Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[dohboy_24]

Wow Florida is really blowing the recovery, and all sports teams want to play there? They are better off in Canada.

1300+ new cases yesterday and over 1400 today!

How many new cases were reported last Wednesday and last Thursday?
How many tests did they run yesterday and today? How many tests did they run last Wednesday and last Thursday?

If there were 500 cases last Wednesday or 2,000 cases last Wednesday would give 1,300 new case yesterday more context. Same with the number of cases last Thursday versus yesterday.

Were the 1,300 cases yesterday from 10,000 tests or 15,000 tests? What about the 1,400 cases from today? If those 1,400 cases came from 4,000 tests as opposed to the 10,000-15,000 tests the day before or from 25,000 tests makes a big difference.

[dohboy_24]

Because our parents and grandparents were "stupid and gullible" back in the day...we no longer worry about getting small pox and polio today.

Because some idiots think they are smarter than everyone because they can use Google...we are seeing increasing incidences of measles in places where there were zero cases for decades.

Meanwhile...in third world countries where some of these diseases still exist because of lack of access to vaccines...the people beg and wish for the kind of access we have.

What would happen to the infection rates and mortality rates of these diseases in third world countries if their sanitation, water treatment, and irrigation systems were improved to the quality and standards of North America and Europe.

Without the introduction of any vaccines whatsoever, what kind of impact do you think those improvements would have on the prevalence of such infectious and communicable diseases in these third world countries you speak of?

While these measures won't impact the spread of all infectious and communicable diseases, it's not as if vaccines are the only viable solution to limit the spread of a virus or the even the most effective choice for each situation.

You who I can only assume is relatively free of any major physical and mental deficits can walk around and rant about all your rights because you (I'm guessing) were fully vaccinated and don't have the sequelae that people who battled measles, mumps, polio and other such viruses ended up with...like physical and mental defects, paralysis, inability to perform the simplest tasks like breathing on your own.

Pick up a damn history book or Google what people with these diseases looked like back then and then thank your parents that they were smart enough to vaccinate you.

The pictures of people with small pox, measles, polio can be horrific...perhaps posting some of those pics in this thread will wake some of those "woke" mf's.

Yes, there have been numerous examples of disaster capitalism in the past and many more to come in the future as it is a very profitable endeavor for those involved, especially when the disaster is a virus or some other invisible enemy like the war on terror.

Speaking of history, here's a great book on the history of disaster capitalism you might want to check out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine

Would be interesting to see what a chapter on this most recent crisis would cover...

[dohboy_24]

Faith in science is an oxymoron. Science asks that you look at the evidence.

The scientific method asks that of you, but not all science follows the scientific method. If so, who is the control group for a vaccine?

The idea that vaccines cause autism is utter nonsense.

The science is settled. The family friend of ours with same sex fraternal twins who developed autism as toddlers soon after one of their scheduled, mandatory vaccinations should just chalk it up to coincidence or bad luck and nothing else. Thanks, I'll tell her that next time I see her.

Mandatory vaccines have nothing to do with trusting "elites". It has to do with proportioning beliefs to evidence and the technical competence of multiple people employed by multiple institutions.

If the "elites" are the ones employing these people, funding their studies, deciding which studies get funding and which ones don't, etc., should I have faith and trust they would have no motivate or incentive other than the health and well-being of myself, yourself and everyone else?

Are you assuming there is no motive other than to improve the technological capabilities, health and well-being of the population behind the fields of science and medicine?

If an auto manufacturer like Volkswagen would intend to deceive its car buyers, shareholders, and governments of the world by intentionally programming its TDI engines to activate their emissions controls only during lab emissions testings to meet US standards, why wouldn't a company selling products and services related to the fields of science and medicine?

SOURCE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal

If a pharmaceutical company like Bayer would knowingly sell blood-clotting agents infected with HIV to Asia and Latin America months after removing them from the Europe and US markets, oh wait... they are a company selling products and services related to the fields of science and medicine.

SOURCE: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/may/23/aids.suzannegoldenberg

Should you wish to receive funding from such a noble and trustworthy company for one of your healthcare, medical, or scientific research studies, you can submit a request or apply for a grant:

http://www.grants-contributions.bayer.com/en/home/

If your request is related to a specific agricultural or business initiative, including university scholarship funding, you can apply for a grant here:
https://www.grantrequest.com/Login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2fapplication.aspx%3fSA%3dSNA%26FID%3d35041%26sid%3d748&SA=SNA&FID=35041&sid=748

When your airplane takes off do you ask: "Why should I trust the pilot?" If you don't, why not? Consider that, non-rhetorically, and then apply the answer to other aspects of modern life.

I don't need to know how to fly a plane or how a plane works, I can just trust the pilot knows those things, sit back, relax and enjoy my flight... right?

Yes, the ultimate default statement is to trust, believe and have faith.

They're the same tenets behind those who believe in the many religions of the world and many times, the same level of "proof" is deemed appropriate for matters of science as the true "scientific method" rarely applies to these situations.

[mtcan]

Because our parents and grandparents were "stupid and gullible" back in the day...we no longer worry about getting small pox and polio today.

Because some idiots think they are smarter than everyone because they can use Google...we are seeing increasing incidences of measles in places where there were zero cases for decades.

Meanwhile...in third world countries where some of these diseases still exist because of lack of access to vaccines...the people beg and wish for the kind of access we have.

What would happen to the infection rates and mortality rates of these diseases in third world countries if their sanitation, water treatment, and irrigation systems were improved to the quality and standards of North America and Europe.

Without the introduction of any vaccines whatsoever, what kind of impact do you think those improvements would have on the prevalence of such infectious and communicable diseases in these third world countries you speak of?

While these measures won't impact the spread of all infectious and communicable diseases, it's not as if vaccines are the only viable solution to limit the spread of a virus or the even the most effective choice for each situation.

You who I can only assume is relatively free of any major physical and mental deficits can walk around and rant about all your rights because you (I'm guessing) were fully vaccinated and don't have the sequelae that people who battled measles, mumps, polio and other such viruses ended up with...like physical and mental defects, paralysis, inability to perform the simplest tasks like breathing on your own.

Pick up a damn history book or Google what people with these diseases looked like back then and then thank your parents that they were smart enough to vaccinate you.

The pictures of people with small pox, measles, polio can be horrific...perhaps posting some of those pics in this thread will wake some of those "woke" mf's.

Yes, there have been numerous examples of disaster capitalism in the past and many more to come in the future as it is a very profitable endeavor for those involved, especially when the disaster is a virus or some other invisible enemy like the war on terror.

Speaking of history, here's a great book on the history of disaster capitalism you might want to check out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine

Would be interesting to see what a chapter on this most recent crisis would cover...

No...I can rationalize the need to preserve life in the face of disaster and the need to make decisions that while seem overly conservative at the time that ultimately is for a greater good.

People in the future...who will have a lot more information than we currently have about the situation...be able to play Monday morning quarterback and criticize the hell out of how things were handled in hindsight. Because this is a NOVEL virus. We don't have all the information about the virus now that we will have a year from now...10 years from now, etc...so **** what they say about this years from now. We do the best with the information we currently have and a constantly changing knowledge base...and that has to be enough for now. Once again...anyone who claims to know definitively about the virus...is lying. There is no such expert at this point in time.

If you take the threat lightly...Canada could easily end up looking like Italy, Spain and New York City at their worst points within the last 2 months. Be thankful we aren't there...and don't forget that as long as the virus is around...it could still happen. Death tolls can still skyrocket if you don't take this seriously enough. No one working in health care is busy looking up conspiracy theories because we work amongst covid positive patients...at least I do and understand the threat. Someone I work with recently contracted covid-19 because she was taking her face shield off after working with a covid patient and the edge of the shield grazed her eye. This would be day 12 of a seemingly never ending fever for her. And she has to worry about if she infected her husband and 3 kids. How would you feel if you had to deal with what she is going through? This is real life...you can go back to your conspiracy theories.

[Wo1verine]

Canada doesn't care about the spread allowing protests to happen without fines during a pandemic with some GOV officials taking part to get votes when the time is needed.

So when the virus starts to spread for those of you that look at the case #s blame the GOV and the protesters for the spike.

[OGLife]

Canada doesn't care about the spread allowing protests to happen without fines during a pandemic with some GOV officials taking part to get votes when the time is needed.

So when the virus starts to spread for those of you that look at the case #s blame the GOV and the protesters for the spike.

Cops and the government would get heat if they handed out tickets.

Cops are not taking the social distancing serious and If they started with doing so during protests, it would lead to outrage.

[Wo1verine]

Canada doesn't care about the spread allowing protests to happen without fines during a pandemic with some GOV officials taking part to get votes when the time is needed.

So when the virus starts to spread for those of you that look at the case #s blame the GOV and the protesters for the spike.

Cops and the government would get heat if they handed out tickets.

Cops are not taking the social distancing serious and If they started with doing so during protests, it would lead to outrage.

I just don't wanna hear the GOV bitch & whine when they break the law that they created because of these ''special circumstances'

Blame yourselves for allowing bending of the rules and showing a bad example and for those who don't care about the virus and instead would rather protest over handful of cop murders when this virus has killed over '100,000' people many in which are people of color.

[OGLife]

Canada doesn't care about the spread allowing protests to happen without fines during a pandemic with some GOV officials taking part to get votes when the time is needed.

So when the virus starts to spread for those of you that look at the case #s blame the GOV and the protesters for the spike.

Cops and the government would get heat if they handed out tickets.

Cops are not taking the social distancing serious and If they started with doing so during protests, it would lead to outrage.

I just don't wanna hear the GOV bitch & whine when they break the law that they created because of these ''special circumstances'

Blame yourselves for allowing bending of the rules and showing a bad example and for those who don't care about the virus and instead would rather protest over handful of cop murders when this virus has killed over '100,000' people many in which are people of color.

I agree. Protests could happen anytime. Some are taking advantage of their school and work schedules since they're off to protest and I dangerously causing a potential spread

[dohboy_24]

No...I can rationalize the need to preserve life in the face of disaster and the need to make decisions that while seem overly conservative at the time that ultimately is for a greater good.

Preservation of life is a noble aim, especially in the face of disaster and I can appreciate the desire to appeal to the greater good.

Should you apply that same logic to many of the other past, present, and future disasters, there are no end to the number of things you should be doing to preserve life.

I don't even have to look at the numbers to absolutely guarantee there have been more children and even more people over the age of 60 who have died in the past 2 decades since the war on terror started as casualties of war in the Middle East than have died already of covid-19. Is that not a disaster to the people of the Middle East or is it only a disaster when it affects you?

People in the future...who will have a lot more information than we currently have about the situation...be able to play Monday morning quarterback and criticize the hell out of how things were handled in hindsight. Because this is a NOVEL virus. We don't have all the information about the virus now that we will have a year from now...10 years from now, etc...so **** what they say about this years from now. We do the best with the information we currently have and a constantly changing knowledge base...and that has to be enough for now. Once again...anyone who claims to know definitively about the virus...is lying. There is no such expert at this point in time. If you take the threat lightly...Canada could easily end up looking like Italy, Spain and New York City at their worst points within the last 2 months. Be thankful we aren't there...and don't forget that as long as the virus is around...it could still happen. Death tolls can still skyrocket if you don't take this seriously enough.

We have more information than we did when this virus started. While we can except to gain more as time moves forward, if there was enough information by the middle of March to make a decision to lockdown and restrict contact through social distancing, there is enough information now to assess the effectiveness of such measures and their necessity moving forward.

At the end of March we were averaging around 1,000 daily cases of covid-19. The levels peaked near 1,500-2,000 daily cases between the middle of April until the middle of May before averaging around 1,000 daily cases by the end of May. Since the end of May, the number of daily new cases has continued to stay below 1,000 people.



If you look at the number of active cases, you can see the trends are starting to dip as well, indicating the lower number of daily new cases is helping to bring down the total number of active cases as the majority of those infected recover from the virus.



Similar to the number of daily new cases, the number of daily new deaths in Canada peaked between the middle of April and the middle of May before hovering around 100 daily cases the last few weeks:



As a result, the trendline for total covid-19 deaths in Canada is flattening, taking longer and longer to increase as fewer people are newly infected and many of those previously infected recover.



With all of the above working together, the number of newly recovered cases was equal to, or greater than, the number newly infected cases for the first time since the lockdown and social distancing measures started the middle of March.



SOURCE: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/canada/

While you are correct to suggest the trends could change and we could see a spike in cases and deaths, the trends suggest otherwise at this point and if those same trends were used on the upswing to justify with swift application, they serve just as well one the down slope to justify their removal.

No one working in health care is busy looking up conspiracy theories because we work amongst covid positive patients...at least I do and understand the threat. Someone I work with recently contracted covid-19 because she was taking her face shield off after working with a covid patient and the edge of the shield grazed her eye. This would be day 12 of a seemingly never ending fever for her. And she has to worry about if she infected her husband and 3 kids. How would you feel if you had to deal with what she is going through? This is real life...you can go back to your conspiracy theories.

As you can see above, there are still covid-19 patients. Experiencing it on a daily basis as you and others who work in health care have does not change the reality of the numbers. The numbers are real. There are people in the hospital, I'm not doubting that or calling you a liar, there just aren't nearly as many as predicted.

Even with the lockdown and social distancing measures we've put in place as recommended, the preliminary warnings and guidelines predicted at least 10-20x as many deaths as we've experienced across the world and yet the measures continue as if what we're experiencing is the same in reality.

[dohboy_24]

I just don't wanna hear the GOV bitch & whine when they break the law that they created because of these ''special circumstances'

Blame yourselves for allowing bending of the rules and showing a bad example and for those who don't care about the virus and instead would rather protest over handful of cop murders when this virus has killed over '100,000' people many in which are people of color.

Considering the percentage of covid-19 deaths among those aged 60 or greater, should the protesters truly not care about the virus and the impact their gathering in groups greater than 5-50 people (depends on which state) while not social distancing has on the greater good of the population, wouldn't they be better off protesting, rioting, and perhaps even looting long-term health care and senior care living facilities instead of their chosen targets?

[mtcan]

No...I can rationalize the need to preserve life in the face of disaster and the need to make decisions that while seem overly conservative at the time that ultimately is for a greater good.

Preservation of life is a noble aim, especially in the face of disaster and I can appreciate the desire to appeal to the greater good.

Should you apply that same logic to many of the other past, present, and future disasters, there are no end to the number of things you should be doing to preserve life.

I don't even have to look at the numbers to absolutely guarantee there have been more children and even more people over the age of 70 who have died in the past 2 decades since the war on terror started as casualties of war in the Middle East than have died already of covid-19? Is that not a disaster to the people of the Middle East or is it only a disaster when it affects you?

People in the future...who will have a lot more information than we currently have about the situation...be able to play Monday morning quarterback and criticize the hell out of how things were handled in hindsight. Because this is a NOVEL virus. We don't have all the information about the virus now that we will have a year from now...10 years from now, etc...so **** what they say about this years from now. We do the best with the information we currently have and a constantly changing knowledge base...and that has to be enough for now. Once again...anyone who claims to know definitively about the virus...is lying. There is no such expert at this point in time. If you take the threat lightly...Canada could easily end up looking like Italy, Spain and New York City at their worst points within the last 2 months. Be thankful we aren't there...and don't forget that as long as the virus is around...it could still happen. Death tolls can still skyrocket if you don't take this seriously enough.

We have more information than we did when this virus started. While we can except to gain more as time moves forward, if there was enough information by the middle of March to make a decision to lockdown and restrict contact through social distancing, there is enough information now to assess the effectiveness of such measures and their necessity moving forward.

At the end of March we were averaging around 1,000 daily cases of covid-19. The levels peaked near 1,500-2,000 daily cases between the middle of April until the middle of May before averaging around 1,000 daily cases by the end of May. Since the end of May, the number of daily new cases has continued to stay below 1,000 people.



If you look at the number of active cases, you can see the trends are starting to dip as well, indicating the lower number of daily new cases is helping to bring down the total number of active cases as the majority of those infected recover from the virus.



Similar to the number of daily new cases, the number of daily new deaths in Canada peaked between the middle of April and the middle of May before hovering around 100 daily cases the last few weeks:



As a result, the trendline for total covid-19 deaths in Canada is flattening, taking longer and longer to increase as fewer people are newly infected and many of those previously infected recover.



With all of the above working together, the number of newly recovered cases was equal to, or greater than, the number newly infected cases for the first time since the lockdown and social distancing measures started the middle of May.



SOURCE: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/canada/

While you are correct to suggest the trends could change and we could see a spike in cases and deaths, the trends suggest otherwise at this point and if those same trends were used on the upswing to justify with swift application, they serve just as well one the down slope to justify their removal.

No one working in health care is busy looking up conspiracy theories because we work amongst covid positive patients...at least I do and understand the threat. Someone I work with recently contracted covid-19 because she was taking her face shield off after working with a covid patient and the edge of the shield grazed her eye. This would be day 12 of a seemingly never ending fever for her. And she has to worry about if she infected her husband and 3 kids. How would you feel if you had to deal with what she is going through? This is real life...you can go back to your conspiracy theories.

As you can see above, there are still covid-19 patients. Experiencing it on a daily basis as you and others who work in health care have does not change the reality of the numbers. The numbers are real. There are people in the hospital, I'm not doubting that or calling you a liar, there just aren't nearly as many as predicted.

Even with the lockdown and social distancing measures we've put in place as recommended, the preliminary warnings and guidelines predicted at least 10-20x as many deaths as we've experienced across the world and yet the measures continue as if what we're experiencing is the same in reality.

Numbers are what they are BECAUSE of what we have been doing...not in spite of it. I'm acutely aware of all the numbers...and study them daily Once again...the horrors of Italy, Spain and New York City can still happen. Be stupid about it and our health care system CAN be overwhelmed. Those are worse-case scenarios. The virus isn't gone and nothing has changed in terms of our inability to actually change the course of a patient's experience with covid once they get it. You and your graphs don't seem to encompass that.

Viruses don't care about trends and graphs and projections.

[dohboy_24]

Numbers are what they are BECAUSE of what we have been doing...not in spite of it.

The number of daily cases was supposed to be 10-20x as much as it has been WITH SOCIAL DISTANCING and LOCKDOWN MEASURES.

The original predictions were not: Do nothing and this might happen. The original predictions were: Even after putting these social distancing and lockdown measures in place, we predict 10-20x as many cases and deaths as we've experienced.

Are you suggesting we should take that to mean the social distancing and lockdown measures were 10-20x more effective than we predicted they would be and that's why the numbers are so much lower?

Should they be so much more effective than predicted, why have these same measures not saved the lives of all those over age 60 in long-term health and senior living facilities? If they're not breaking the lockdown orders and maintaining social distancing, why are these measures ineffective among this cohort?

How could you scientifically prove the measures we've followed have been effective or more effective than other measures? Would that not require a control group and a test group, the collection of data for both groups and a comparison of each data set to determine the effectiveness of the control group compared to the test group? Who is the control group? Who is the test group?

I'm acutely aware of all the numbers...and study them daily Once again...the horrors of Italy, Spain and New York City can still happen. Be stupid about it and our health care system CAN be overwhelmed. Those are worse-case scenarios.

Yes, they are worse-case scenarios. Care to share the best-case scenarios for comparison?

Countries with zero covid-19 deaths reported:

Uganda
Vietnam
Mongolia
Faeroe Islands
Gibraltar
Cambodia
French Polynesia
Bhutan
Macao
Eritrea
St. Vincent Grenadines
Namibia
Timor-Leste
Grenada
New Caledonia
Laos
Saint Lucia
Dominica
Fiji
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Falkland Islands
Greenland
Vatican City
Seychelles
Papua New Guinea
Caribbean Netherlands
St. Barth
Lesotho
Anguilla
Saint Pierre Miquelon

Countries with 1 to 10 covid-19 deaths. Total. Not today. Not yesterday. Ever.

Montserrat
British Virgin Islands
Liechtenstein
Turks and Caicos
Cayman Islands
Curaçao
French Guiana
Suriname
Western Sahara
Réunion
Botswana
Gambia
Burundi
Brunei
Belize
Comoros
Rwanda
Mozambique
MS Zaandam
Saint Martin
Antigua and Barbuda
Aruba
Eswatini
Palestine
Benin
Monaco
CAR
Hong Kong
Zimbabwe
Malawi
Angola
Cabo Verde
Libya
Syria
Myanmar
Barbados
Maldives
Zambia
Madagascar
Taiwan
Trinidad and Tobago
Guinea-Bissau
Bermuda
Malta
Montenegro
Jordan
Iceland
Mauritius
Jamaica
Costa Rica
South Sudan
Nepal

Countries with 11 to 100 covid-19 deaths. Total. Not today. Not yesterday. Ever.

Bahamas
Paraguay
Sri Lanka
Sao Tome and Principe
Guyana
Equatorial Guinea
Georgia
Togo
Diamond Princess
Martinique
Guadeloupe
Sint Maarten
Uzbekistan
Cyprus
Ethiopia
Congo
Kyrgyzstan
Venezuela
Bahrain
Gabon
Tanzania
New Zealand
Uruguay
Guinea
Isle of Man
Singapore
Mayotte
Latvia
Djibouti
Liberia
Slovakia
Lebanon
Albania
Ivory Coast
Ghana
Mauritania
San Marino
Qatar
Senegal
Channel Islands
Nicaragua
Sierra Leone
Tajikistan
Tunisia
Haiti
Andorra
El Salvador
Kazakhstan
Burkina Faso
Thailand
Niger
Chad
Oman
Estonia
Lithuania
Azerbaijan
Kenya
DRC
Somalia
Cuba
Mali

Countries with 101 to 1,000 covid-19 deaths. Total. Not today. Not yesterday. Ever.

Australia
Croatia
Yemen
Slovenia
Luxembourg
Malaysia
North Macedonia
Bulgaria
Guatemala
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Armenia
Greece
Cameroon
Morocco
Kuwait
Norway
Honduras
Serbia
Belarus
Iraq
UAE
S. Korea
Israel
Afghanistan
Moldova
Finland
Nigeria
Czechia
Sudan
Panama
Bolivia
Dominican Republic
Hungary
Denmark
Argentina
Saudi Arabia
Austria
Algeria
Ukraine
Bangladesh
South Africa
Japan
Philippines

That's 186 of the 215 countries listed here: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

86% of the countries have less than 1,000 total deaths from covid-19.

86% of the countries = about 17,000 deaths
14% of the countries = about 375,000 deaths

Colombia
Poland
Egypt
Romania
Chile
Portugal
Ireland
Indonesia
Pakistan
Switzerland
Ecuador
Sweden
Turkey
China
Peru
Russia
Netherlands
India
Canada
Iran
Germany
Belgium
Mexico
Spain
France
Italy
Brazil
UK
USA

Are the health care systems of these countries worse than the others? Did the citizens of these countries not follow the lockdown and social distancing measures the same as the others?

What about these countries would have them end up being responsible for such a disproportionate amount of covid-19 cases and deaths?

The virus isn't gone and nothing has changed in terms of our inability to actually change the course of a patient's experience with covid once they get it.

Not unless the recommended treatment plan changes. Thus far, placing a patient on a ventilator appears to be the least effective form of treatment enough though it's the most widely used. There appears to have been more success with other treatment protocols, but none of them are as prevalent or widely accepted despite their apparent effectiveness.

You and your graphs don't seem to encompass that.

Viruses don't care about trends and graphs and projections.

No, but epidemiologists do and they, along with other scientific professionals studying this virus made some pretty bad initial predictions and projections that, as we've collected more and more data, do not support the current measures being taken and do not even really support the measures that were taken in the first place.

[mtcan]

Numbers are what they are BECAUSE of what we have been doing...not in spite of it.

The number of daily cases was supposed to be 10-20x as much as it has been WITH SOCIAL DISTANCING and LOCKDOWN MEASURES.

The original predictions were not: Do nothing and this might happen. The original predictions were: Even after putting these social distancing and lockdown measures in place, we predict 10-20x as many cases and deaths as we've experienced.

Are you suggesting we should take that to mean the social distancing and lockdown measures were 10-20x more effective than we predicted they would be and that's why the numbers are so much lower?

Should they be so much more effective than predicted, why have these same measures not saved the lives of all those over age 60 in long-term health and senior living facilities? If they're not breaking the lockdown orders and maintaining social distancing, why are these measures ineffective among this cohort?

How could you scientifically prove the measures we've followed have been effective or more effective than other measures? Would that not require a control group and a test group, the collection of data for both groups and a comparison of each data set to determine the effectiveness of the control group compared to the test group? Who is the control group? Who is the test group?

I'm acutely aware of all the numbers...and study them daily Once again...the horrors of Italy, Spain and New York City can still happen. Be stupid about it and our health care system CAN be overwhelmed. Those are worse-case scenarios.

Yes, they are worse-case scenarios. Care to share the best-case scenarios for comparison?

Countries with zero covid-19 deaths reported:

Uganda
Vietnam
Mongolia
Faeroe Islands
Gibraltar
Cambodia
French Polynesia
Bhutan
Macao
Eritrea
St. Vincent Grenadines
Namibia
Timor-Leste
Grenada
New Caledonia
Laos
Saint Lucia
Dominica
Fiji
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Falkland Islands
Greenland
Vatican City
Seychelles
Papua New Guinea
Caribbean Netherlands
St. Barth
Lesotho
Anguilla
Saint Pierre Miquelon

Countries with 1 to 10 covid-19 deaths. Total. Not today. Not yesterday. Ever.

Montserrat
British Virgin Islands
Liechtenstein
Turks and Caicos
Cayman Islands
Curaçao
French Guiana
Suriname
Western Sahara
Réunion
Botswana
Gambia
Burundi
Brunei
Belize
Comoros
Rwanda
Mozambique
MS Zaandam
Saint Martin
Antigua and Barbuda
Aruba
Eswatini
Palestine
Benin
Monaco
CAR
Hong Kong
Zimbabwe
Malawi
Angola
Cabo Verde
Libya
Syria
Myanmar
Barbados
Maldives
Zambia
Madagascar
Taiwan
Trinidad and Tobago
Guinea-Bissau
Bermuda
Malta
Montenegro
Jordan
Iceland
Mauritius
Jamaica
Costa Rica
South Sudan
Nepal

Countries with 11 to 100 covid-19 deaths. Total. Not today. Not yesterday. Ever.

Bahamas
Paraguay
Sri Lanka
Sao Tome and Principe
Guyana
Equatorial Guinea
Georgia
Togo
Diamond Princess
Martinique
Guadeloupe
Sint Maarten
Uzbekistan
Cyprus
Ethiopia
Congo
Kyrgyzstan
Venezuela
Bahrain
Gabon
Tanzania
New Zealand
Uruguay
Guinea
Isle of Man
Singapore
Mayotte
Latvia
Djibouti
Liberia
Slovakia
Lebanon
Albania
Ivory Coast
Ghana
Mauritania
San Marino
Qatar
Senegal
Channel Islands
Nicaragua
Sierra Leone
Tajikistan
Tunisia
Haiti
Andorra
El Salvador
Kazakhstan
Burkina Faso
Thailand
Niger
Chad
Oman
Estonia
Lithuania
Azerbaijan
Kenya
DRC
Somalia
Cuba
Mali

Countries with 101 to 1,000 covid-19 deaths. Total. Not today. Not yesterday. Ever.

Australia
Croatia
Yemen
Slovenia
Luxembourg
Malaysia
North Macedonia
Bulgaria
Guatemala
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Armenia
Greece
Cameroon
Morocco
Kuwait
Norway
Honduras
Serbia
Belarus
Iraq
UAE
S. Korea
Israel
Afghanistan
Moldova
Finland
Nigeria
Czechia
Sudan
Panama
Bolivia
Dominican Republic
Hungary
Denmark
Argentina
Saudi Arabia
Austria
Algeria
Ukraine
Bangladesh
South Africa
Japan
Philippines

That's 186 of the 215 countries listed here: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

86% of the countries have less than 1,000 total deaths from covid-19.

86% of the countries = about 17,000 deaths
14% of the countries = about 375,000 deaths

Colombia
Poland
Egypt
Romania
Chile
Portugal
Ireland
Indonesia
Pakistan
Switzerland
Ecuador
Sweden
Turkey
China
Peru
Russia
Netherlands
India
Canada
Iran
Germany
Belgium
Mexico
Spain
France
Italy
Brazil
UK
USA

Are the health care systems of these countries worse than the others? Did the citizens of these countries not follow the lockdown and social distancing measures the same as the others?

What about these countries would have them end up being responsible for such a disproportionate amount of covid-19 cases and deaths?

The virus isn't gone and nothing has changed in terms of our inability to actually change the course of a patient's experience with covid once they get it.

Not unless the recommended treatment plan changes. Thus far, placing a patient on a ventilator appears to be the least effective form of treatment enough though it's the most widely used. There appears to have been more success with other treatment protocols, but none of them are as prevalent or widely accepted despite their apparent effectiveness.

You and your graphs don't seem to encompass that.

Viruses don't care about trends and graphs and projections.

No, but epidemiologists do and they, along with other scientific professionals studying this virus made some pretty bad initial predictions and projections that, as we've collected more and more data, do not support the current measures being taken and do not even really support the measures that were taken in the first place.

This is going nowhere. Not agreeing with you...and this is a waste of time.

[fbalmeida]

Faith in science is an oxymoron. Science asks that you look at the evidence.

The scientific method asks that of you, but not all science follows the scientific method. If so, who is the control group for a vaccine?

Science is science is science. When a part of the method is lacking, then you're not describing or obtaining science. Vaccines are among the most rigorously tested and controlled products we know of, for safety and efficacy.

https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/blog/vaccine-randomized-clinical-trials

The idea that vaccines cause autism is utter nonsense.

The science is settled. The family friend of ours with same sex fraternal twins who developed autism as toddlers soon after one of their scheduled, mandatory vaccinations should just chalk it up to coincidence or bad luck and nothing else. Thanks, I'll tell her that next time I see her.

What science? I see no science there. I see anecdotal evidence that has not been corroborated by any objective observation or any known chemical or biological causal relation between vaccines and autism, from essentially every credible source on the planet.

Mandatory vaccines have nothing to do with trusting "elites". It has to do with proportioning beliefs to evidence and the technical competence of multiple people employed by multiple institutions.

If the "elites" are the ones employing these people, funding their studies, deciding which studies get funding and which ones don't, etc., should I have faith and trust they would have no motivate or incentive other than the health and well-being of myself, yourself and everyone else?

Are you assuming there is no motive other than to improve the technological capabilities, health and well-being of the population behind the fields of science and medicine?

If an auto manufacturer like Volkswagen would intend to deceive its car buyers, shareholders, and governments of the world by intentionally programming its TDI engines to activate their emissions controls only during lab emissions testings to meet US standards, why wouldn't a company selling products and services related to the fields of science and medicine?

SOURCE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal

If a pharmaceutical company like Bayer would knowingly sell blood-clotting agents infected with HIV to Asia and Latin America months after removing them from the Europe and US markets, oh wait... they are a company selling products and services related to the fields of science and medicine.

SOURCE: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/may/23/aids.suzannegoldenberg

Should you wish to receive funding from such a noble and trustworthy company for one of your healthcare, medical, or scientific research studies, you can submit a request or apply for a grant:

http://www.grants-contributions.bayer.com/en/home/

If your request is related to a specific agricultural or business initiative, including university scholarship funding, you can apply for a grant here:
https://www.grantrequest.com/Login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2fapplication.aspx%3fSA%3dSNA%26FID%3d35041%26sid%3d748&SA=SNA&FID=35041&sid=748

If the institutions that are setup for the sole purpose of regulating and controlling drugs for safety were as incompetent or as easily corrupted as you casuistically describe them as, then we shouldn't be observing the ongoing expansion of life-spans in tandem with where better and more drugs and medical procedures are more available, in contrast to where they are less available.

When your airplane takes off do you ask: "Why should I trust the pilot?" If you don't, why not? Consider that, non-rhetorically, and then apply the answer to other aspects of modern life.

I don't need to know how to fly a plane or how a plane works, I can just trust the pilot knows those things, sit back, relax and enjoy my flight... right?

Yes, the ultimate default statement is to trust, believe and have faith.

They're the same tenets behind those who believe in the many religions of the world and many times, the same level of "proof" is deemed appropriate for matters of science as the true "scientific method" rarely applies to these situations.

No. You're offering a caricature of what is actually a stream of calculated assumptions, rather than blind trust in absence of non-subjective evidence.

When we're in our plane seat and ready for takeoff, we can know for a fact that the pilot is not some average Joe selected at random. We can know for a fact that access to the cockpit is controlled and limited to the properly scheduled and accredited pilot on the airline's payroll. Although we don't really need to, but If we allow ourselves to dwell on the matter, we can also know for a fact that the pilot obtained their licence following years of rigorous training and testing. And lastly, all these precautions are corroborated by the consistently decreasing number of accidents and casualties since the advent of aviation.

[Vaclac]

Canada doesn't care about the spread allowing protests to happen without fines during a pandemic with some GOV officials taking part to get votes when the time is needed.

So when the virus starts to spread for those of you that look at the case #s blame the GOV and the protesters for the spike.

Cops and the government would get heat if they handed out tickets.

Cops are not taking the social distancing serious and If they started with doing so during protests, it would lead to outrage.

I just don't wanna hear the GOV bitch & whine when they break the law that they created because of these ''special circumstances'

Blame yourselves for allowing bending of the rules and showing a bad example and for those who don't care about the virus and instead would rather protest over handful of cop murders when this virus has killed over '100,000' people many in which are people of color.

The hipocracy is stunning. I support the protestors (the vast majority that are peaceful anyway - there is no justification for the violent ones and they undermine the cause). But I also supported the anti-lockdown protestors. The difference in government attitude on them is crazy. The right to protest is meaningless if the government decides what you may legitimately protest and what you can't. And using a justification that actually applies to both protests to condemn one but not the other is plainly treating the right to protest differently on the basis of their message. If we care about the right to protest generally rather than only a particular cause, then it needs to apply universally.

[shmoosicle]

Not unless the recommended treatment plan changes. Thus far, placing a patient on a ventilator appears to be the least effective form of treatment enough though it's the most widely used. There appears to have been more success with other treatment protocols, but none of them are as prevalent or widely accepted despite their apparent effectiveness.

Where did you hear this?

[fbalmeida]

With vaccines, their effectiveness is essentially predicated on obtaining population immunity. Which means one person's refusal places others at risk. Which is why they are often (and should be) compulsory.

One person's refusal to comply places others at risk in many situations we all encounter on a daily basis without issue.

That's actually not true, by definition.

If you are being placed at risk by someone else's behaviour, than you are at issue with it to some varying degree, in proportion to the risk and your desire to remain physically and emotionally unharmed.

The example you give of 2nd hand smoke is very useful as an illustration, considering the expansion of regulations, rules, and prohibitions on cigarette smoking in recent decades.

The European Commission and several states have toyed with the idea of banning cigarettes in public areas that tend to gather crowds, such as beaches or cafés.

And the car with a compulsory breathalyzer is also currently in the conversation.

All this to say that certified vaccines should indeed be mandatory. And in practice, they are. The penalty for non-compliance will never be the proverbial "man with a gun that will show up on your doorstep". Typically, the compulsion is applied indirectly, as a requirement for attending public school.

[lolwut]

The idea that vaccines cause autism is utter nonsense.

The science is settled. The family friend of ours with same sex fraternal twins who developed autism as toddlers soon after one of their scheduled, mandatory vaccinations should just chalk it up to coincidence or bad luck and nothing else. Thanks, I'll tell her that next time I see her.

How many other kids do you personally know received vaccines and also developed autism?

Take Canada for example. Let's assume for a moment that 99% of children in Canada receive vaccinations. At the same time, about 1.5% of children in Canada are diagnosed as being on the spectrum. What happened to the rest of the children who received vaccines? Did the vaccines not cause autism for them? Is there some unknown interaction between vaccines and neurological mechanisms that result in autism for a small percentage of the population that receive vaccines?

Don't get me wrong -- I'm not trying to argue that vaccines did not cause autism for the 1.5% who were diagnosed. I'm saying the data does not paint a clear picture that vaccines are the cause of their autism. The fact that your family friends' kids received vaccines and fell into the 1.5% does not mean that one caused the other. Even if that really was the case, the data in front of you is inconclusive to support that theory. Your family friends are welcome to believe whatever they want, but understand that the data does not currently support what they are choosing to believe.

Your single data point does not support either side of the vaccine/autism debate. You can choose to say that it does, but you should do so knowing that there is no logical reasoning backing that belief.

[Gold Dragon]

Children who don’t vaccinate get autism too and they actually get it at a higher rate than kids who do vaccinate but that is likely not a causal effect.

https://www.autismspeaks.org/science-news/no-mmr-autism-link-large-study-vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated-kids


The one paper by a doctor who falsified data that created this false connection in people’s minds has done so much harm to humanity. It shows you the power of fake news.

https://www.verywellhealth.com/who-is-andrew-wakefield-260623

[Westside Gunn]

so what are the real causes of autism? ive been hearing wayy too many people having kids with autism. i dont blame the vaccines but its something we are doing thats contributing to it.