Coronavirus hunters pick up another piece of the trail in Italy...

[Fred Bloggs]

Retrospective investigation of archived blood samples from national screening program reveals SARS-Cov-2 was circulating in Italy with significant prevalence in September 2019. This was well before China even became aware of their Wuhan problem.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3110088/covid-19-virus-hunters-pick-another-piece-trail-italy

 

[Gerhard Hoffmann]

Am 18.11.20 um 10:45 schrieb Martin Brown:

Germany seemed to get away with it in the first wave with anomolously
low fatalities because the infection was largely confined to the young
and fit ski set who spend winter in the Italian Alps.

The first known German cases were at Webasto, a maker of car heaters.
They had a meeting that included a Chinese engineer.

The returning ski set was what set all of Europe on fire, other than
Italy. A really bad hot spot was Ischgl. They checked the cell phone
data of the visitors returning home:

<
https://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/article206879663/Corona-Pandemie-So-hat-Ischgl-das-Virus-in-die-Welt-getragen.html#cs-lazy-picture-placeholder-01c4eedaca.png
>

Germany got away relatively well because of contact tracing and
having a good medical infrastructure. We could even import
some patients from the neighbors.


Currently, in the 2nd wave, that tracing is completely overloaded.


Gerhard

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Thursday, November 19, 2020 at 2:40:29 AM UTC+11, Martin Brown wrote:

On 18/11/2020 11:41, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 8:45:39 PM UTC+11, Martin Brown wrote:
On 18/11/2020 01:48, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 12:28:20 PM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs
wrote:
On Tuesday, November 17, 2020 at 7:19:02 PM UTC-5, Bill Sloman
wrote:
On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 2:48:52 AM UTC+11, Fred Bloggs
wrote:

<snip>

Only once we knew what to look for could we find it!

It got noticed in Wuhan before the authorities were prepared to recognise it, but even that was only on the 30th December.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Wenliang

Undoubtedly with hindsight it is possible to look back and see how things could be done better but until the novel signal was 3 sigma above the noise it is highly unlikely that anyone would pick up on it (and be believed).

Li Wenliang did pick up on it - not all that early - and was chastised for doing it about a week too early. He wasn\'t all that far ahead of the curve.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Don Y]

On 11/18/2020 8:40 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

On 18/11/2020 11:41, Bill Sloman wrote:

Covid -19 kills young people too, and makes quite a few of them very sick.
It\'s also remarkably infectious.

Scare mongering. In the under 45\'s you have to be very seriously unlucky or
already be suffering from pre-existing comorbidities before it is a serious
threat. It is running through UK universities right now virtually uncontrolled
and there have been only a very few of them hospitalised. Most are self
isolating in their halls of residence.

The MRC nowcasting IFR data shows very clearly that the total number of people
under 65 who will die of Covid infections is roughly comparable with the number
aged between 65 and 70 who will suffer the same fate. This disease is very
strongly age related in its severity with every 8 years older doubling your
risk on average (as does being male).

Why is \"death\" the only criteria that is (apparently) being used to gauge
it\'s \"seriousness\"? We have ~6200 deaths, here (AZ) in a total population
of ~7M -- i.e., the number of deaths you would expect if EVERYONE in the state
had come down with the flu. Yet, only claim to have ~3% infected.

I\'ve never been *keen* on catching the flu -- despite having a considerably
lower chance of death from that infection -- or even a \"cold\".

I don\'t like being sick. (Can you point to many people who DO?) It
*costs* me money (treatment, lost income), time and \"discomfort\". That\'s not
how I\'d like to spend my days!

I now know more than a dozen people who *directly* lost a month (or more) to
their COVID infections. No telling how much more \"loss\" they will incur in
the months (and years) to come. THEY certainly don\'t know what their *total*
costs are likely to be!

Thankfully, I know of no fatalities. And, no \"asymptomatic\" infections
(folks that I know haven\'t been testing themselves -- what good would that
do? If you\'re sick, you\'re sick!).

 

[David Brown]

On 19/11/2020 03:49, Don Y wrote:

On 11/18/2020 8:40 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
On 18/11/2020 11:41, Bill Sloman wrote:

Covid -19 kills young people too, and makes quite a few of them very
sick. It\'s also remarkably infectious.

Scare mongering. In the under 45\'s you have to be very seriously
unlucky or already be suffering from pre-existing comorbidities before
it is a serious threat. It is running through UK universities right
now virtually uncontrolled and there have been only a very few of them
hospitalised. Most are self isolating in their halls of residence.

The MRC nowcasting IFR data shows very clearly that the total number
of people under 65 who will die of Covid infections is roughly
comparable with the number aged between 65 and 70 who will suffer the
same fate. This disease is very strongly age related in its severity
with every 8 years older doubling your risk on average (as does being
male).

Why is \"death\" the only criteria that is (apparently) being used to gauge
it\'s \"seriousness\"?  We have ~6200 deaths, here (AZ) in a total population
of ~7M -- i.e., the number of deaths you would expect if EVERYONE in the
state
had come down with the flu.  Yet, only claim to have ~3% infected.

I\'ve never been *keen* on catching the flu -- despite having a considerably
lower chance of death from that infection -- or even a \"cold\".

I don\'t like being sick.  (Can you point to many people who DO?)  It
*costs* me money (treatment, lost income), time and \"discomfort\". 
That\'s not
how I\'d like to spend my days!

I now know more than a dozen people who *directly* lost a month (or
more) to
their COVID infections.  No telling how much more \"loss\" they will incur in
the months (and years) to come.  THEY certainly don\'t know what their
*total*
costs are likely to be!

Thankfully, I know of no fatalities.  And, no \"asymptomatic\" infections
(folks that I know haven\'t been testing themselves -- what good would that
do?  If you\'re sick, you\'re sick!).

In addition to the simple unpleasantness and inconvenience of being ill
with \"flu-like symptoms\" for a few weeks, a significant fraction of
Covid suffers end up with serious long-term effects. These include
permanent (or at least long-lasting) loss smell, chronic fatigue,
damage to internal organs (especially the lungs) that will shorten
life-expectancy by many years, and even brain damage. I\'d like to see
numbers of this kind of thing being published and heavily publicised -
it might make the younger folks take things more seriously, instead of
thinking \"it\'s just old people that die of Covid, I\'ll be fine\". Maybe
you won\'t die now - but maybe you\'ll cut 10-20 years off your life-span.

 

[server]

On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 07:48:43 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

Retrospective investigation of archived blood samples from national screening program reveals SARS-Cov-2 was circulating in Italy with significant prevalence in September 2019. This was well before China even became aware of their Wuhan problem.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3110088/covid-19-virus-hunters-pick-another-piece-trail-italy

People are running PCR tests at N=35 and more. 2^35 is a big number.
2^45 is somewhat bigger.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/portuguese-court-rules-pcr-tests-unreliable-quarantines-unlawful

It will be funny if, some day, it is agreed that the PCR tests were
nonsense and masks didn\'t work.




--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

The best designs are necessarily accidental.

 

[Lasse Langwadt Christensen]

søndag den 22. november 2020 kl. 17.34.16 UTC+1 skrev jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com:

On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 07:48:43 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

Retrospective investigation of archived blood samples from national screening program reveals SARS-Cov-2 was circulating in Italy with significant prevalence in September 2019. This was well before China even became aware of their Wuhan problem.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3110088/covid-19-virus-hunters-pick-another-piece-trail-italy
People are running PCR tests at N=35 and more. 2^35 is a big number.
2^45 is somewhat bigger.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/portuguese-court-rules-pcr-tests-unreliable-quarantines-unlawful

It will be funny if, some day, it is agreed that the PCR tests were
nonsense and masks didn\'t work.

if it turns out masks didn\'t work I\'m sure the story will be that the unwashed masses just didn\'t use them right

 

[server]

On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 09:59:39 -0800 (PST), Lasse Langwadt Christensen
<langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:

søndag den 22. november 2020 kl. 17.34.16 UTC+1 skrev jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com:
On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 07:48:43 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

Retrospective investigation of archived blood samples from national screening program reveals SARS-Cov-2 was circulating in Italy with significant prevalence in September 2019. This was well before China even became aware of their Wuhan problem.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3110088/covid-19-virus-hunters-pick-another-piece-trail-italy
People are running PCR tests at N=35 and more. 2^35 is a big number.
2^45 is somewhat bigger.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/portuguese-court-rules-pcr-tests-unreliable-quarantines-unlawful

It will be funny if, some day, it is agreed that the PCR tests were
nonsense and masks didn\'t work.

if it turns out masks didn\'t work I\'m sure the story will be that the unwashed masses just didn\'t use them right

Well, that too. If any face-worn mask allows comfortable breathing,
it\'s not working very well.

Zero Hedge is right: a google search shows that the mainstream news
sources won\'t touch this story.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

The best designs are necessarily accidental.

 

[ke...@kjwdesigns.com]

On Sunday, 22 November 2020 at 10:06:26 UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
....

Zero Hedge is right: a google search shows that the mainstream news
sources won\'t touch this story.

....
In that case your Google skills must be limited.

When I Google for it I get links to the New York Times from four days ago, the Washington Post on Friday and numerous other mainstream news outlets.

kw

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 10:51:09 -0800 (PST), \"ke...@kjwdesigns.com\"
<keith@kjwdesigns.com> wrote:

On Sunday, 22 November 2020 at 10:06:26 UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
...
Zero Hedge is right: a google search shows that the mainstream news
sources won\'t touch this story.
...
In that case your Google skills must be limited.

Better than your people skills.

 

[ke...@kjwdesigns.com]

On Sunday, 22 November 2020 at 12:24:00 UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 10:51:09 -0800 (PST), \"ke...@....com\"
ke...@....com> wrote:

On Sunday, 22 November 2020 at 10:06:26 UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
...
Zero Hedge is right: a google search shows that the mainstream news
sources won\'t touch this story.
...
In that case your Google skills must be limited.
Better than your people skills.

Why, because I am contradicting your claim that is demonstrably not true?

You seem to be asserting that there is some conspiracy to hide information from the public.

kw

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Monday, November 23, 2020 at 7:34:14 AM UTC+11, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:

On Sunday, 22 November 2020 at 12:24:00 UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 10:51:09 -0800 (PST), \"ke...@....com\"
ke...@....com> wrote:

On Sunday, 22 November 2020 at 10:06:26 UTC-8, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
...
Zero Hedge is right: a google search shows that the mainstream news
sources won\'t touch this story.
...
In that case your Google skills must be limited.

Better than your people skills.

Why, because I am contradicting your claim that is demonstrably not true?

You seem to be asserting that there is some conspiracy to hide information from the public.

He\'s a right-wing ninny, who seems to think that Zero Hedge isn\'t in the business of slanting their reporting to suit right-wing ninnies like him and Cursitor Doom.

He expects to be flattered, and if you don\'t flatter him, you lack \"people skills\", even when what he has posted is clearly potty - as it frequently is.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Martin Brown]

On 22/11/2020 17:59, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:

søndag den 22. november 2020 kl. 17.34.16 UTC+1 skrev
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com:
On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 07:48:43 -0800 (PST), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

Retrospective investigation of archived blood samples from
national screening program reveals SARS-Cov-2 was circulating in
Italy with significant prevalence in September 2019. This was
well before China even became aware of their Wuhan problem.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3110088/covid-19-virus-hunters-pick-another-piece-trail-italy


People are running PCR tests at N=35 and more. 2^35 is a big number.
2^45 is somewhat bigger.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/portuguese-court-rules-pcr-tests-unreliable-quarantines-unlawful

It will be funny if, some day, it is agreed that the PCR tests were
nonsense and masks didn\'t work.

UK PCR testing seems to work OK. Most of the people who test positive
here go on to develop the disease and the problem is not really with
false positives so much as false negatives which run at about 20%.

A friend who tested *negative* for Covid had all of the classic
symptoms and was told to self isolate anyway. They were not redoing
tests at that time (and only really testing hospital admissions).

Mass testing is being rolled out (probably inadvisedly) with a 0.1%
false positive rate which seems OK until you apply it to a million
people when the incidence in the population is about the same. Right now
the incidence rate in England is 1:80 and possibly falling in lockdown.

if it turns out masks didn\'t work I\'m sure the story will be that
the unwashed masses just didn\'t use them right

The majority of the great unwashed don\'t wear or treat their masks in a
safe or effective manner. Nose not covered and touching their eyes with
potentially contaminated hands being the two most common errors I see.

Failure to respect the difference between the clean inside surface and
the potentially contaminated outer surface being the other one.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Steve Wilson]

Martin Brown <\'\'\'newspam\'\'\'@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

UK PCR testing seems to work OK. Most of the people who test positive
here go on to develop the disease and the problem is not really with
false positives so much as false negatives which run at about 20%.

PCR requires a certain minimum sample to detect. If the patient is below
that threshold, they will produce a false negative.

A friend who tested *negative* for Covid had all of the classic
symptoms and was told to self isolate anyway. They were not redoing
tests at that time (and only really testing hospital admissions).

Mass testing is being rolled out (probably inadvisedly) with a 0.1%
false positive rate which seems OK until you apply it to a million
people when the incidence in the population is about the same. Right
now the incidence rate in England is 1:80 and possibly falling in
lockdown.

if it turns out masks didn\'t work I\'m sure the story will be that the
unwashed masses just didn\'t use them right

The majority of the great unwashed don\'t wear or treat their masks in
a safe or effective manner. Nose not covered and touching their eyes
with potentially contaminated hands being the two most common errors I
see.

Failure to respect the difference between the clean inside surface and
the potentially contaminated outer surface being the other one.

Very true. My girlfriend uses a HEPA filter with a mask and face shield.
She changes the mask as soon as it gets wet from her breath, and she
disinfects her hands often. So far this seems to be working.

HEPA filters are close to 100% effective on virus particles. See

<https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-about-masks-
heres-science-behind-how-face-masks-prevent>

<https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/transmission-of-sars-
cov-2-implications-for-infection-prevention-precautions>

<https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/modes-of-transmission-
of-virus-causing-covid-19-implications-for-ipc-precaution-
recommendations>

<https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/q-a-how-is-covid-19-
transmitted>

The BROAD AirPro Mask Rechargeable Electrical Air Purifying Respirator
with HEPA Filter

CDN$ 94.99

<https://www.amazon.ca/AirPro-Rechargeable-Electrical-Purifying-
Respirator/dp/B07YWLBVF2/>




--
Science teaches us to trust. - sw