Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 13:39:14 -0700 (PDT),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, March 29, 2020 at 4:26:28 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Sunday, March 29, 2020 at 4:23:13 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 2020-03-29 15:25, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 19:34:19 +0100, Jeff Layman
jmlayman@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 29/03/20 16:35, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
This according the British epidemiologist and government scientific adviser with a lifetime of experience studying deadly disease and epidemics.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/25/two-thirds-patients-die-coronavirus-would-have-died-year-anyway/
So what? Take a thousand patients with terminal cancer and less than 6
months to live. Stand them in the middle of the road and let 10 drunk
drivers run them down. Are you saying we shouldn't blame the drunk
drivers because the patients were going to die anyway?
We are all going to die, so it seems we shouldn't be concerned about how
it happens if we don't reach our expected natural individual lifespan.
Of course, the newspaper article was shortened, so we don't know exactly
what was said or if there were any caveats.
What if the average number of people are killed this year by colds and
flu, but we gave this virus a name and a lot of testing and a lot of
publicity? Why don't we launch a similar massive effort to save lives
every year, from every virus?
We have 2300 corona19-blamed deaths in the USA so far. We have 20-50K
flu deaths so far. For the average old person dying of complications
of a cold or flu, we probably don't do a PCR analysis of what the
virus was.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_swine_flu_pandemic#United_States
The data collected on colds and flu is shockingly bad, considering
that a lot of people die.
Sir Wilfrid Laurier, the famous doctor, called pneumonia "the old man's
friend." These days it's almost the only way to die that isn't
horrible, except for something sudden like getting hit by a bus or
suffering a massive stroke.
What part of dying from pneumonia is not horrible???
The hospital setting puts you in coma. You never see it coming.
Last time I was in a hospital, there were several strong motivations
to get out, preferably alive.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
This according the British epidemiologist and government scientific adviser with a lifetime of experience studying deadly disease and epidemics.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/25/two-thirds-patients-die-coronavirus-would-have-died-year-anyway/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Ferguson_(epidemiologist)
** He is a leading expert and is making more sense than anyone else.
But, in science
** The death rate figure I see is more like 2% - implying 1.3%
Very consistent as it equates to 76 years.
No, it is NOT consistent;
whit3rd the insightful and polite wrote:
That's just clickbait.
He's firing off random hypotheses suitable for testing
** He is a leading expert and is making more sense than anyone else.
Reality check: if the disease has 3% mortality, that implies one in fifty of the people who catch it 'would have died this year'.
That's inconsistent with normal human lifespan.
** The death rate figure I see is more like 2% - implying 1.3%
Very consistent as it equates to 76 years.
The biggest WITLESS FUCKHEAD here poseted:
-----------------------------------------
whit3rd wrote:
That's just clickbait
** The death rate figure I see is more like 2% - implying 1.3%
Very consistent as it equates to 76 years.
No, it is NOT consistent
**Exactly consistent with the usual human deaths rate in advance countries.
On Sunday, March 29, 2020 at 3:25:31 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 19:34:19 +0100, Jeff Layman
jmlayman@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 29/03/20 16:35, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
This according the British epidemiologist and government scientific adviser with a lifetime of experience studying deadly disease and epidemics.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/25/two-thirds-patients-die-coronavirus-would-have-died-year-anyway/
So what? Take a thousand patients with terminal cancer and less than 6
months to live. Stand them in the middle of the road and let 10 drunk
drivers run them down. Are you saying we shouldn't blame the drunk
drivers because the patients were going to die anyway?
We are all going to die, so it seems we shouldn't be concerned about how
it happens if we don't reach our expected natural individual lifespan.
Of course, the newspaper article was shortened, so we don't know exactly
what was said or if there were any caveats.
What if the average number of people are killed this year by colds and
flu, but we gave this virus a name and a lot of testing and a lot of
publicity? Why don't we launch a similar massive effort to save lives
every year, from every virus?
We have 2300 corona19-blamed deaths in the USA so far. We have 20-50K
flu deaths so far. For the average old person dying of complications
of a cold or flu, we probably don't do a PCR analysis of what the
virus was.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_swine_flu_pandemic#United_States
The data collected on colds and flu is shockingly bad, considering
that a lot of people die.
The statistic for deaths due to all causes each and every day in U.S. is 6,600. The corona deaths don't even register compared to that. It's just another cause of death.
But if you do not do enough to stop transmission, the cases will rise to
way over that figure. From
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-analysis/news--wuhan-coronavirus/>:
"We estimate that in the absence of interventions, COVID-19 would have
resulted in 7.0 billion infections and 40 million deaths globally this
year."
And that isn't the only point. Viruses mutate (and we know that this
coronavirus has already mutated - it must have done to infect humans).
If it does mutate again to a more infectious and deadly form, the death
rate then will make the current prediction figures look puny by comparison.
The biggest WITLESS FUCKHEAD here posted:
---------------------------------------
** Listen FUCKHEAD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You are just another brain dead TROLL !!
IMO you ought to be in a home for the mentally retarded.
It's terrifying to think an UTTER IMBECILE like you is on the loose.
FFS, FOAD.
..... Phil
The biggest WITLESS FUCKHEAD here posted:
---------------------------------------
** Listen FUCKHEAD !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You are just another brain dead TROLL !!
IMO you ought to be in a home for the mentally retarded.
It's terrifying to think an UTTER IMBECILE like you is on the
loose.
FFS, FOAD.
..... Phil
On 29/03/20 21:41, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, March 29, 2020 at 3:25:31 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 19:34:19 +0100, Jeff Layman
jmlayman@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 29/03/20 16:35, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
This according the British epidemiologist and government scientific adviser with a lifetime of experience studying deadly disease and epidemics.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/25/two-thirds-patients-die-coronavirus-would-have-died-year-anyway/
So what? Take a thousand patients with terminal cancer and less than 6
months to live. Stand them in the middle of the road and let 10 drunk
drivers run them down. Are you saying we shouldn't blame the drunk
drivers because the patients were going to die anyway?
We are all going to die, so it seems we shouldn't be concerned about how
it happens if we don't reach our expected natural individual lifespan.
Of course, the newspaper article was shortened, so we don't know exactly
what was said or if there were any caveats.
What if the average number of people are killed this year by colds and
flu, but we gave this virus a name and a lot of testing and a lot of
publicity? Why don't we launch a similar massive effort to save lives
every year, from every virus?
We have 2300 corona19-blamed deaths in the USA so far. We have 20-50K
flu deaths so far. For the average old person dying of complications
of a cold or flu, we probably don't do a PCR analysis of what the
virus was.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_swine_flu_pandemic#United_States
The data collected on colds and flu is shockingly bad, considering
that a lot of people die.
The statistic for deaths due to all causes each and every day in U.S. is 6,600. The corona deaths don't even register compared to that. It's just another cause of death.
But if you do not do enough to stop transmission, the cases will rise to
way over that figure. From
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-analysis/news--wuhan-coronavirus/>:
"We estimate that in the absence of interventions, COVID-19 would have
resulted in 7.0 billion infections and 40 million deaths globally this
year."
And that isn't the only point. Viruses mutate (and we know that this
coronavirus has already mutated - it must have done to infect humans).
If it does mutate again to a more infectious and deadly form, the death
rate then will make the current prediction figures look puny by comparison.
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 10:58:34 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 30 Mar 2020 08:21:55 +0100, Jeff Layman
jmlayman@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 29/03/20 21:41, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, March 29, 2020 at 3:25:31 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 19:34:19 +0100, Jeff Layman
jmlayman@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 29/03/20 16:35, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
This according the British epidemiologist and government scientific adviser with a lifetime of experience studying deadly disease and epidemics.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/25/two-thirds-patients-die-coronavirus-would-have-died-year-anyway/
So what? Take a thousand patients with terminal cancer and less than 6
months to live. Stand them in the middle of the road and let 10 drunk
drivers run them down. Are you saying we shouldn't blame the drunk
drivers because the patients were going to die anyway?
We are all going to die, so it seems we shouldn't be concerned about how
it happens if we don't reach our expected natural individual lifespan.
Of course, the newspaper article was shortened, so we don't know exactly
what was said or if there were any caveats.
What if the average number of people are killed this year by colds and
flu, but we gave this virus a name and a lot of testing and a lot of
publicity? Why don't we launch a similar massive effort to save lives
every year, from every virus?
We have 2300 corona19-blamed deaths in the USA so far. We have 20-50K
flu deaths so far. For the average old person dying of complications
of a cold or flu, we probably don't do a PCR analysis of what the
virus was.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_swine_flu_pandemic#United_States
The data collected on colds and flu is shockingly bad, considering
that a lot of people die.
The statistic for deaths due to all causes each and every day in U.S. is 6,600. The corona deaths don't even register compared to that. It's just another cause of death.
But if you do not do enough to stop transmission, the cases will rise to
way over that figure. From
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-analysis/news--wuhan-coronavirus/>:
"We estimate that in the absence of interventions, COVID-19 would have
resulted in 7.0 billion infections and 40 million deaths globally this
year."
The great 1918 flu infected about half the world population. The bad
2009 pandemic, maybe 15%.
And that isn't the only point. Viruses mutate (and we know that this
coronavirus has already mutated - it must have done to infect humans).
If it does mutate again to a more infectious and deadly form, the death
rate then will make the current prediction figures look puny by comparison.
Pandemic viruses usually, not always, mutate to be milder. There are
dozens of cold and flu viruses around this season. Any of them could
mutate to be worse.
This thing came through my area in early December. I rate the symptoms as mild to moderate, and not as bad as influenza but longer lasting.
On Mon, 30 Mar 2020 08:21:55 +0100, Jeff Layman
jmlayman@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 29/03/20 21:41, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, March 29, 2020 at 3:25:31 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 19:34:19 +0100, Jeff Layman
jmlayman@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 29/03/20 16:35, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
This according the British epidemiologist and government scientific adviser with a lifetime of experience studying deadly disease and epidemics.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/25/two-thirds-patients-die-coronavirus-would-have-died-year-anyway/
So what? Take a thousand patients with terminal cancer and less than 6
months to live. Stand them in the middle of the road and let 10 drunk
drivers run them down. Are you saying we shouldn't blame the drunk
drivers because the patients were going to die anyway?
We are all going to die, so it seems we shouldn't be concerned about how
it happens if we don't reach our expected natural individual lifespan.
Of course, the newspaper article was shortened, so we don't know exactly
what was said or if there were any caveats.
What if the average number of people are killed this year by colds and
flu, but we gave this virus a name and a lot of testing and a lot of
publicity? Why don't we launch a similar massive effort to save lives
every year, from every virus?
We have 2300 corona19-blamed deaths in the USA so far. We have 20-50K
flu deaths so far. For the average old person dying of complications
of a cold or flu, we probably don't do a PCR analysis of what the
virus was.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_swine_flu_pandemic#United_States
The data collected on colds and flu is shockingly bad, considering
that a lot of people die.
The statistic for deaths due to all causes each and every day in U.S. is 6,600. The corona deaths don't even register compared to that. It's just another cause of death.
But if you do not do enough to stop transmission, the cases will rise to
way over that figure. From
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-analysis/news--wuhan-coronavirus/>:
"We estimate that in the absence of interventions, COVID-19 would have
resulted in 7.0 billion infections and 40 million deaths globally this
year."
The great 1918 flu infected about half the world population. The bad
2009 pandemic, maybe 15%.
And that isn't the only point. Viruses mutate (and we know that this
coronavirus has already mutated - it must have done to infect humans).
If it does mutate again to a more infectious and deadly form, the death
rate then will make the current prediction figures look puny by comparison.
Pandemic viruses usually, not always, mutate to be milder. There are
dozens of cold and flu viruses around this season. Any of them could
mutate to be worse.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 2:35:08 AM UTC+11, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
This according the British epidemiologist and government scientific adviser with a lifetime of experience studying deadly disease and epidemics.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/25/two-thirds-patients-die-coronavirus-would-have-died-year-anyway/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Ferguson_(epidemiologist)
It's reported in the UK Daily Telegraph, which is an up-market source of right-wing rubbish.
I suppose that fact that two thirds of Covid-19 victims might have died from some other cause within a year is supposed to be comforting for the other third, who wouldn't have.
The fact that the guy is an epidemiologist doesn't make his extremely speculative predictions about the age-composition of the potential victims all that interesting.
It's not going to help the UK get their Covid-19 epidemic under control
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/
There were only 2546 new cases on the 28th March, which is down from 2885 on the 27th March, but one swallow doesn't make a summer, as Italy demonstrates.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Pandemic viruses usually, not always, mutate to be milder. [...]
On 2020-03-30 16:58, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
[...]
Pandemic viruses usually, not always, mutate to be milder. [...]
Yes, but do you realize why?
Jeroen Belleman
On 2020-03-30 16:58, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
[...]
Pandemic viruses usually, not always, mutate to be milder. [...]
Yes, but do you realize why?
Jeroen Belleman
On Mon, 30 Mar 2020 09:01:24 -0700 (PDT),
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 10:58:34 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 30 Mar 2020 08:21:55 +0100, Jeff Layman
jmlayman@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 29/03/20 21:41, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, March 29, 2020 at 3:25:31 PM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 19:34:19 +0100, Jeff Layman
jmlayman@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 29/03/20 16:35, bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com wrote:
This according the British epidemiologist and government scientific adviser with a lifetime of experience studying deadly disease and epidemics.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/25/two-thirds-patients-die-coronavirus-would-have-died-year-anyway/
So what? Take a thousand patients with terminal cancer and less than 6
months to live. Stand them in the middle of the road and let 10 drunk
drivers run them down. Are you saying we shouldn't blame the drunk
drivers because the patients were going to die anyway?
We are all going to die, so it seems we shouldn't be concerned about how
it happens if we don't reach our expected natural individual lifespan.
Of course, the newspaper article was shortened, so we don't know exactly
what was said or if there were any caveats.
What if the average number of people are killed this year by colds and
flu, but we gave this virus a name and a lot of testing and a lot of
publicity? Why don't we launch a similar massive effort to save lives
every year, from every virus?
We have 2300 corona19-blamed deaths in the USA so far. We have 20-50K
flu deaths so far. For the average old person dying of complications
of a cold or flu, we probably don't do a PCR analysis of what the
virus was.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_swine_flu_pandemic#United_States
The data collected on colds and flu is shockingly bad, considering
that a lot of people die.
The statistic for deaths due to all causes each and every day in U.S. is 6,600. The corona deaths don't even register compared to that. It's just another cause of death.
But if you do not do enough to stop transmission, the cases will rise to
way over that figure. From
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-analysis/news--wuhan-coronavirus/>:
"We estimate that in the absence of interventions, COVID-19 would have
resulted in 7.0 billion infections and 40 million deaths globally this
year."
The great 1918 flu infected about half the world population. The bad
2009 pandemic, maybe 15%.
And that isn't the only point. Viruses mutate (and we know that this
coronavirus has already mutated - it must have done to infect humans)..
If it does mutate again to a more infectious and deadly form, the death
rate then will make the current prediction figures look puny by comparison.
Pandemic viruses usually, not always, mutate to be milder. There are
dozens of cold and flu viruses around this season. Any of them could
mutate to be worse.
This thing came through my area in early December. I rate the symptoms as mild to moderate, and not as bad as influenza but longer lasting.
Mo and I may have it. Faint sore throat, very mild headache, slight
temperature, a little tickle in the upper chest. Yes, very mild and
long lasting. But there are lots of other viruses this winter, so C19
is improbable.
I'm dying (not literally yet) to see some good general-population
antibody studies.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
On Sunday, March 29, 2020 at 8:18:55 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Monday, March 30, 2020 at 2:35:08 AM UTC+11, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
This according the British epidemiologist and government scientific adviser with a lifetime of experience studying deadly disease and epidemics.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/25/two-thirds-patients-die-coronavirus-would-have-died-year-anyway/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Ferguson_(epidemiologist)
It's reported in the UK Daily Telegraph, which is an up-market source of right-wing rubbish.
I suppose that fact that two thirds of Covid-19 victims might have died from some other cause within a year is supposed to be comforting for the other third, who wouldn't have.
The fact that the guy is an epidemiologist doesn't make his extremely speculative predictions about the age-composition of the potential victims all that interesting.
It's not going to help the UK get their Covid-19 epidemic under control
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/
There were only 2546 new cases on the 28th March, which is down from 2885 on the 27th March, but one swallow doesn't make a summer, as Italy demonstrates.
The same criteria is going to be used to ration ventilators in overwhelmed hospitals right now.