bluefrogguy

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion

Recommended Posts

Just now, KCTD25 said:

It is a claim. The Chinese government claimed that they had no evidence of human to human transmission in January. You don't think China knew that it was being passed between humans in January, almost 2 months in with cases exploding? How did they think all those people were getting it? I guess that's possible, but we are talking about China so I'm going to guess the chances of that being true are slim. 

Having no evidence isn't a claim.  WHO didn't have the info China did.  They had what was released.  How are they supposed to say there is human to human transmission if they've never seen any data to support that.  They didn't say it CANNOT be transmitted, they said they don't have the evidence to support whether it does or does not.  That's how science works.  You hypothesize, gather data, make conclusions (many more steps).  If they have no data, they can make no scientific conclusions.  Until ANY scientific organization has the evidence needed, what they said is literally what they should have said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KCTD25 said:

That's exactly my point. I just think it was irresponsible for the WHO to repeat that claim, without the WHO independently verifying that it was true. 

You keep calling it a claim... it's not.  What they were saying is they didn't have evidence to support it moving person to person.  That's it.  Once you get the evidence you make conclusions, not using only the tainted evidence from one source.  Otherwise, they would have said it was not.  That would be a claim.  Saying you don't have evidence is literally just that, you can't make a claim one way or the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, jfazz23 said:

 

they push chinese propaganda and people cite them....then criticize actual science French studies that have been peer reviewed....sigh

You still here ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, KCTD25 said:

It is a claim. The Chinese government claimed that they had no evidence of human to human transmission in January. You don't think China knew that it was being passed between humans in January, almost 2 months in with cases exploding? How did they think all those people were getting it? I guess that's possible, but we are talking about China so I'm going to guess the chances of that being true are slim. 

Yes, China lied, but they never showed the evidence they had to the WHO or anyone else.  WHO cannot make a claim of transmission without that evidence, all they can say is they don't have evidence of it transmitting a certain way.  They are a scientific organization.  Expecting scientists to make a solid claim with little to no evidence of anything isn't going to happen.  That's not how science works.  Without data to support human to human transmission (more positive tests show nothing, could have been in the water for all they knew), they can only say they don't have evidence.  Think about it like this.  Just because the police don't have evidence of a murder at the scene doesn't mean it didn't occur.  You've never heard them say there was no evidence of murder on a suicide case only to change that determination once evidence presented itself?  ANY agency like this can only put out facts based on evidence.  They cannot use conjecture. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, daynlokki said:

You keep calling it a claim... it's not.  What they were saying is they didn't have evidence to support it moving person to person.  That's it.  Once you get the evidence you make conclusions, not using only the tainted evidence from one source.  Otherwise, they would have said it was not.  That would be a claim.  Saying you don't have evidence is literally just that, you can't make a claim one way or the other.

You're arguing semantics. If you have an issue with calling it a claim that's fine. The point is the WHO repeated China's statement that they had no evidence of human to human transmission, and that was irresponsible for a scientific organization to do without independent confirmation, knowing it was coming from a communist country known for silencing it's people and pushing propaganda. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, KCTD25 said:

You're arguing semantics. If you have an issue with calling it a claim that's fine. The point is the WHO repeated China's statement that they had no evidence of human to human transmission, and that was irresponsible for a scientific organization to do without independent confirmation, knowing it was coming from a communist country known for silencing it's people and pushing propaganda. 

Because at that time they had no evidence.  China was the only country with any of it and they weren't sharing it.  They cannot make any determination one way or another until they actually do have evidence... You expecting them to say there was human to human transmission without any scientific verification of that?  For all they knew it was transmitted through the air, food, bats, pets, there are any number of ways to transmit disease and viruses.  Without any actual PROOF, the ONE thing they can say is they don't have evidence... because they had no evidence.  Nothing shown to them at that time pointed to human to human transmission outside of more people getting sick.  Even that could have been a myriad of different types of transmission.  They are SCIENTISTS.  Their burden of proof is MUCH higher than the average human.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, KCTD25 said:

You're arguing semantics. If you have an issue with calling it a claim that's fine. The point is the WHO repeated China's statement that they had no evidence of human to human transmission, and that was irresponsible for a scientific organization to do without independent confirmation, knowing it was coming from a communist country known for silencing it's people and pushing propaganda. 

Question, Epstein suicide or murder?  Because without any proof all you can say as an organization is that there is no evidence a murder occured... because you don't have evidence to show that a murder happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, daynlokki said:

Because at that time they had no evidence.  China was the only country with any of it and they weren't sharing it.  They cannot make any determination one way or another until they actually do have evidence... You expecting them to say there was human to human transmission without any scientific verification of that?  For all they knew it was transmitted through the air, food, bats, pets, there are any number of ways to transmit disease and viruses.  Without any actual PROOF, the ONE thing they can say is they don't have evidence... because they had no evidence.  Nothing shown to them at that time pointed to human to human transmission outside of more people getting sick.  Even that could have been a myriad of different types of transmission.  They are SCIENTISTS.  Their burden of proof is MUCH higher than the average human.

I expect them to not make a statement either way until they have independently verified evidence to support it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, KCTD25 said:

I expect them to not make a statement either way until they have independently verified evidence to support it. 

Which is exactly what they did when stating there is no evidence of human to human transmission at this time.  They said they don't have anything to show one way or the other.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, daynlokki said:

Which is exactly what they did when stating there is no evidence of human to human transmission at this time.  They said they don't have anything to show one way or the other.

lol, ok. I've officially lost interest in this conversation. Have a good night. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, KCTD25 said:

I expect them to not make a statement either way until they have independently verified evidence to support it. 

Isn’t that what happened? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bugs bunny said:

Isn’t that what happened? 

He's taking saying there is no evidence of something as a claim it's not happening.  That's not what that is saying.  This is a disconnect with about half of America, sadly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

first off, I appreciate hearing different views and using my own brain to make a decision based on evidence presented. I do not have a scientific background and enjoy reading your thoughts on this serious matter,

 

that said,as far as “there is no evidence that it is transmitted person to person” , I took that as good news. Whewf.  I simply assumed that they conducted tests to see.  I can understand the concept of it meaning exactly what it says.  However, whether right or wrong, the way it was presented in the media by scientists and doctors, using those words, may have lulled me into a false sense of security.  Maybe a majority people understood it as “no evidence means no evidence”, but I’m guessing most people were like me.  A country of people letting their guards down could not have helped, with what we can all agree on is a situation that at least at some points was mishandled,

Edited by Cesare13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Cesare13 said:

first off, I appreciate hearing different views and using my own brain to make a decision based on evidence presented. I do not have a scientific background and enjoy reading your thoughts on this serious matter,

 

that said,as far as “there is no evidence that it is transmitted person to person” , I took that as good news. Whewf.  I simply assumed that they conducted tests to see.  I can understand the concept of it meaning exactly what it says.  However, whether right or wrong, the way it was presented in the media by scientists and doctors, using those words, may have lulled me into a false sense of security.  Maybe a majority people understood it as “no evidence means no evidence”, but I’m guessing most people were like me.  A country of people letting their guards down could not have helped.

Can’t blame someone else for assumptions made by you. Take their wording at face value. They are scientists not politicians. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Full post by the WHO for reference: "Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China," 

Media slants this so much both ways. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know almost nothing about this but...

Perhaps it was poor communication.  People will use phrases like "there is no evidence that x"...  I think there's often an implication that means something like "we've looked for evidence and it isn't there."   So, if I have gone through the suicide top to bottom, and his personal life was consistent with suicide and he had powder burns on his hands, etc etc.  and I say "I found no evidence that it was anything but suicide" that's different than if I just arrive on the scene and the press is asking me if it was a murder and I say "there's no evidence of that."  I actually probably wouldn't say that. I'd say "I haven't started my investigation."

Honestly, my own default interpretation when someone says "there is no evidence that..." is that they've looked fairly hard and it wasn't there.  Since most of us are not scientists, it's probably better to say things like "we don't know yet" or "we haven't investigated that yet."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, jonninho said:

Please, do not say baseball in Mid-May in this forum.. i have done so multiple times and have received rather pessimistic responses.

I have said and stand by my prediction of baseball in May at some point.

 

Love the optimism.  Zero chance

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, jfazz23 said:

UN is also useless and a left wing political organization.  its obvious where you and Tony sit politically

When we are getting into conspiracy stuff and politics of a weird kind aren't we getting a wee bit off track here?  Sounds like trolling to me.  I mean even the guy with the weird hair on Ancient Aliens isn't this much into twilight zone stuff.

Edited by The Big Bat Theory
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd add, from the WHO pov, or any international body attempting to provide a neutral perspective, when a major world government lies, it puts them in a precarious position.  It's not really their function, nor is do they really have the resources, to make judgments about the truth of the claims.  

Every country does this and the more power/interests they have, the more likely they are to do it.  For example, the presumptive Dem candidate for POTUS just said, in very plain language, he voted for the war though he never believed there were WMDs (which is itself a bit of a propaganda term, creating a false equivalence between some useless mustard gas from WWI and an ICBM). Remember "dirty bombs?"  We just made those up. They wouldn't work. Anyway, I think almost everyone now realizes that the whole thing was fabricated. And certainly Russia, France, India, whomever do the same stuff both intentionally, and by being blinded by their own desires. 

Ultimately, it's just a very messy situation.  I doubt the WHOs objective was to promote Chinese propaganda and thereby increase the spread of the virus.  Maybe they could be more cautious with their language which is great when a rival country is making dubious claims. But whenever your country gets that treatment, you, or at least your leaders, will make a massive stink.  That's just politics.  

Then, on top of all that, you have the press talking about things they don't understand, or being deceptive, which we see all the time with less critical scientific studies.  You know, like when some study shows that people who drink a lot of coffee have X result but the researchers say more research is needed and maybe the real cause was something else and then journalists write a bunch of stories like, "Is Coffee The Fountain Of Youth?" 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Oxford now reporting infection Fatality rate of  0.19% which probably makes it less dangerous than the Flu. this i nothing more than media hysteria...or is this anecdotal evidence too :)

https://www.cebm.net/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/

 

Our current best assumption, as of the 22nd March, is the IFR  is approximate 0.19% (95% CI, 0.16 to 0.24).*

 

Edited by jfazz23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, GamblorLA said:

I'd add, from the WHO pov, or any international body attempting to provide a neutral perspective, when a major world government lies, it puts them in a precarious position.  It's not really their function, nor is do they really have the resources, to make judgments about the truth of the claims.  

Every country does this and the more power/interests they have, the more likely they are to do it.  For example, the presumptive Dem candidate for POTUS just said, in very plain language, he voted for the war though he never believed there were WMDs (which is itself a bit of a propaganda term, creating a false equivalence between some useless mustard gas from WWI and an ICBM). Remember "dirty bombs?"  We just made those up. They wouldn't work. Anyway, I think almost everyone now realizes that the whole thing was fabricated. And certainly Russia, France, India, whomever do the same stuff both intentionally, and by being blinded by their own desires. 

Ultimately, it's just a very messy situation.  I doubt the WHOs objective was to promote Chinese propaganda and thereby increase the spread of the virus.  Maybe they could be more cautious with their language which is great when a rival country is making dubious claims. But whenever your country gets that treatment, you, or at least your leaders, will make a massive stink.  That's just politics.  

Then, on top of all that, you have the press talking about things they don't understand, or being deceptive, which we see all the time with less critical scientific studies.  You know, like when some study shows that people who drink a lot of coffee have X result but the researchers say more research is needed and maybe the real cause was something else and then journalists write a bunch of stories like, "Is Coffee The Fountain Of Youth?" 

 

WHO leader was elected with OVERWHELMING backing by the communist chinese government.  now hes covering up chinese lies and pushing chinese propoganda.  just look at this tweet from WHO. lmao. "WHO does NOT recommend any specific health measures..."

Image result for nicolas cage laugh gif

 

 

edit: here is a little more about how WHO handled corona virus.  just lol if you take them seriously

Image

Edited by jfazz23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, jfazz23 said:

 

WHO leader was elected with OVERWHELMING backing by the communist chinese government.  now hes covering up chinese lies and pushing chinese propoganda.  just look at this tweet from WHO. lmao. "WHO does NOT recommend any specific health measures..."

Image result for nicolas cage laugh gif

 

 

edit: here is a little more about how WHO handled corona virus.  just lol if you take them seriously

Image

This is fake news. I showed the tweet in its entirety up above. They said: "Preliminaryinvestigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China," 

Read the actual travel advisory from the 5th of January from your citation: 

While the cause of the pneumonia seems to be a novel coronavirus, transmission potential and modes of transmission remain unclear. Therefore, it would be prudent to reduce the general risk of acute respiratory infections while travelling in or from affected areas (currently Wuhan)...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most coronaviruses aren’t serious or life threatening. They aren’t going to name something a pandemic based purely off the information given to them by the Chinese government. Without it being outside of a country blatantly lying to them how are they supposed to form any basis for a scientific opinion? China wasn’t allowing the WHO in during the beginning. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/02/07/health/cdc-coronavirus-china.amp.html

Cant formulate anything without data to support you. Of course all they could say is there is no evidence. The only evidence they had was that it was a coronavirus (several versions of the common cold are as well) and there was some pneumonia involved early on. They had no basis to tell what the forms of transmissions were considering the ONLY data on a NEW virus they got was given to them by the Chinese government. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it does turn out to be .19% and it is highly infectious, that is a lot of people. .0019x 150,000,000 (less than half of US) is 285,000. As it says in the paper you linked, it is very hard to know in the beginning so it could easily have been even worse. Hopefully we land at the lower end of the range, but it's a range.

 

Anyway, one thing I don't get. 

1: The Chinese and WHO were putting out deceptive propaganda at the start saying the virus was not a big concern.

2 THEY are putting out deceptive propaganda now saying the virus is a big concern. 

3: What?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jfazz23 said:

Oxford now reporting infection Fatality rate of  0.19% which probably makes it less dangerous than the Flu. this i nothing more than media hysteria...or is this anecdotal evidence too :)

https://www.cebm.net/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/

 

Our current best assumption, as of the 22nd March, is the IFR  is approximate 0.19% (95% CI, 0.16 to 0.24).*

 

America is chalk full of people with Cardiovascular, diabetes and hypertension. With a real risk of our health care system being overwhelmed. All of which will raise the death rate.

There is a trend in how eastern cultures are handling this over western cultures and it's not in our favor.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.