@djsumdog toronto is a cancer on the country of Canada and should be excised with impunity
@giantbug Do you watch Viva Fredi? He has a series called Viva on the Street where he’s been documenting the insane lock-downs in Quebec. Barely anyone covered the massive lockdown protests in Europe this past week.
It has nothing at all to do with a virus any more. It’s all about control and it’s really all about The Great Reset.
🇳🇱
They are already going on about shit with a new strain that they think the vaccine wont cover... exactly what I said stood a good chance of happening. Several times I pointed out due to the nature of the virus vaccines arent likely to solve it and at best will help for a short period. Seems thats how its playing out (though too early to really say for sure).
So basically its theatre. Test our mRNA garbage for us with liability protection but you still get lockdown and mask because some imaginary future posibilities.
@djsumdog @giantbug
Yea its all preliminary and at best they have hints of data at most any of this.. they have blown it so out of perportion they are basically just guessing and throwing whatever nonsense at it.
Dont get me wrong COVID is real and all, but fear has dominated the handling of it to such an extent that it is wreckless. Largely because what we know to be good practice in this situation is the opposite of what the general public perceives as good practice, so you get this sort of situation where fear breeds a worse environment to a rather extreme extent.
@icedquinn @freemo @giantbug SARS1/MERS were a lot more deadly. Deadlier viruses tend to burn out faster. HIV is pretty insidious because it takes 2~5 years to kill someone, but that’s mitigated by its low transmission rate (which is why it’s more prevalent in male homosexual communities; just due to contact surface). If HIV had a 30%~50% transmission rate among hetrosexuals, we would have seen a horrific population drop in the 80s/90s.
Deadlier viruses burning out faster is a myth and I debunked that when you mentioned it a month ago or however long.
I can understand why it might seem that way though since deadliest viruses tend to be viruses not present in the general population and are novel.. novel viruses do tend to be easier to contain and dont have very insidious transmission routes.
Because it is naive to a whole host of complexeties... For example, since we are talking generally, most viruses are infectious **before** symtpoms and by the time symptoms present you are no longer in the infectious stage. But if it kills you it will kill you in the stage where you show symptoms. Somtimes you are slightly infectious when you have symptoms but much reduced and not when most of the spread happens... This is true for corona-class viruses (not just THE coronavirus).
As such even a virus that is 100% deadly it would spread exactly the same and at the same rate as the same virus if it were 0% deadly.
Most importantly while it may make sense by the sound of it if you simply look at the correlation between a viruses morbidity and its R0 (how fast it spreads) you will find deadlier viruses that are not novel do **not** have a lower R0, which directly disproves his assertion.
Lets take some specific samples of actual data to show why this is completely false.
Rabies is one of the most deadly non-novel viruses we know.. close to 100% of people who get this disease die without a vaccine. No virus compares in terms of percentage chance of death (in all cases we assume no vaccine of course).
Despite how deadly it is there are several diseases with as large or lower an R0.. in other words it spreads faster than many less deadly diseases. For example "swine flu" has almost the exact same rate of spread (R0) yet doesnt even have a morality rate of 1% at somewhere around 0.3%. Avian flu was about 63% deadly and yet had much lower R0 despite being less deadly at an R0 of 1 (it didnt really spread much at all).
To pick another example seasonal flu kills about 0.1% of people and has a R0 of about 2.6, yet there are tons of diseases that spread faster and are far more deadly such as: HIV (Mort: treated 2.5%, untreated: 80%, R0: 3.5), Lyme disease (mort: 0.25%, R0: 3.9), Dengue Fever (mort: 5%, R0 5), Tuberculosis (mort 66%, R0 5.5), Mumps (mort 2%, R0 12.3), and many many others.
Long story short, it may sound valid, but you cant just make things up and assume their true you have to look at the data. The fact is when you look at the data this assertion is a complete myth.
if its exceptionally deadly but not enough to end up committing viral suicide, people take it seriously with targeted quarantines and it stops being a problem.
i don't see what the issue in what he said.
@djsumdog @giantbug