-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
[No Politics] What you need to know about CoVID-19 by SARS-CoV-2 [No Politics]
- Thread starter andymok
- Start date
- Status
Can we please forget the horrifying and virtually unobtainable concept of herd immunity? [Edit: excluding vaccination, of course.] It never worked with polio, chicken pox, small pox, or nearly any other viral disease. Yet it would require perhaps 5X more deaths than already occurred in most countries, including the US if it ever could be reached. It’s like A Shirley Jackson short story, for goodness sake. (Google The Lottery.)
Last edited:
Learning Curve
Dr. Anthony Fauci: “Science is Truth”
https://www.hhs.gov/podcasts/learning-curve/learning-curve-05-dr-anthony-fauci-science-is-truth.html
AF: Anthony Fauci the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases since 1984
MC: Michael Caputo the assistant secretary of Public Affairs at the United States Department of Health and Human Services.
This excerpt is about American anti-science bias and the interaction between people who believe in absolutes vs shifting scientific views (emphasis mine):
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
AF: Yeah. Well, one of the problems we face in the United States is that unfortunately, there is a combination of an anti-science bias that people are, for reasons that sometimes are, you know, inconceivable and not understandable, they just don't believe science and they don't believe authority. So, when they see someone up in the White House, which has an air of authority to it, who's talking about science, that there are some people who just don't believe that. And that's unfortunate because, you know, science is truth. And if you go by the evidence and by the data, you're speaking the truth.
And it's amazing sometimes the denial there is, it's the same thing that gets people who are anti-vaxxers, who don't want people to get vaccinated, even though the data clearly indicate the safety of vaccines. That's really a problem. I think the people who believe or people who understand and have trust in someone who has a very, very long track record of always speaking the truth based on evidence, and I've done that, as you said, through now six administrations. This is my sixth administration.
MC: You know, so it's interesting, doc, because I kind of see that the people who don't believe science are people who believe in absolutes. That the truth is it's either true or it's not.
AF: Right.
MC: And in this process, we've seen the models shift. We've seen the data shift. We've seen an instruction shift. And I think perhaps those who believe in absolute truth, don't really end up being believing science that shifts. Don't you think that in the end, the American people have to begin to understand that science is an absolute truth?
AF: Right.
MC: It really isn't.
AF: Well, science has a -- no, I think we have to be careful we don't confuse people. So, let me take a different perspective, Michael.
MC: I am here to confuse people.
AF: Okay.
[laughter]
AF: Okay. So, science is the attempt in good faith to get to the facts, and it isn't perfect. And what happens is that science can be self-correcting. The beauty of science is that it's self-correcting. So, if somebody comes up with an observation, there could be ways that they gathered the information, that they interpreted the information that isn't really necessarily the way it is. But the beauty of that is that there are so many other people independently, who are asking the same questions that sooner or later, something that really is true, will get confirmed time after time, after time. And something that in good faith was thought to be true but isn't when the scientific process repeats it over and over again, all of a sudden you realize, you know, there was something about that that wasn't quite right.
So, as long as science is humble enough and open enough and transparent enough to excel -- to accept the self-correction. It's a beautiful process. So, the science doesn't change. What it is, is sometimes interpretation. That's the point.
MC: See, I, you know -- and common here, I'm from the, you know, communications arena, from the political arena, you know, doing legal or litigation communications. I did -- science to me -- I had so much trouble with physics Dr. Fauci. I wanted to be an engineer. I got a journalism degree. I'm science stunted. I have a problem, I think, like most Americans. But now that I've been here for a little while, I understand that science is kind of an iterative process. And it's one that eventually you arrive at the absolute truth.
AF: Right.
MC: And I think most -- many Americans haven't. They don't get that that science is really something that thousands of people participate in to end up on one -- in one immutable truth.
Dr. Anthony Fauci: “Science is Truth”
https://www.hhs.gov/podcasts/learning-curve/learning-curve-05-dr-anthony-fauci-science-is-truth.html
AF: Anthony Fauci the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases since 1984
MC: Michael Caputo the assistant secretary of Public Affairs at the United States Department of Health and Human Services.
This excerpt is about American anti-science bias and the interaction between people who believe in absolutes vs shifting scientific views (emphasis mine):
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
AF: Yeah. Well, one of the problems we face in the United States is that unfortunately, there is a combination of an anti-science bias that people are, for reasons that sometimes are, you know, inconceivable and not understandable, they just don't believe science and they don't believe authority. So, when they see someone up in the White House, which has an air of authority to it, who's talking about science, that there are some people who just don't believe that. And that's unfortunate because, you know, science is truth. And if you go by the evidence and by the data, you're speaking the truth.
And it's amazing sometimes the denial there is, it's the same thing that gets people who are anti-vaxxers, who don't want people to get vaccinated, even though the data clearly indicate the safety of vaccines. That's really a problem. I think the people who believe or people who understand and have trust in someone who has a very, very long track record of always speaking the truth based on evidence, and I've done that, as you said, through now six administrations. This is my sixth administration.
MC: You know, so it's interesting, doc, because I kind of see that the people who don't believe science are people who believe in absolutes. That the truth is it's either true or it's not.
AF: Right.
MC: And in this process, we've seen the models shift. We've seen the data shift. We've seen an instruction shift. And I think perhaps those who believe in absolute truth, don't really end up being believing science that shifts. Don't you think that in the end, the American people have to begin to understand that science is an absolute truth?
AF: Right.
MC: It really isn't.
AF: Well, science has a -- no, I think we have to be careful we don't confuse people. So, let me take a different perspective, Michael.
MC: I am here to confuse people.
AF: Okay.
[laughter]
AF: Okay. So, science is the attempt in good faith to get to the facts, and it isn't perfect. And what happens is that science can be self-correcting. The beauty of science is that it's self-correcting. So, if somebody comes up with an observation, there could be ways that they gathered the information, that they interpreted the information that isn't really necessarily the way it is. But the beauty of that is that there are so many other people independently, who are asking the same questions that sooner or later, something that really is true, will get confirmed time after time, after time. And something that in good faith was thought to be true but isn't when the scientific process repeats it over and over again, all of a sudden you realize, you know, there was something about that that wasn't quite right.
So, as long as science is humble enough and open enough and transparent enough to excel -- to accept the self-correction. It's a beautiful process. So, the science doesn't change. What it is, is sometimes interpretation. That's the point.
MC: See, I, you know -- and common here, I'm from the, you know, communications arena, from the political arena, you know, doing legal or litigation communications. I did -- science to me -- I had so much trouble with physics Dr. Fauci. I wanted to be an engineer. I got a journalism degree. I'm science stunted. I have a problem, I think, like most Americans. But now that I've been here for a little while, I understand that science is kind of an iterative process. And it's one that eventually you arrive at the absolute truth.
AF: Right.
MC: And I think most -- many Americans haven't. They don't get that that science is really something that thousands of people participate in to end up on one -- in one immutable truth.
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2018
- Messages
- 6,267
- Likes
- 9,404
How do you know that? You missed the surge in California. That has a political smell. Stop acting like an expert when you all you did is stay at a Holiday Inn last night. By the way, Texas local officials may now order businesses to require masks and such an order is in effect for Harris County/Houston.
Ron, please. Please. Please read the posts above showing where is surging and where isn’t. I am being open and transparent with you. Without insults. There were over 400 cities with demonstrations. Many of the states have no surge at all. Many are surging. Science is the process of looking at data and testing hypotheses. It was a valid and testable hypothesis that demonstrations would lead to surges. They did not. The surges - proven by the data available - are a separate phenomenon.
maty
Major Contributor
I suppose. Incompetence has no political color, unfortunately it is something that is widespread in many western developed countries that, not many years ago, their institutions were more effective. I guess as a reflection of their societies. Spain is a very good example of both
Learning Curve
Dr. Anthony Fauci: “Science is Truth”
https://www.hhs.gov/podcasts/learning-curve/learning-curve-05-dr-anthony-fauci-science-is-truth.html
AF: Anthony Fauci the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases since 1984
MC: Michael Caputo the assistant secretary of Public Affairs at the United States Department of Health and Human Services.
This excerpt is about how with shifting evidence comes shifting advice, in particular the use of masks.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
MC: And I noticed that you're always frank. You stick with the science. And that confuses some people.
AF: Well, it does. And I do stick to the science. I have the responsibility, which I take very seriously, of always being consistent and basing what you say on evidence. And there are times when you don't have all the evidence you need, but you have to make judgments based on both prior experience and the degree of evidence that you have. When you get more information, you process your information according to the facts and the evidence, which is the reason why when people see what's going on, and you have an evolving outbreak, it's a work in progress or a disaster in progress.
This was unprecedented, you know, and when you give advice about what should you be doing, should you be out there, should you be shutting down earlier versus later? I mean, people get confused. And they say, "Wow, you know, we shut down and we caused a great disruption in society. We caused great economic pain, loss of jobs." But if you look at the data, now that papers have come out literally two days ago, the fact that we shut down when we did and the rest of the world did, has saved hundreds of millions of infections and millions of lives. And yet, there are those who say, "You shut down, you did destructive things by disrupting the economy." And others say, "Well, if you save so many infections by shutting down, why didn't you shut down two weeks earlier? You could have saved many more lives."
So, I think that's where I wouldn't say that confusion is. Sometimes what appears to be inconsistencies, but they're not because at any given moment, you've got to make your decision based on evidence. And it isn't your decision. It's your advice and your guidelines because the people who make the decisions at the top of the top, the President and the Vice President, and at the local level, the governors and the mayors, they take into account advice and recommendations, not only from the health sector, but from the economic sector, from the political sector, from things that they're responsible for.
So, the thing we have to stick by our guns in the sense of we got to make sure that we make consistently the public health recommendation based on the truth and the evidence as we have it.
MC: And the fact is, the evidence we -- as we have it is shifting.
AF: Yeah.
MC: So, some people when they hear about masks, no mask, you know, spike, no spike, you know, et cetera, they don't they don't understand that with the shifting evidence comes some shifting advice.
AF: Yeah. I mean, I think a typical example of that was the misunderstanding about masks. At a time when there was a shortage of PPE and a shortage of masks, many health officials, myself included, were saying, "Masks are not perfect." The people who really need the masks, the N95s and other masks, the surgical masks, are the people in the healthcare community who in fact, are putting themselves in harm's way every day to take care of sick people.
So, it would be terrible if all of a sudden everybody started hoarding masks so when they weren't available, and the health care providers wouldn't have it. Then when it became clear that there was transmission by people who without symptoms, that you can't assume that if you walk out in your society and someone is not coughing and is not sneezing that you're okay. Because we know now that 25 to 45 percent of people who are infected are asymptomatic.
Therefore, there's a compelling reason to wear a mask. One, in case I am infected, but one of those asymptomatic carriers, I'm not going to spread the infection to a vulnerable person who might actually get very sick and die; or if I'm uninfected and somebody else is infected, that they are going to -- there are going to infect me if I don't have a mask. So, right now people are saying, "Well, wait a minute, a couple of months ago, you said, don't worry about masks." The situation has changed. It's changed because we now have enough masks for the healthcare providers and we know that if the infection can be spread from an asymptomatic person.
Dr. Anthony Fauci: “Science is Truth”
https://www.hhs.gov/podcasts/learning-curve/learning-curve-05-dr-anthony-fauci-science-is-truth.html
AF: Anthony Fauci the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases since 1984
MC: Michael Caputo the assistant secretary of Public Affairs at the United States Department of Health and Human Services.
This excerpt is about how with shifting evidence comes shifting advice, in particular the use of masks.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
MC: And I noticed that you're always frank. You stick with the science. And that confuses some people.
AF: Well, it does. And I do stick to the science. I have the responsibility, which I take very seriously, of always being consistent and basing what you say on evidence. And there are times when you don't have all the evidence you need, but you have to make judgments based on both prior experience and the degree of evidence that you have. When you get more information, you process your information according to the facts and the evidence, which is the reason why when people see what's going on, and you have an evolving outbreak, it's a work in progress or a disaster in progress.
This was unprecedented, you know, and when you give advice about what should you be doing, should you be out there, should you be shutting down earlier versus later? I mean, people get confused. And they say, "Wow, you know, we shut down and we caused a great disruption in society. We caused great economic pain, loss of jobs." But if you look at the data, now that papers have come out literally two days ago, the fact that we shut down when we did and the rest of the world did, has saved hundreds of millions of infections and millions of lives. And yet, there are those who say, "You shut down, you did destructive things by disrupting the economy." And others say, "Well, if you save so many infections by shutting down, why didn't you shut down two weeks earlier? You could have saved many more lives."
So, I think that's where I wouldn't say that confusion is. Sometimes what appears to be inconsistencies, but they're not because at any given moment, you've got to make your decision based on evidence. And it isn't your decision. It's your advice and your guidelines because the people who make the decisions at the top of the top, the President and the Vice President, and at the local level, the governors and the mayors, they take into account advice and recommendations, not only from the health sector, but from the economic sector, from the political sector, from things that they're responsible for.
So, the thing we have to stick by our guns in the sense of we got to make sure that we make consistently the public health recommendation based on the truth and the evidence as we have it.
MC: And the fact is, the evidence we -- as we have it is shifting.
AF: Yeah.
MC: So, some people when they hear about masks, no mask, you know, spike, no spike, you know, et cetera, they don't they don't understand that with the shifting evidence comes some shifting advice.
AF: Yeah. I mean, I think a typical example of that was the misunderstanding about masks. At a time when there was a shortage of PPE and a shortage of masks, many health officials, myself included, were saying, "Masks are not perfect." The people who really need the masks, the N95s and other masks, the surgical masks, are the people in the healthcare community who in fact, are putting themselves in harm's way every day to take care of sick people.
So, it would be terrible if all of a sudden everybody started hoarding masks so when they weren't available, and the health care providers wouldn't have it. Then when it became clear that there was transmission by people who without symptoms, that you can't assume that if you walk out in your society and someone is not coughing and is not sneezing that you're okay. Because we know now that 25 to 45 percent of people who are infected are asymptomatic.
Therefore, there's a compelling reason to wear a mask. One, in case I am infected, but one of those asymptomatic carriers, I'm not going to spread the infection to a vulnerable person who might actually get very sick and die; or if I'm uninfected and somebody else is infected, that they are going to -- there are going to infect me if I don't have a mask. So, right now people are saying, "Well, wait a minute, a couple of months ago, you said, don't worry about masks." The situation has changed. It's changed because we now have enough masks for the healthcare providers and we know that if the infection can be spread from an asymptomatic person.
Yes but your post conveniently left out California, which Ron pointed out, and you asserted that the surges have nothing to do with the protests. You could only prove that with contact tracing, which is very difficult according to recent attempts in NY, unless you know this has been done in those cities?
maty
Major Contributor
[Spanish]
[ Jeong Eun-kyeong, the director of the KCDC [South Korea], said today: "Originally our prediction is that the 2nd wave would be in the fall or winter. Our prognosis turned out to be incorrect. As long as people continue to have close contact with others, we believe the infections will continue." ]
[ Mayor Park [Seoul] has also warned that if the daily average of new infections in Seoul exceeds 30 for 3 days in a row and the hospital occupancy rate exceeds 70%, hard distancing will be imposed again. ]
[ -So, take note, because even the summer is not going to take # COVID19 ahead (today they have made 35 degrees in Seoul and the average in the last week has exceeded 30) neither this is over nor the virus has been weakened or the like I've seen written out there ]
[ -Attention large cities and summer places; with some agglomeration the sprouts are INEVITABLE
-That in some places there are - ICU income does not mean that we are now fully prepared. Even with preparation, 1 nonsense is enough to return to confinement ]
[ -The mayor said today that the virus R factor (the average number of people each new patient has been infecting) in Seoul from April 30 to June 11 has been 1.79
-If the R factor continues in these parameters "in a month we can expect 800 contagions per day" he warned ]
[ Jeong Eun-kyeong, the director of the KCDC [South Korea], said today: "Originally our prediction is that the 2nd wave would be in the fall or winter. Our prognosis turned out to be incorrect. As long as people continue to have close contact with others, we believe the infections will continue." ]
[ Mayor Park [Seoul] has also warned that if the daily average of new infections in Seoul exceeds 30 for 3 days in a row and the hospital occupancy rate exceeds 70%, hard distancing will be imposed again. ]
[ -So, take note, because even the summer is not going to take # COVID19 ahead (today they have made 35 degrees in Seoul and the average in the last week has exceeded 30) neither this is over nor the virus has been weakened or the like I've seen written out there ]
[ -Attention large cities and summer places; with some agglomeration the sprouts are INEVITABLE
-That in some places there are - ICU income does not mean that we are now fully prepared. Even with preparation, 1 nonsense is enough to return to confinement ]
[ -The mayor said today that the virus R factor (the average number of people each new patient has been infecting) in Seoul from April 30 to June 11 has been 1.79
-If the R factor continues in these parameters "in a month we can expect 800 contagions per day" he warned ]
maty
Major Contributor
Therefore, we are in the worst case scenario, health and ... economic.
Until there is an effective medical treatment in the early stages and / or an effective vaccine... the future is very problematic.
Until there is an effective medical treatment in the early stages and / or an effective vaccine... the future is very problematic.
I agree and I considered calling that part out as being disingenuous when I first posted it. However, I still find his point about "understand that with the shifting evidence comes some shifting advice" is valid. People are using the idea that because the advice is shifting, it is all invalid.
Why is a sizable chunk of our population not wearing masks? I think the shifting evidence and resulting shifting advice is part of that reason - people need to come to terms with as our knowledge advances (and availability of PPE for the general public), so will the advice and guidance.
I would be very surprised if Branko Milanovic thinks betting on herd immunity is a good strategy, but I have not spoken with him since the beginning of the pandemic. Given the mortality rate it looks like a dangerous strategy indeed, but I guess it is the only rational explanation for much of US policy (if there is any rationality).
I know this is semantic, but there is nothing dangerous or inherently wrong with herd immunity, what is dangerous is trying to achieve Covid19 herd immunity without an available vaccine. I would prefer to call what Branko is referring to as the “Swedish Strategy.”
maty
Major Contributor
[ Updates from a Dallas ICU: we are completely full with COVID patients. Our ER is trying to send us 3 more. We are running out of good PPE and having to use ****** backups. The other ICUs are trying to take our AM staffing because they are also full. ]
A statistic to celebrate from the Netherlands: we just had the first 24 hours without a single reported fatality. Furthermore, we had only two new hospital admissions, and once again fewer people tested positively, even though testing has been intensified very much, with effectively unlimited capacity.
Finally, as should be obvious from such statistics, there is no evidence at all that the Black Lives Matter demonstrations in the Netherlands had any effect on infections. We also had a big demonstation in The Hague over the weekend of ultra right wing activists and soccer hooligans who demanded an immediate end to all anti Covid restrictions, with participants completely ignoring the social distancing rules. The demonstration had been banned because of public safety and health concerns, and police had to arrest 400 people. We shall see if this demonstration shows infections in two weeks time. By and large the story seems to be that the virus does not spread easily under such conditions, but if demonstrators are completely irresponsible this may be different. We shall see.
Finally, as should be obvious from such statistics, there is no evidence at all that the Black Lives Matter demonstrations in the Netherlands had any effect on infections. We also had a big demonstation in The Hague over the weekend of ultra right wing activists and soccer hooligans who demanded an immediate end to all anti Covid restrictions, with participants completely ignoring the social distancing rules. The demonstration had been banned because of public safety and health concerns, and police had to arrest 400 people. We shall see if this demonstration shows infections in two weeks time. By and large the story seems to be that the virus does not spread easily under such conditions, but if demonstrators are completely irresponsible this may be different. We shall see.
The US accounts for 20% of new cases globally, even though we have only 4.3% of the world’s population. Go ‘Murica!
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/22/...tion=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/22/...tion=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage
I agree that in the Swedish case it seems like a thoughtful though perhaps misguided strategy. In the US case I wonder if there is indeed any strategy. In the Netherlands I think we made three big mistakes. The first was not to stockpile enough protective material. The second was for the provincial governor of the southern province of Brabant to allow Carnival celebrations to go ahead (they are indoors in large part) even though the virus was already raging in Italy. I remember my wife and myself looking at each other and saying: 'are they mad?' I suppose it was politically inconvenient to ban Carnival in this quite conservative catholic province, but even so, it produced the by far largest concentration of infections. Up in the north where we live there have been virtually no cases at all. The third was to wait one week too much before imposing our lockdown. The rersult was that our peak was about as bad as it could be, but the lockdown was highly effective, and very quickly reduced case numbers, even though the lockdown was never complete. Shops remained open, and so did a fair number of busineses if they could provide safe working conditions. Public transport continued at a much reduced level, and we were never banned from going out for a walk or, as in my case, a long bicycle ride. It suggests that a lockdown does not have to be complete to be effective. People were very disciplined, to be sure. The Swedes of course went further along this road, and maybe too far.
The thing is that the impact of other infections are identical in Sweden and Finland. Also, the immunity as measured by antibodies are just 2x difference between the countries. If "heard immunity" is a strategy, based on available evidence of seroprevalence, the strategy looks similar in many countries (1-5 %).
I left out California, yes, because I didn't list all the states that are experiencing increases. So let's take a look. I think one could make an argument either way.
Clearly there's been a long-term uptrend. One could also argue there was a plateau during May, but then also the daily lows were getting higher through that period. So, without doing tracing, it's inconclusive IMO.
But what is NOT inconclusive, are all the states which have NOT had a surge after the protests, but rather declines. IF protests were to be the primary cause of surges we'd surely see an increase in NY where many police were filmed not wearing masks. Yet, here is the picture in NYC, presumably the one single place most likely to show a surge. Nope, didn't happen.
- Status
Similar threads
