Coronavirus Pandemic

[Silence]

What do you think about this?

And this?

Watched the second video first and have yet to watch the first.

First, how would I know whether the German pulmonologist is right or not? While he says he ran a public health system for 150k people, he doesn't appear to be a virologist or infectious disease specialist.

Second, the logic he walks us through comes off as pretty straight-forward and, to be frank, rather elementary. Strikes me that any actual expert would have thought of these things. Which leads me to...

Third, its a capitalist conspiracy as all the virologists are seeking the approval of the industrial complex with the money (i.e., the politicians). This doesn't hold water for me. If this is, as the good German doctor suggests, a hoax it will expose all the various governments' experts as incompetent and worse, fraudulent. This seems self defeating.

On a related note, it raises the same old challenge with any of these appeals to authority, whether one's own (e.g., the German doctor) or third party: We're all in a conflicted position of interests. There is always something to be gained through currying favor with someone or another. Any story can be woven together so as to make an expert/authority appear compromised. Who knows what the good doctor stands to gain from his own video? Seems at least as likely he has an ulterior motive as those he's accusing of the same.

Again, how they hell am I or any of you to actually "know". I'm presuming here that none of us are expert virologists. This just seems such a convoluted conspiracy requiring so many scientists to "sign off" and with really nothing to gain considering the cost (at least economically if not lives). Occam's Razor is screaming "look at me!" in this case. I'm sticking with the "this novel virus is something to take seriously" for the time being.

 

[Vortex]

 

[Silence]

Okay, now for Corbet's video.

Interestingly, this video post-dates his newsletter from February where he's already laid this whole thing bare as a massive conspiracy. This is relevant as we should acknowledge the worldview from where this guy would start ANY supposed "analysis". Its his gig. Its his source of compensation and notoriety. This doesn't meant the video Vortex posted from Corbet isn't valid, but a listener should go in with ears open, right?

He spends the first half of the video basically questioning the official numbers and the method of diagnosis used in Wuhan. He raises valid points, that are actually quite elementary for any serious thinker, regarding the validity of the numbers. He also raises concern with the MSM's treatment of these numbers and their too often sensationalism of the numbers.

He then questions the Chinese medical teams' decision to use CT scans as a complimentary diagnostic to direct testing. According to Corbet they were struggling to get enough tests (sound familiar?) and starting diagnosing using CT scans. He questions this as a method. Again, neither Corbet nor I are medical experts. What he should have done, if he were truly interested in an objective evaluation, was to find an expert to ask. Seems reasonable that such an expert may have confirmed his suspicions. Its also equally possible in my mind that an expert may have indicated the Chinese were smart to use CT scans as they were in a triage scenario.

We all know the data on this thing is woefully inadequate. Infection rates, mortality, details on the virus itself, etc. That's been acknowledged from the start. So maybe the Chinese used what they had at the ready. (CT scans). You know "real world" vs some crackpot conspiracy youtuber peddling his wares to make a buck?

The rest of the video is a diatribe on the various secret and public power brokers and the various conspiracy motivations that might lead to a fake pandemic. No where does he indicate what HE would do if he were in charge of a government, national/local/whatever. No where does he indicate he'll come back on and apologize for any harm his "this thing is fake" may end up causing if it ISN'T fake.

No, I didn't find this guy thought provoking, intelligent, or valuable in any way. YMMV.

 

[Silence]

And?

If this thing is what the "officials" say it is, just wait a year and repost the chart.

Let's cut to the chase. What are you proposing the citizens of the world do about this COVID-19 thing? Let's say you were in charge. What would you do?

 

[Vortex]

And?


If this thing is what the "officials" say it is, just wait a year and repost the chart.

Let's cut to the chase. What are you proposing the citizens of the world do about this COVID-19 thing? Let's say you were in charge. What would you do?

Silence, you could have replied with actual counter-arguments to my table showing (apparrent) mortality numbers - such as pointing to (apparently) higher mortality rate and (apparently) higher contagion risk; something like Jim Smith has already done here on the thread:

http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/coronavirus-pandemic.4489/page-3#post-140018

Instead, you replied with an evasive dismissal.

Yet, even if the counter-arguments such as Jim Smith's are correct (which they may be or may be not, given that these are official numbers, and everything official is highly suspect and untrustworthy - at least, in my view, which you may not share...), this still won't refute the fact that there is no horrible, existentially threatening pandemic that may be used as a justification for systematic propaganda of panic (that has already reached the level of an unhinged mass hysteria), harsh (and ever-increasing) restrictions of personal freedom and social life, as well as severe (and still worsening) damage to the economy.

As for the question, what would I do if I had governmental power at my disposal...

This reminds me about an episode from one computer game I once played. In this game, a lord who liked to present himself as a kindly father figure for his serfs, got enraged for the failure of some of them to do his bidding and ordered them to be subjected to cruel public flogging. This was met with grim cynicism by the game protagonist, a somewhat anarchic figure. Their dialogue summarises what an anarchist (like me) would answer if being faced with such a question:

Protagonist: Well, it seems you are not a loving father anymore, aren't you?

Lord: No, I am still one! These scoundrels were just lazy, and they're taking their deserved punishment! Just think, what will you do if you were in my place, faced with such an insubordination?

Protagonist: Well, I will never be in your place.

And this summarises it: where is no way to me to answer what should have been done by the government, since I reject the very principle of government, seeing it as a fundamental cause of countless problems, and not their solution.

I could only answer what I would advice to people to do, as their equal.

To elderly people, I would say: if you won't like to put your life at a severe risk, you may go into a voluntary quarantine until the situation seems safe enough to you to end it. If you are willing to risk your life... well, such is your will.

To everyone else, I would say: live your lives at their fullest, without any restriction - just don't forget to deliver food, send interesting books, make a regular Skype call and do everything else necessary for your grandmothers and grandfathers who wait, willingly self-isolated, for the epidemic to go away (or, at least, to weaken). However, if you fear the virus, and it is your will to avoid the risk, you can follow your elderly relatives' example and to go into a voluntary quarantine.

 

[Silence]

So anarchy is your real world, practical advice to the global community? Do whatever you want; without restriction. Presumably you would want "do whatever you want" to not include instigating violence against others? What about recklessly infecting them with a potentially deadly disease?

This isn't a video game Vortex. These flawed governments are what we've got at present; they're here. They can either try to do something or elect to do nothing. Seemingly, folks might damn them either way which strikes me as childish.

They've elected to listen to their medical personnel and to take action. Hindsight may prove that to be a horrific decision. But again, I ask, what choice do they really have in the matter? A "you do you, I'll do me" platform is just not a practical option here in the real world.

 

[Jim_Smith]

Does it work better than a placebo?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1240724252657156098

 

[Silence]

Does it work better than a placebo?

I don't know. Did you read a concern regarding its effectiveness over placebo?

A quick check of the internet shows a few medical outlets (one from China and one from France) that show in vitro effectiveness against COVID-19. Both stopped short of calling the treatment effective, but both supported the notion of further investigation by the medical science community.

 

[LoganChristopher]

I can not make sense of the conflicting information regarding the virus itself. But I'm leaning towards it being way, way over-hyped especially as the economic impact grows and grows.

Silence, we obviously have our governments in place. What Vortex mentions as a solution could have been done with those governments. They could have recommended just that thing. Instead we're all under government quarantine with the global economy collapsing as a result.

South Korea seems to be having the best response, and then the best statistics. We could have in-acted similar testing. You can't say they were unawares. In Event 201, which roleplayed pretty close to this exact event, was Stephen Redd, MD, director of the CDC’s Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response. If you ask me they have purposefully gotten in the way of testing.

See the new vaccines they're already testing for this. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04283461 Why do these involve no placebo-control group? Why isn't this double blind? Why start off with bad science?

 

[Eric Newhill]

Watched the second video first and have yet to watch the first.

First, how would I know whether the German pulmonologist is right or not? While he says he ran a public health system for 150k people, he doesn't appear to be a virologist or infectious disease specialist.

Irrelevant argument by you. He understands diseases that attack the lungs. Pretty sure he didn't say he ran a public health clinic. Rather he studied data from the 150K people in such a system

Second, the logic he walks us through comes off as pretty straight-forward and, to be frank, rather elementary. Strikes me that any actual expert would have thought of these things. Which leads me to...

It is fairly straight forward logic and the problem is that in the panic and hysteria people are ignoring such logic

Third, its a capitalist conspiracy as all the virologists are seeking the approval of the industrial complex with the money (i.e., the politicians). This doesn't hold water for me. If this is, as the good German doctor suggests, a hoax it will expose all the various governments' experts as incompetent and worse, fraudulent. This seems self defeating.

I didn't hear him saying that at all. Rather, he said what I personally believe. It's mass psychosis, emperors new clothes, fueled by the media. Governments are forced to take it seriously because the frenzied mob would turn on them if they didn't. Trump even originally said it was a hoax.

He further stated - which I also agree with - that political factions and other interests are spinning the hoax to their advantage. Also that virologists and other typically obscured geeks are seeking their 15 minutes of fame and years of funding. Yep. Just like climatologists and global warming.

The Dr. is not a conspiracy theorist. He's merely describing how brush fires, turn into forest fires (metaphorically, of course). This was the perfect storm for an ignorant mob to run roughshod over civilization.

 

[Silence]

I can not make sense of the conflicting information regarding the virus itself. But I'm leaning towards it being way, way over-hyped especially as the economic impact grows and grows.

Silence, we obviously have our governments in place. What Vortex mentions as a solution could have been done with those governments. They could have recommended just that thing. Instead we're all under government quarantine with the global economy collapsing as a result.

South Korea seems to be having the best response, and then the best statistics. We could have in-acted similar testing. You can't say they were unawares. In Event 201, which roleplayed pretty close to this exact event, was Stephen Redd, MD, director of the CDC’s Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response. If you ask me they have purposefully gotten in the way of testing.

See the new vaccines they're already testing for this. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04283461 Why do these involve no placebo-control group? Why isn't this double blind? Why start off with bad science?

Sure, what Vortex mentioned could have been done. Its called the "do nothing" option and I don't mean that as a pejorative. There are plenty of times when maintaining the status quo is the optimal course of action.

So why didn't we do that?

The most likely explanation, the simplest, is that the world's governments were advised by their medical and scientific communities to take action. So they did.

I've seen no credible case to warrant the alternative, do nothing approach. Again, all those espousing that course of action may prove to be prescient. But I simply question the basis on which you would advise taking that course of action. It just seem reckless to me; and unfounded.

 

[Silence]

Irrelevant argument by you. He understands diseases that attack the lungs. Pretty sure he didn't say he ran a public health clinic. Rather he studied data from the 150K people in such a system

I was simply making the point that the doctor is appealing to his own authority Eric. He wasn't presenting research work, but rather his view based on his experience. Again, he's not a virologist by his own admission and his role as an administrator may or may not be valuable considering there are literally thousands of such administrators across the globe. He's just one. Why aren't they all crying out?

It is fairly straight forward logic and the problem is that in the panic and hysteria people are ignoring such logic

People? Sure. The world's best virologists and communicable disease experts? Not a chance.

I didn't hear him saying that at all. Rather, he said what I personally believe. It's mass psychosis, emperors new clothes, fueled by the media. Governments are forced to take it seriously because the frenzied mob would turn on them if they didn't. Trump even originally said it was a hoax.

He further stated - which I also agree with - that political factions and other interests are spinning the hoax to their advantage. Also that virologists and other typically obscured geeks are seeking their 15 minutes of fame and years of funding. Yep. Just like climatologists and global warming.

The Dr. is not a conspiracy theorist. He's merely describing how brush fires, turn into forest fires (metaphorically, of course). This was the perfect storm for an ignorant mob to run roughshod over civilization.

Maybe you're right Eric. We'll see how this line of thinking ages.

I agree the governments didn't have a choice in the matter. I think the notion that all the world's governments medical advisors are giving bad advice to secure funding is ridiculous. Are there some bad apples in the bunch? I'm sure. Are all the apples bad? Not buying it. Like you I'm sure, I know a few serious research and medical professionals. They all have moral compasses sufficiently aligned to not be part of a pandemic hoax.

Again, maybe I'm wrong but I'll need to be proven so.

 

[David Bailey]

Again, maybe I'm wrong but I'll need to be proven so.

Well one thing is clear, the current policy will do immense damage in other ways that are hard to quantify.

1) Assorted places where people actively participate in sport and/or exercise will close. That will make people seriously less fit - more prone to various diseases.

2) Children will not be able to school or do many of their other favourite things - so at least some of them will relieve their boredom with other activities - consuming alcohol, or drugs, engaging in unprotected sex, petty crime, or assorted dangerous internet dares.

3) People will not obtain all the psychological benefits from meeting others and performing activities together.

4) At least some kids will have their education wrecked.

5) Many people will suffer financial hardship and/or the collapse of their business. Both cause severe stress, which causes heart disease and other illnesses.

It is an extremely drastic curtailment of life for a disease that most people handle at home, and some barely notice they are ill.

David

 

[coroico]

I didn't hear him saying that at all. Rather, he said what I personally believe. It's mass psychosis, emperors new clothes, fueled by the media. Governments are forced to take it seriously because the frenzied mob would turn on them if they didn't. Trump even originally said it was a hoax.

He further stated - which I also agree with - that political factions and other interests are spinning the hoax to their advantage. Also that virologists and other typically obscured geeks are seeking their 15 minutes of fame and years of funding. Yep. Just like climatologists and global warming.

So what do you make of stories like this Eric? https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/who-gets-hospital-bed/607807/
Outright lies? Propaganda - do you think this wasn’t going on in Italy a week ago and isn’t going on now? I’ve chosen the Atlantic but there is plenty of reporting from Italy of a similar nature, doctors in their 20s and 30s are ending on intensive care, over 65s are not ventilated when they need to be, which amounts to a death sentence. I live in London, a doctor I know who works in the local hospital tells me there are a number of teenagers with the virus in intensive care right now fighting for their lives. This does not happen in a ”normal” year.

Re the German Doctor, his theory is easy enough to falsify (or not) if correct you would expect the overall respiratory mortality rate to be broadly similar this year to previous years in areas heavily hit. If thats not the case then clearly his approach does not hold.

 

[Eric Newhill]

I was simply making the point that the doctor is appealing to his own authority Eric. He wasn't presenting research work, but rather his view based on his experience. Again, he's not a virologist by his own admission and his role as an administrator may or may not be valuable considering there are literally thousands of such administrators across the globe. He's just one. Why aren't they all crying out?


People? Sure. The world's best virologists and communicable disease experts? Not a chance.


Maybe you're right Eric. We'll see how this line of thinking ages.

I agree the governments didn't have a choice in the matter. I think the notion that all the world's governments medical advisors are giving bad advice to secure funding is ridiculous. Are there some bad apples in the bunch? I'm sure. Are all the apples bad? Not buying it. Like you I'm sure, I know a few serious research and medical professionals. They all have moral compasses sufficiently aligned to not be part of a pandemic hoax.

Again, maybe I'm wrong but I'll need to be proven so.

Silence,
I could be wrong. I'm just not seeing it yet. The data just doesn't support the extraordinary killer pandemic at this point.

The world's best virologists don't necessarily agree. They work for governments and other institutions that control their message. Also virologists are not economists, criminologists, or social scientists. They are looking at this situation through a very narrow lens. They are focusing on worst scenarios because the media directs them to that aspect of the discussion. I listen to them talk very carefully. It's in their best interest to inflate the danger and thus become important and receive funding. I don't think they're are lying, per se. In fact, I often hear them simply repeating statistics that are out of context. They know the correct context, but the public doesn't. So the public comes away with the most dire interpretation, which in turn drives the politicians to take action so they don't appear to be fiddling while Rome burns.

My main point is not that the covid 19 virus isn't bad for some people that contract it. Rather that, deaths happen due to diseases and this is not causing an extraordinary number of deaths - and the economic and other societal damage done by the extreme measures that are being taken is far worse than what the virus would do on its own. It kills fewer people than rabies. We have lived with rabies since humans began. It kills way fewer people than a normal flu. We manage to live with the flu.

 

[Jim_Smith]

So what do you make of stories like this Eric? https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/who-gets-hospital-bed/607807/
Outright lies? Propaganda - do you think this wasn’t going on in Italy a week ago and isn’t going on now? I’ve chosen the Atlantic but there is plenty of reporting from Italy of a similar nature, doctors in their 20s and 30s are ending on intensive care, over 65s are not ventilated when they need to be, which amounts to a death sentence. I live in London, a doctor I know who works in the local hospital tells me there are a number of teenagers with the virus in intensive care right now fighting for their lives. This does not happen in a ”normal” year.

Re the German Doctor, his theory is easy enough to falsify (or not) if correct you would expect the overall respiratory mortality rate to be broadly similar this year to previous years in areas heavily hit. If thats not the case then clearly his approach does not hold.

The number of people who are seriously sick at any given time is a small fraction of the population.

But hospital capacity is not very flexible so if the number of seriously sick people increases suddenly, hospitals, doctors, and morgues, can get swamped (causing panic) even though the number of sick people is still a small fraction of the total population.

So the controversy is whether a large fraction of the population will ever become seriously sick from covid-19 and what are the economic costs of the precautions the government is taking. Economic costs can also cost lives. Panic also has economic costs.

I think reasonable people can disagree on this issue. I don't know who is right.

Some of my previous posts have included data that I think is motivating the US government policy

For the last 20 days, Covid-19 cases in the US have been increasing by a factor of 10 every 10 days:
http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/coronavirus-pandemic.4489/post-140041

Covid-19 has a higher fatality rate in confirmed cases and spreads faster than flu:
http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/coronavirus-pandemic.4489/post-140018

 

[Jim_Smith]

Silence,
I could be wrong. I'm just not seeing it yet. The data just doesn't support the extraordinary killer pandemic at this point.

...

One problem facing the government is that once you know for sure the virus really dangerous, it's too late for precautions to work. Viruses can spread exponentially and covid-19 patients can spread the disease many days before they even know they are sick. The government can potentially save a lot of lives but only if they take action early.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...doors-coronavirus-covid-19-column/5002763002/

Coronavirus closings: There are substantial benefits to not dilly-dallying around.
Glenn Harlan Reynolds Opinion columnist​

...​

Right now, things aren’t bad enough to make closing the obvious action. The trouble is, by the time things get that bad, it’ll be too late for closing to do as much good.​

...
With a disease spreading more-or-less exponentially, and with a lengthy contagious period in which there are no symptoms, by the time it’s obviously spreading among your students or employees, you’ll be past the point where interrupting transmission will really make a difference.​

 

[Jim_Smith]

Here is a graph of confirmed deaths in the US on a log scale. It shows the number of deaths increased by a factor of 13 in the last 15 days. The graph at the link below is interactive, I added the US and changed to a log scale to show exponential growth.

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus#confirmed-covid-19-deaths-by-country




Below are tables based on my previous post of confirmed cases and the table above. The tables extrapolate exponential growth in cases and deaths. The tables don't go on indefinitely because there are a finite number of people living in the US. However covid-19 cases and deaths may continue to increase although at a slower rate after the exponential growth phase. For comparison, the CDC estimates the number of deaths from flu this year are 22,000 - 55,000.

Covid-19 has the potential to cause hundreds of thousands of deaths in the US but this data is not proof it will. As the disease spreads it is likely to become less deadly because variants with mutations that kill fewer people will tend to spread faster since their victims will remain alive to spread the virus. Covid-19 is also likely to spread slower over time as more people become infected it is harder for the virus to reach new uninfected victims. There have also been encouraging reports of drugs that can be used to effectively treat covid-19.

Hopefully these factors and the precautions being taken and will keep number of cases and deaths low and they will not reach anything near these extrapolations.

Confirmed cases in the US extrapolated after 3/19



Confirmed deaths in the US extrapolated after 3/20

 

[Eric Newhill]

Here is a graph of confirmed deaths in the US on a log scale. It shows the number of deaths increased by a factor of 13 in the last 15 days. The graph at the link below is interactive, I added the US and changed to a log scale to show exponential growth.

https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus#confirmed-covid-19-deaths-by-country

View attachment 1567


Below are tables based on my previous post of confirmed cases and the table above. The tables extrapolate exponential growth in cases and deaths. The tables don't go on indefinitely because there are a finite number of people living in the US. However covid-19 cases and deaths may continue to increase although at a slower rate after the exponential growth phase. For comparison, the CDC estimates the number of deaths from flu this year are 22,000 - 55,000.

Covid-19 has the potential to cause hundreds of thousands of deaths in the US but this data is not proof it will. As the disease spreads it is likely to become less deadly because variants with mutations that kill fewer people will tend to spread faster since their victims will remain alive to spread the virus. Covid-19 is also likely to spread slower over time as more people become infected it is harder for the virus to reach new uninfected victims. There have also been encouraging reports of drugs that can be used to effectively treat covid-19.

Hopefully these factors and the precautions being taken and will keep number of cases and deaths low and they will not reach anything near these extrapolations.

Confirmed cases in the US extrapolated after 3/19

View attachment 1563

Confirmed deaths in the US extrapolated after 3/20

View attachment 1566

Jim,
That kind of extrapolation never plays out - 1918 being the exception. We heard the same argument about HIV, MERS, SARS, Swine Flu, Ebola and a few others I've forgotten, were shown the same extrapolations, but the media hype wasn't as loud and constant, the public panic was far less and the official reaction was subdued.

The extrapolation didn't play out in China and it didn't play out even on the cruise ship. So why is anyone taking the extrapolation seriously? That what I mean by "they're not lying per se", but they are stirring up the whirlwind nonetheless.

 

[Silence]

Eric,

If you were Trump what would you have done? I continue to feel as if we really didn't have a choice in terms of the response based on the advice we've been given by the medical and scientific communities. Maybe you've got a different read.