COVID-19 Science Thread

[Xtrema]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It is quite telling that another month has gone by, and all talk of masks is gone because they are not even able to remotely generate data in favour of masks. And you still haven't provided a lick of evidence in the supportive of the belief. I guess if the gov told you to shove your thumb up your ass because it prevents transmission, you would because "you just don't know it could work".

Just because the info either doesn't appear in your circle or you actively label it as fake news, doesn't mean there is no data.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-h...y-researchers/

Not proven yet. But there are a lot of data shows that the lack of proven vaccine, it's the best weapon we got for now.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Just because the info either doesn't appear in your circle or you actively label it as fake news, doesn't mean there is no data.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-h...y-researchers/

Not proven yet. But there are a lot of data shows that the lack of proven vaccine, it's the best weapon we got for now.

yeah, there is sufficient evidence to make the discussion a pointless one.

[Misterman]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

yeah, there is sufficient evidence to make the discussion a pointless one.

And now we have Hinshaw basically confirming masks are pointless.

[zechs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

And now we have Hinshaw basically confirming masks are pointless.

No, that's only in YOUR echo chamber you covid denier/anti-masker /sarcasm

[Tik-Tok]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

And now we have Hinshaw basically confirming masks are pointless.

Source?

[Misterman]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No, that's only in YOUR echo chamber you covid denier/anti-masker /sarcasm

No I am not Hinshaw. Sorry for the confusion. If you think she is a denier/anti masker, you can take that up with her. Maybe she is just a puppet for the UCP now? That's up to you to decide for yourself. I'm just relaying the update.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Source?

Update the other day about how they have wrapped up their asymptomatic testing. And essentially asymptomatic spread AND spread from contact with confirmed cases(wish they would have elaborated more on that little tidbit add in) is very low(asymptomatic testing revealed 7 cases in every 10,000). The main reason they have pushed mask use is due to the presumed high asymptomatic spread potential.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7341602/a...-september-17/

[Xtrema]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Update the other day about how they have wrapped up their asymptomatic testing. And essentially asymptomatic spread AND spread from contact with confirmed cases(wish they would have elaborated more on that little tidbit add in) is very low(asymptomatic testing revealed 7 cases in every 10,000). The main reason they have pushed mask use is due to the presumed high asymptomatic spread potential.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7341602/a...-september-17/

That's a dangerous conclusion. Since we are not forcing everyone into asymptomatic testing. Just volunteers.

There is a significant number of people who are sick will also not go in for testing because the implication. Those are the people we need to force a mask on. If anything, people who goes in for asymptomatic testing, we really don't have to worry about masks on them, chancing are they are probably responsible enough to be careful and considerate enough to wear a mask.

Also, data isn't based on the same baseline since mask is not mandatory thru out the province.

[zechs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No I am not Hinshaw. ]

Sorry, this forum's setup is different from what I am used to. Was agreeing with you, trying to express how some see what you said in a sarcastic manner. Failed miserably.

[Misterman]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Sorry, this forum's setup is different from what I am used to. Was agreeing with you, trying to express how some see what you said in a sarcastic manner. Failed miserably.

Oh gotcha. We need a /s emoji for sarcasm posts. I don't know why I read your /sarcasm as something you were also accusing me of. lol

[Misterman]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Also, data isn't based on the same baseline since mask is not mandatory thru out the province.

The data isn't really relevant to whether masks are mandated in your area or not. The data is demonstrating that asymptomatic spread is unlikely and low risk. The purpose of masks(according to the government) is to prevent asymptomatic spread.

In any sense, does any one know what the end goal is here? All I ever heard about was flattening the curve. We have decimated the curve now, but the metric has changed and suddenly we care about active cases instead of real problems any more. I guess death and hospitalizations weren't scaring people enough now that those numbers are virtually nonexistent. Even if these unfounded anecdotes about long term effects proves to be true, I'm still not seeing how this response could be deemed worth it.

[Xtrema]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The data isn't really relevant to whether masks are mandated in your area or not. The data is demonstrating that asymptomatic spread is unlikely and low risk. The purpose of masks(according to the government) is to prevent asymptomatic spread.

In any sense, does any one know what the end goal is here? All I ever heard about was flattening the curve. We have decimated the curve now, but the metric has changed and suddenly we care about active cases instead of real problems any more. I guess death and hospitalizations weren't scaring people enough now that those numbers are virtually nonexistent. Even if these unfounded anecdotes about long term effects proves to be true, I'm still not seeing how this response could be deemed worth it.

The only absolute concrete conclusion on asymptotic spread is force everyone in AB to take a test within a 14 day period.

Random samples may show something, may not. In this case, it's a waste of resources other than giving people peace of mind visiting senior relatives or going into school openings.

You are right on the messaging on what we are fight for now tho. At 1% infection rate and holding, while not ideal, to me that's as good as all the current policy is going to give us other than going back to lockdown 1.0. And so far, we have not had to dial back anything yet in AB, unlike ON.

If infection rate is at 0.1%, then we can probably go back to 2019 way of living. But again, I'm not Hinshaw.

[ThePenIsMightier]

Could someone pick apart any of the flaws that may exist in this video? This gentleman appears to be quite educated and is very well spoken and articulate. He's saying a lot of things in a very articulate, informed manner that support what many angry mobs believe, but are too dumb to effectively communicate.

He's saying some things that I've wanted to hear someone say, as well. So, if this is a trap, how do we not fall into it? Is he fundamentally wrong about the Gompertz Curve? Is his explanation of Sweden's mild flu season from 2019 wrong? Is his buttery, Irish voice lulling me into becoming an asshole anti-masker?

**I copied this video over from the other thread. I'm not the person that initially posted it. I think it's better, here.

[Xtrema]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Could someone pick apart any of the flaws that may exist in this video? This gentleman appears to be quite educated and is very well spoken and articulate. He's saying a lot of things in a very articulate, informed manner that support what many angry mobs believe, but are too dumb to effectively communicate.

He's saying some things that I've wanted to hear someone say, as well. So, if this is a trap, how do we not fall into it? Is he fundamentally wrong about the Gompertz Curve? Is his explanation of Sweden's mild flu season from 2019 wrong? Is his buttery, Irish voice lulling me into becoming an asshole anti-masker?

**I copied this video over from the other thread. I'm not the person that initially posted it. I think it's better, here.

I didn't sit thru the whole thing but remember that current policies will reduce deaths compared to a normal flu season. So if anything we now have data on when we do nothing and we do have data on when we do lock down, and data on open with masks. So using lower death data now as proof to undo current policy may not be best argument.

Also, is there another mutation since May? We already know March and May are different strain already.

All I know is North American's view toward masks and vaccine will mean we ARE not going back to old normal until at least 2023. There is no way 2 people infected with normal flu can shut down 5 units at a hospital, kills 3 and put 300 worker out of commission for 2 weeks and patients has to rerouted to other facilities.

But I think like South Park's pandemic special, the 2 sides are already set. You are not going to change any minds with facts or interupetation of facts that fit your narrative.

I think we are doing fine in AB for now at 1% positive rate. I don't see a need to further lock down or restrictions. But Ontario and Quebec are freaking out but their case increase rate is a cause for concern at 2% and 4% postive.

And if you guys loves death data....
https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data

Ontario now has experience daily deaths similar to Apr/May during the peak last few days, may have prompted the freakout by Ford gov.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Could someone pick apart any of the flaws that may exist in this video? This gentleman appears to be quite educated and is very well spoken and articulate. He's saying a lot of things in a very articulate, informed manner that support what many angry mobs believe, but are too dumb to effectively communicate.

He's saying some things that I've wanted to hear someone say, as well. So, if this is a trap, how do we not fall into it? Is he fundamentally wrong about the Gompertz Curve? Is his explanation of Sweden's mild flu season from 2019 wrong? Is his buttery, Irish voice lulling me into becoming an asshole anti-masker?

**I copied this video over from the other thread. I'm not the person that initially posted it. I think it's better, here.

Can I give you the short answer?

It's mostly bullshit. The long answer would take me some typing, if you insist.

[ThePenIsMightier]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Can I give you the short answer?

It's mostly bullshit. The long answer would take me some typing, if you insist.

I think it deserves more typing than that. He's properly educated and his curves seem to match based on analyzing existing data, not forecasts. Plus, his explanations for Sweden's weak flu season sound pretty damn good.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think it deserves more typing than that. He's properly educated and his curves seem to match based on analyzing existing data, not forecasts. Plus, his explanations for Sweden's weak flu season sound pretty damn good.

I'll throw some points out there that disrupt his line of thinking:

- His thesis seems to be that sars-CoV-2 is = to the dynamics of the flu, and he cherry picks data to fit. What's next? If he starts discussing fibonacci curves and such, I'll just laugh. This guy is basically a layman chartist.
- His other major assumption is that the majority (all?) of the current positives are due to RNA fragments rather than active virus. Yet he presents no data to support this claim. This actually is something of a concern, since this does actually happen. But it is a significant stretch to assume that it is what comprises current positivity rates.
- He doesn't even use words properly, or invents words. He thinks that cases are = deaths and hospitalizations? Wut? He invented the word "casedemic" I think? It just sounds dumb.

I can keep going.

I'm always hesitant to impugn someone based on their bona fides as science does not require authority, just analysis. However, given the dearth of supportive actual data in his "analysis" rather than correlations, I think it is worth discussing who this guy is. He's a biochemical engineer, with no experience, training or education in epidemiology or infectious disease. He got sick, and invented a quack all-meat diet or some such and presents himself as an expert on a variety of topics.

[sabad66]

There’s a good rebuttal video here if you have the time:



One thing that Igor is clearly wrong about is that early in his video he says 80% of people already have de facto immunity from other corona viruses like the cold etc. Clearly bullshit because if that were true, that would mean that the countries already have herd immunity and it would have never been an epidemic in the first place.

There’s a lot more bullshit that is proven wrong but that’s an easy one. Overall Igor makes himself appear smart, but he isn’t. Don’t forget to donate to his patreon page and/or set up monthly donations though!

[Xtrema]

As someone who occasionally utter BS that sounds smart to get people who don't know shit to go away, I identify with Igor within 5mins of that video and didn't really want to pad his youtube stat.

I learn from this inspiration video:

[Buster]

I found his accent irrationally infuriating.

[SportEL]

So do the useless Slave Muzzles show a correlation in preventing the spread of Wuhan Virus? Nope.

--> https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politic...ll-us-n1009481