Started By
Message
re: OT: Corona Panic 2020
Posted on 4/19/20 at 2:29 pm to DawgsLife
Posted on 4/19/20 at 2:29 pm to DawgsLife
I saw Dr. Forster on TV. If he is correct when the coronavirus originated sometime between September and December it probably wasn't a strain that sickened humans. Using a large sample of complete genome strains from around the world, the mutations were mapped. The paper hasn't been peer reviewed yet.
1
Posted on 4/19/20 at 3:45 pm to Whiznot
quote:
I saw Dr. Forster on TV. If he is correct when the coronavirus originated sometime between September and December it probably wasn't a strain that sickened humans. Using a large sample of complete genome strains from around the world, the mutations were mapped. The paper hasn't been peer reviewed yet.
That's interesting. And like you said...when you factor in possible mutations of the virus.....I was reading where some of the stuff they were seeing some success treating Corona were no longer being effective because they were mutating so quickly.
But that was several weeks ago, and who knows what is going on. It seems like nobody can get a handle on it.
Posted on 4/19/20 at 3:58 pm to DawgsLife
Interesting...YouTuber covering a report/study stating the virus may have been spread to waaaay more than stats making the mortality rate actually waaay lower possibly the same as the flu. Also hypothesized that the quarantine may not have mattered and so we may have unnecessarily tubed the economy.
LINK
LINK
Posted on 4/19/20 at 4:02 pm to Brick67
Nothing would surprise me at this point. I read where they did a limited study in California and something like 85% of people tested were positive for antibodies. That alone would have crashed the mortality rate.
But, it was just an impromptu testing, I think and not conclusive.
But, it was just an impromptu testing, I think and not conclusive.
Posted on 4/19/20 at 4:30 pm to DawgsLife
Makes sense though. There's a lot of speculation that the virus has been in the US since October. So there "could" be 50-85 times the number of infected that have not been counted in the official numbers.
Posted on 4/19/20 at 7:52 pm to Brick67
quote:
the quarantine may not have mattered and so we may have unnecessarily tubed the economy.
I’m gonna trust the doctors, CDC, President, etc. on this one.
Posted on 4/19/20 at 8:29 pm to DawgsLife
I posted the Video a couple days ago of the Stanford study in Santa Clara on mortality rate and the spread of the disease. Not a single frick given by those people collecting their checks and free welfare
Posted on 4/19/20 at 9:03 pm to DawgsLife
You will have to post a link because the Santa Clara study only found 13% with antibodies. The sample population was culled from people responding to a Facebook post, reportedly.
Posted on 4/19/20 at 9:38 pm to Whiznot
quote:
You will have to post a link because the Santa Clara study only found 13% with antibodies. The sample population was culled from people responding to a Facebook post, reportedly.
Here.
LINK
If the sample is representative, it means 81,000 had been infected at a time when the deaths were at a couple hundred, so the actually mortality rate is 0.08% or consistent with the flu.
Posted on 4/19/20 at 10:53 pm to deeprig9
The Athletic reported that a PED lab that works for MLB bought 10,000 antibody tests. In the next two weeks every MLB employee is going to be tested including players, front office and stadium vendors.
Assuming that the tests are accurate we should get a better measure of coronavirus penetration
Assuming that the tests are accurate we should get a better measure of coronavirus penetration
Posted on 4/20/20 at 5:46 am to Whiznot
quote:
You will have to post a link because the Santa Clara study only found 13% with antibodies. The sample population was culled from people responding to a Facebook post, reportedly.
No problem. If I demand links from others I should be willing to post links, too.
Coronavirus: Santa Clara County has had 50 to 85 times more cases than we knew about, Stanford estimates
In a startling finding, new Stanford research reveals between 48,000 and 81,000 people in Santa Clara County alone may already have been infected by the coronavirus by early April — that’s 50 to 85 times more than the number of official cases at that date.
I will say it would appear as if I misstated some numbers...I was trying to go off memory. I think you were closer to being correct about the antibodies.
Just how much of an undercount? Stanford’s low-end estimate of Santa Clara County cases is nearly double the confirmed total — 28,000 — for the entire state of California. The study estimated 2.5% to 4.2% of residents here carry antibodies to the pathogen, a marker of past infection that suggests it may be safe for them to go back to work and school.
I remembered the 50 to 85 times more cases and screwed up on my comment. Apologies.
Posted on 4/20/20 at 10:06 am to DawgsLife
We were apparently both relying on faulty memory when we each originally reported the percentage of test subjects positive for antibodies.
You reported that percentage as 85%.
I reported that percentage as 13%.
According to The Mercury News, "The study estimated 2.5% to 4.2% of residents here carry antibodies to the pathogen..."
My excuse for screwing up is covid brain fog. Yesterday I searched my closet three times for a favorite shirt. Then I searched the whole house. Today I found the shirt. It was on the first hanger.
I usually try to post links and not rely on my sometimes faulty memory but I tend to get lazy.
You reported that percentage as 85%.
I reported that percentage as 13%.
According to The Mercury News, "The study estimated 2.5% to 4.2% of residents here carry antibodies to the pathogen..."
My excuse for screwing up is covid brain fog. Yesterday I searched my closet three times for a favorite shirt. Then I searched the whole house. Today I found the shirt. It was on the first hanger.
I usually try to post links and not rely on my sometimes faulty memory but I tend to get lazy.
This post was edited on 4/20/20 at 10:13 am
Posted on 4/20/20 at 10:19 am to Whiznot
Chicago showing closer to 50% of the pop has antibodies based on sample.
It's not all about the Standford-Santa Clara study. There are lots of them out there.
I'm working right now and don't have time to dig it up, but google chicago antibodies and you can probably find it.
It's not all about the Standford-Santa Clara study. There are lots of them out there.
I'm working right now and don't have time to dig it up, but google chicago antibodies and you can probably find it.
Posted on 4/20/20 at 10:23 am to deeprig9
I worry about unreliable testing everywhere. We couldn't even trust the CDC.
CDC’s failed coronavirus tests were tainted with coronavirus, feds confirm
CDC’s failed coronavirus tests were tainted with coronavirus, feds confirm
Posted on 4/20/20 at 11:49 am to Whiznot
quote:
You reported that percentage as 85%.
I reported that percentage as 13%.
Hey...take a victory lap. You were closer...by a bunch!
I actually was remembering the "85 times" comment and was thinking...well, I'm not sure what i was thinking. quote:
My excuse for screwing up is covid brain fog. Yesterday I searched my closet three times for a favorite shirt. Then I searched the whole house. Today I found the shirt. It was on the first hanger.
Welcome to my world. That is an everyday occurence. the older you get the more it will happen.
quote:
I usually try to post links and not rely on my sometimes faulty memory but I tend to get lazy.
Same here. I like to give links because it forces me to read the article instead of just making a bad guess.
Posted on 4/20/20 at 11:51 am to deeprig9
quote:
Chicago showing closer to 50% of the pop has antibodies based on sample.
It's not all about the Standford-Santa Clara study. There are lots of them out there.
I'm working right now and don't have time to dig it up, but google chicago antibodies and you can probably find it.
Not sure if this is the exact article you were referring to, but here is one that says the same thing.
Early Antibody Testing In Chicago: 30-50% Of Those Tested For COVID-19 Already Have Antibodies, Report Says
Posted on 4/20/20 at 11:54 am to Whiznot
quote:
I worry about unreliable testing everywhere. We couldn't even trust the CDC.
CDC’s failed coronavirus tests were tainted with coronavirus, feds confirm
I think they were running into the same thing in England. Tests don't do any good if they are unreliable. Apparently they are running into it a decent amount.
Posted on 4/20/20 at 11:54 am to DawgsLife
That's the one, thanks.
Also, it's a good idea to start screenshotting alot of this kind of stuff before it gets disappeared.
Also, it's a good idea to start screenshotting alot of this kind of stuff before it gets disappeared.
Posted on 4/20/20 at 11:59 am to deeprig9
quote:
That's the one, thanks.
Also, it's a good idea to start screenshotting alot of this kind of stuff before it gets disappeared.
I've noticed some of that, too. I saw articles and when I went back to them I couldn't find them. The press has gotten so dishonest with their reporting. I'm sure it is to differing degrees applicable to both sides, but it's getting really bad.
Posted on 4/20/20 at 12:25 pm to DawgsLife
So the Chicago study isn't testing a sample of the total population. The result is from the subset of people tested for the disease. Of course that result is going to be much higher.
Page 143 of 174
Latest Georgia News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News