Bat be fa·ce·tious Key facts Approximately 1.35 million people die each year as a result of road traffic crashes. The2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development has set an ambitious target of halving the global number of deaths and injuries from road traffic crashes by 2020. Road traffic crashes cost most countries 3% of their gross domestic product. More than half of all road traffic deaths are among vulnerable road users: pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists. 93% of the world's fatalities on the roads occur in low- and middle-income countries, even though these countries have approximately 60% of the world's vehicles. Road traffic injuries are the leading cause of death for children and young adults aged 5-29 years. Every year the lives of approximately 1.35 million people are cut short as a result of a road traffic crash. Between 20 and 50 million more people suffer non-fatal injuries, with many incurring a disability as a result of their injury. Road traffic injuries cause considerable economic losses to individuals, their families, and to nations as a whole. These losses arise from the cost of treatment as well as lost productivity for those killed or disabled by their injuries, and for family members who need to take time off work or school to care for the injured. Road traffic crashes cost most countries 3% of their gross domestic product. So using "Liberal Logic" (sic) Anyone who drives a car or takes a bus is a MURDERER !!! It's Pass Time to Stop de BS PanicDemic If You're afraid to get out of your house then STAY THERE. Let those of us who aren't afraid live our lifes Ooops Fergots to Credit: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/road-traffic-injuries
Ars Technica: Evidence slowly building for long-term heart problems post-COVID-19. https://arstechnica.com/science/202...g-for-long-term-heart-problems-post-covid-19/
@R29k About a third of Floridian kids are infected but most are asymptomatic. No one can tell at this point what the long term possible consequences are, how this might affect their respiratory tract or anything else for that matter - so this is rather worrying.... But most people are like that: if it doesn't affect them and if it isn't happening right now and badly - it isn't happening...
Bat older brother got hit with myocarditis and/or pericardites as a teen. (In 1960 LoUiSiAna de only place "diagnosing and treating" that was The Childrens Ward @ Big Charity in New Orleans) so de diagnosis isn't clear. He attended his Junior and Senior Years of High School in bed at home. Teachers and Students would move an intercom between classrooms. There was an old barn full of Bats in a field by our house brother likes to hunt...so maybe him was first case of Kung Flu from eating a bat Me gone message him and find out
https://thehill.com/changing-americ...r-EEUsFUJwVMtusWwHD4Sbo_W5NpbiZZ2FdNnzZB1YZKg Alonso described X-rays that reveal damage caused to human lungs by the coronavirus, even for people without severe symptoms. "They are seeing there is damage to the lungs in these asymptomatic children. ... We don't know how that is going to manifest a year from now or two years from now," Alonso told reporters. "Is that child going to have chronic pulmonary problems or not?"
Capitalism at work: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...ed-maine-wedding-n1239353?cid=sm_npd_nn_fb_ma Very "clever"....
Of course it is happening. Deaths by anaphylactic shocks at Aspirin administration did happen. (Just saying individual 'extraordinary' reactions happen all the time). I assume nobody of us here who is posting has been infected by SARS-CoV-2 (yet). Means, we are not affected by it and / or asymptomatology, but we do not deny that it is happening. Why should we? The question here -at first place- is what does it mean to ME (the consumer of such news) getting such a info! Speaking of "society" "being of community" it will be always individual speakers, the individual, 'me', those (individuals) who are thinking about the 'society' by categorisation what 'it' means to the 'society'. It's all about how such news are presented, in which context, what's the source and finally how the reader is categorizing such infos. (Personal risk evaluation / risk categorisation...or simply 'worries')... If the media's / politicians purpose is to spread fear by informing out of context, then such media / politicians are harmful as well. (Spreading fear / big headlines is best-selling for most media)... Nobody of us exactly knows what will happen if getting infected by corona. But some of us know other diseases such as FLU. To make a proper categorisation only a progress comparison to other known diseases and categorisation by that makes sense. By comparing to something that is personally known or even self-experienced one can make a real categorisation. Anything else remains a vague imagination. And we know that a flu can come along with the same asymptomatic progresses as well...
I see all mainstream media and not so mainstream, are spreading fear. Government s officials at least in Mexico love to spread the disease... of fear.
Words of a scientist who really knows his stuff. Not a ridiculous guy who thinks everything is fixed with discussions or arguments without real evidence.
@Mr.X ....... i'm at 7.57 now ...... when does he actualy start to say something ? ...... the message ? ...... the point ? He likes the sound of his own voice ........... sounds like a mentaly confused old mary popins reading a story to backward kids ....... but all hes realy doing is moaning ............ spreading confusion ...... and saying tha corona is no worse than flu and the whole thing is a conspiracy ? Whens he going to say what he ' thinks ' should happen ? His silver bullet ? JFC Hes nuts . The only thing missing is reptilians .
health experts predict here in the US about 3000 deaths per day by the end of september december mainly due to peoples negligence and carelessness and a vaccine will take even longer not many people are volunteering for trial runs...maybe next year things will improve will have to wait and see
@Yen, sorry but I really have to question/challenge your assertions: you already changed your (reasoned and reasonable) position once for one which is clearly driven by a certain belief in somebody else ("a leader"), as much as your suddenly and rather mysteriously radically changed understanding of statistics... What makes you a "measure" by anyone's standards now, what should make anyone not seriously question your judgement now that you have already changed your position drastically, having watched a guy who really sounds like he can't think for love or money....? (He may well be a great scientist in his narrow field but he sure as hell is NOT a guy to listen to when it comes to public health policy advice, as he is clearly not trained in any of that and he clearly does not understand "Do no harm!", never mind his rather confused "reasoning", which a first year philosophy student can destroy with a few Formal Logic lessons under his/her belt...)
Wow, this is quite revealing. Now I got you poor soul. Now it's clear to my somewhat limited intelligence your arrogant behavior and thought patterns. Sure you don't feel God / Superior Power fulfilling your miserable existence. Wow everyday we can learn interesting stuff, pretty much. Promise: this is the last time I quote you or even reply to you. Not worth any effort. Lol
Anybody trained in logics can unpick him in 5 minutes flat. You are not trained in that. Whatever you are trained in, I am sure you can do well... Obviously, this ain't "it", sadly... On the other hand, this only reveals your complexes... Hence your pattern of behaviour, constantly falling for the lowest common denominator... I associate it with the Right. It seems you have some growing up to do... I'm OK with that, I'll give you time, as in "I have the good will to not take this badly"... But do you?
Studies on the effectiveness of face masks So far, most studies found little to no evidence for the effectiveness of cloth face masks in the general population, neither as personal protective equipment nor as a source control. A May 2020 meta-study on pandemic influenza published by the US CDC found that face masks had no effect, neither as personal protective equipment nor as a source control. (Source) A July 2020 review by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medince found that there is no evidence for the effectiveness of cloth masks against virus infection or transmission. (Source) A Covid-19 cross-country study by the University of East Anglia found that a mask requirement was of no benefit and could even increase the risk of infection. (Source) An April 2020 review by two US professors in respiratory and infectious disease from the University of Illinois concluded that face masks have no effect in everyday life, neither as self-protection nor to protect third parties (so-called source control). (Source) An article in the New England Journal of Medicine from May 2020 came to the conclusion that cloth face masks offer little to no protection in everyday life. (Source) An April 2020 Cochrane review (preprint) found that face masks in the general population or health care workers didn’t reduce influenza-like illness (ILI) cases. (Source) An April 2020 review by the Norwich School of Medicine (preprint) found that “the evidence is not sufficiently strong to support widespread use of facemasks”, but supports the use of masks by “particularly vulnerable individuals when in transient higher risk situations.” (Source) A July 2020 study by Japanese researchers found that cloth masks “offer zero protection against coronavirus” due to their large pore size and generally poor fit. (Source) A 2015 study in the British Medical Journal BMJ Open found that cloth masks were penetrated by 97% of particles and may increase infection risk by retaining moisture or repeated use. (Source) Additional aspects There is increasing evidence that the SARS-2 coronavirus is transmitted, at least in indoor settings, not only by droplets but also by smaller aerosols. However, due to their large pore size and poor fit, cloth masks cannot filter out aerosols (see video analysis below): over 90% of aerosols penetrate or bypass the mask and fill a medium-sized room within minutes. The WHO admitted to the BBC that its June 2020 mask policy update was due not to new evidence but “political lobbying”: “We had been told by various sources WHO committee reviewing the evidence had not backed masks but they recommended them due to political lobbying. This point was put to WHO who did not deny.” (D. Cohen, BBC Medical Corresponent) Japan, despite its widespread use of face masks, experienced its most recent influenza epidemic with more than 5 million people falling ill just one year ago, in January and February 2019. However, unlike SARS-2, the influenza virus is transmitted by children, too. Many states that introduced mandatory face masks on public transport and in shops in spring or early summer, such as Hawaii, California, Argentina, Spain, France and Japan, still saw a strong increase in infections from July onwards, indicating a low effectiveness of mask policies. Austrian scientists found that the introduction, retraction and re-introduction of mandatory face masks in Austria had no influence at all on the infection rate. In the US state of Kansas, the 90 counties without mask mandates had lower coronavirus infection rates than the 15 counties with mask mandates. To hide this fact, the Kansas health department tried to manipulate the official statistics and data presentation. Contrary to common belief, studies in hospitals found that the wearing of a medical mask by surgeons during operations didn’t reduce post-operative bacterial wound infections in patients. In children, the risk of Covid-19 disease and transmission is very low – much lower than for influenza – and face masks for children are therefore, in general, not indicated. During the notorious 1918 influenza pandemic, the use of cloth face masks among the general population was widespread and in some places mandatory, but they made no difference. https://videos.files.wordpress.com/4egEyh2b/masks-aerosols-dr-ted-noel_dvd.mp4
I am not interested in the author or if the author does not follow what you call proper reasoning / arguing. I am interested in the data. I present you 3 'things' which everybody can evaluate oneself. No study of the subject statistic is needed... We all were/are focused on the "corona dashboard / COVID-19 map". It represents the panic motor of how COVID-19 is spreading. And it is used to reason restrictions. It's also used to determine if political decisions have / had an influence on the pandemia The global one is published by Johns Hopkins University https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html The special more detailed one for Germany by the RKI https://corona.rki.de The common values are: COVID-19 infections deaths by COVID-19 Recovered 1. The testing rate changed during the pandemia. And every country has a different testing rate due to availability / capacities. At the beginning we had far less tests available than now. The testing rate for Germany is today AFAIK 600000/week. The more you test the more results you get. This means you get more positives and more negatives. Right? Both dashboards do only present the positives! It looks like the infection had grown fastly at the beginning BUT the reason for it is the fact that we did more tests! You MUST relate the positives TO the amount of tests! Anything else is statistical BS! 2. Each test has an error rate! Right? When you have an error rate of 0.5% (common PCR error rate) and you do 300000 tests you have maximally 1500 false positives. When you raise now your testing capabilities to 600000 tests then you have maximally double false positives, 3000! This means you have 3000/7 = 428 false results every day! Here some politicians have announced a second wave when the infections changed from 1200 to 1500 (a difference of 300) per day WITHOUT to consider that the more you test the more false positives you get! At current testing rates of 600000/week you have already around 400 false results each day. BUT a difference of 300 is taken to reason a second wave! This is also statistical BS. 3. They list the SARS-CoV2 positives. A pandemia -however- is about sick people! Right? A virus positive per se is nothing at all at first place. Only when you develop symptoms (be sick) you are affected by it. To list virus positives per day and in/decreasing comparisons ALONE can be considered as unprofessional yes even as spreading fear! You actually need to count those who are getting sick by corona! Check yourself the statistics and tell me why we still have absolute values, why we still have NO consideration of error rates, why we still speak of positives and not of sick people! I don't need a 'leader' and those 3 points are not all. Furthermore if you have proper statistics you clearly can prove (for Germany): -The first wave was over already before the lockdown -The lockdown had no significant influence on infection rate -The 'second wave' can be reasoned by a higher rate due to error rate. -Only 20% of infected humans develop specific symptoms at all. It is very important to have results about lockdown since it was the measure that had most impact on human rights / human psychology/ economy..... And it is important to know if it had an influence on corona or not! (BTW: There are other scientific studies that prove that a lockdown is no appropriate measure to curb a pandemia.)
We're in a section called serious discussions and this ' discussion ' is the oposite of serious . VT threads arent allowed ......... and this is a VT thread . >A wise old man speaking on a chair 1 - You announce that he's wise = you say that he's right and anyone not agreeing with him is wrong . 2 - Take the text ........ and a marker ....... and cross out all the blah blah and packaging .......... and mark the claims he makes ........ and the proofs he offers . After doing that theres very little left . He claims that corona is a part of a world wide hoax ......... a secret plan by governments ......... its no more dangerous that the flu ...... and he offers no proof . 3 - Who is the guy and whats his reputation ? = www.vernoncoleman.com/main.htm click the links on the left hand side and read them . The guy represents almost all of the psycho-esoteric bulls**t VT comunity spectrum . He denys climate change , is anti vacines , is anti muslim , pro brexit and microwaves are dangerous . >The BBC, the EU and Auschwitz Vernon Coleman The BBC doesn’t just obtain its money by thugging pensioners and other citizens. It doesn’t rely on profits from the sale of DVDs and other stuff. The BBC doesn’t like to mention this but it has received hundreds of millions of pounds from the EU. And since it is a fact that the EU was created with the help of Nazis with links to war criminals who made huge sums from Auschwitz, I don’t think it is much of a stretch to conclude that there is also a link between the BBC and the profits made with the help of the concentration camps at Auschwitz. So, it’s perhaps not surprising that the BBC seems to support the Labour party (widely accused of being anti-Semitic) – and opposes Brexit. Presumably, the Labour Party wants to gather in the massive Muslim vote. But the treacherous BBC just wants to support its paymasters at the EU. Copyright Vernon Coleman 2019 Doubters should read The Shocking History of the EU by Zina Cohen. It is available on Amazon as an eBook and a paperback and it contains all the facts you’ll need. If all Remainers read this book there would be no Remainers (except for Nazis). 4 - He says that ' corona ' is just another flu / no more dangerous that ' the ' flu . A - Corona is not one virus its a family . B - Same with ' the ' flu . C - He therby forgets the spanish flu ........ with 20 million dead in a world with a lot less people and less international travel .......... what would that number of deaths be if we scaled it up to todays world population ? 100 million ? And thats not bad ? Dangerous ?