

It's always interesting to hear people, especially amateurs, do
control theory by guesswork. Most people say A causes B and B causes A
so it must oscillate.

There are all sorts of crazy waveforms predicted for this one. The
most common viral infection curve, a mostly Gaussian impulse, is
rarely seen in the press.

Nobody cares what the exact shape will be!

But the lockdown was supposed to "flatten the curve."

The curve doesn't matter?

Unless there is /reason/ (i.e not emotion, not hope) to
believe otherwise, then history is a reasonable starting
point.

Not the stuff I've seen.

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/367/6485/1414.2/F1.large.jpg?width=800&height=600&carousel=1

Some are worse!

>History indicates several peaks over years rather than months.

If you are predicting that we will have another cold and flu season
next winter, I agree.





--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 2020-04-18 16:50, Winfield Hill wrote:

whit3rd wrote...

On Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 12:46:22 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On 18 Apr 2020 12:06:14 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com
wrote:

https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/04/18/1836218/claim-that-covid-19-
came-from-
lab-in-china-completely-unfounded-scientists-say

These days, you can find scientists to say most anything.

No scientists trusts a scientist's words, rather we trust the data.
The 'say almost anything' phrase suggests that you've been finding
scientists entertaining hypotheses that aren't in agreement. That's
normal, and wouldn't surprise anyone with a good elementary school
science education. It's not noteworthy.

When a scientist, in this case, says a claim is unfounded, it means the
claim alone is worthless, absent a supporting observation; that doesn't
mean the claim is right or wrong, it means it's untested.

The dramatic-form 'he said, she said' squabbling is irrelevant in science.
The resolution will always come from observations, not words and syllables.

You should re-read the material. Here's one statement:
"The genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is
not derived from any previously used virus backbone."

https://nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uox9g9kgq2h8r3v/s41591-020-0820-9.pdf?dl=1

That's one of many such strong statements. Alexandre Hassanin,
"Even if it is difficult to prove that a laboratory accident did not
take place, you should know that SARS-CoV-2 is not closely related
to any previous viruses; it was never sequenced (even partially)
in previous studies, and the COVID-19 outbreak began in November/
December, as in previous SARS epidemic events (2002 and 2003)."
Hassanin said: "These two points suggest therefore that the current
outbreak was not the consequence of a laboratory accident."

Eric Hundman, an Assistant Professor at NYU Shanghai, had stern
words for anyone still spreading this misinformation. "Insinuating
that the virus escaped from a lab in China by saying 'well, there's
no evidence that it didn't' is not only untrue, it amounts to
disinformation that could further ratchet up US-China tensions
and distract from more urgent priorities. There actually is
scientific evidence against the "escaped from a lab" theory."

That's moving the goal posts. They were collecting a lot of bat
coronaviruses and working on them in _Level_2_, not L4. It probably
wasn't an engineered virus, but that's entirely beside the point.

And if you live in Shanghai, you're under the ChiCom thumb, so you say
what you have to say. Maybe a well-known foreigner is a bit safer
himself, but all they'd have to do to make Hundman play ball is to
disappear one of his Chinese friends and let Hundman know what he had to
do to get him released.

It's not like they never do that sort of thing, you know.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs


--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[Cursitor Doom]

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 14:07:07 -0400, Phil Hobbs wrote:

And if you live in Shanghai, you're under the ChiCom thumb, so you say
what you have to say. Maybe a well-known foreigner is a bit safer
himself, but all they'd have to do to make Hundman play ball is to
disappear one of his Chinese friends and let Hundman know what he had to
do to get him released.

It's worth keeping in mind that this one-word global government Hillary &
her ilk want to see brought in will be implemented along the lines of the
Chinese model. So if you value your freedom, it would be wise to
emphatically reject the project and all the nation-hating nutjobs like
Bill Sloman and Gardner who are loudly cheering it on.

 

Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:RFCnG.167512$e1n.104486@fx36.am4:

On 21/04/20 12:58, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:14:39 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 21/04/20 00:37, Ricky C wrote:
Did the doctor go blind and can't see??? This is the 21st
century. We can do video calls on our cell phones now. Why
would a doctor not be able to examine a patient over the phone?

Only if the patient has a suitable device and can use it at
the relevant time.

It's tough to do a spinal tap over Skype.

That's a little bit more than an examination!

Aficionados could probably do a Spinal Tap over Skype

None more black! ("How much more black could it be?")