Why are there so few ICU beds?, page 17

sn0wchyld said:
Perhaps then you can explain why parts of northern europe, with mask wearing rates at or below 10%, have the same (or perhaps less) rates of death and case rate than other parts of the EU (or USA for that matter) despite those having rates above 90%?

The only explanation he can offer you is his own truthiness. Which does not require facts to back it up.

However, I can assure you that much of northern Europe is, in fact, COLD. When a person coughs or sneezes, said emissions face a sudden temperature drop, in fact they freeze and become heavier than air. If the sudden impact with the ground doesn't kill those buggers, the cold will. On the off chance some of it survives until a thaw, they are trapped on the ground until trampled under foot.
 
sn0wchyld said:
Perhaps then you can explain why parts of northern europe, with mask wearing rates at or below 10%, have the same (or perhaps less) rates of death and case rate than other parts of the EU (or USA for that matter) despite those having rates above 90%?
Simple. Mask rates aren't above 90% in the US. Only 44% of US citizens say they regularly wear a mask outside their home. 27% of republicans are proud to say they never, ever wear a mask.

It doesn't prove they're ineffective, but that they are at the very least, not primary in preventing spread/death, and that there's almost certainly other factors involved in their efficacy (such as quality of mask, method of use, etc etc etc).
Absolutely. They are one part of the formula that includes distancing, moving things outdoors, better hygiene, contact tracing and testing/quarantining. They are a big part of it though.


It may reduce aerosoles for instance, but if you touch the mask even once then dont disinfect before touching anything else then your efficacy just dropped dramatically (How often do you think people are doing that? )
Masks are most effective at stopping you from spreading your own viruses. If you touch the mask saturated with your own flora you will not become infected with a new virus, since you already have it.
methodology on categorisation is also worthy of discussion... ie died with or from?
?? Almost no one dies directly from COVID-19 as a primary cause. They die from the pneumonia it creates, or the organ failure it causes, or the blood clots it causes. (Which is why people who are risk for pneumonia are much more likely to die.)

But if someone is shot by a criminal and dies of blood loss, we still call it death by gunshot wound - even if the primary cause of death is exsanguination.
 
Dauntless said:
However, I can assure you that much of northern Europe is, in fact, COLD. When a person coughs or sneezes, said emissions face a sudden temperature drop, in fact they freeze and become heavier than air. If the sudden impact with the ground doesn't kill those buggers, the cold will. On the off chance some of it survives until a thaw, they are trapped on the ground until trampled under foot.

Do you have any idea how stupid that sounds?
 
I'm sure Trollobie is impressed with your efforts to top me. Dang, I should have guessed a chance to act 'Stupider than thou' would be a rallying call to the flying monkeys.

Hmmm, isn't one of you missing?
 
cv19 is looking for me :evil:
took 4 from the Ocean View nursing home. When gas was $4, i'd shut off there, and coast home, that is how close by it is. :shock: Now i don't want to ride my bike near it :lol:
The way the media was freaking out in March, i thought by April it would be here :roll:
So August is the arrival, same as my birthday- made it to 68 :mrgreen:
8,666 cases in Volusia co. :shock: and 173 deaths :oops:
416 cases in NSB
 
Matt Gruber said:
cv19 is looking for me :evil:

Nah, Covid can't hold a thought to look for you even so much as a bird could, the birds never come looking for you.

Within a mile of my home there are several convalescent homes. I think of Governor Cuomo indolently sending the Covid patients to infect the elderly, causing huge numbers of deaths. Well, we didn't have that in California. Dang, I have an assisted living home next door, I wonder if Cuomo put them there, too.

The speculation that I had it at the beginning of the year. The revelation that there are 5 common colds going around that will give you 'Partial Immunity' if you've had them, perhaps that was what we had. I just haven't felt I was at great risk. But that as much as because I try to be ready if it does happen.

So for your birthday you can listen to the Daphne Du Maurier short story 'The Birds.' Inspired the Hitchcock film, but as always the Hollywood version bore little resemblance to the original material. It's sort of an allegory to the bombing of England at the beginning of WWII, everything was going so well then something changed and it seemed random chance controlled your future. But did it?

What do you think of the ending? (English Literature major here.) Some say the smoking the cigarette with everyone else dead likens to facing the firing squad. Being more the 'Master of my Fate' type, I say he's outlived the cocky, the complacent, the born victims, now it's the arrogant bastards' cigarettes he's smoking (That one won't need them anymore) as he's waiting to see his latest barricade pass or fail the test and getting ready for what comes next. What do you think?

[youtube]qmHG0bDpX4w[/youtube]
[youtube]jGIBhTWda0c[/youtube]
 
nicobie said:
Happy birthday Matt. 🎈🎂

Stay safe.
thanks :thumb:
.
here is a paper on a rapid recovery treatment for cv19
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3665228
 
"History and Economics of Pandemics" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wbd5Ge4MwI
:bigthumb:
 
"History and Economics of Pandemics" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wbd5Ge4MwI
:bigthumb:
2nd wave more powerful due in 18-24 months :shock:
 
markz said:
We all know who bears responsibility for the pandemic virus.

I wonder, what happened to markz? It's literally a month since he posted on ES last time...
 
I don't know how to copy an article from FB but scientists put the covid 19 RNA sequence through the second most powerful supercomputer.
I think it said a week and a half.
Bradykinin hypothesis is what the computer came up with.
 
Bradykinin Storm. Not the work of Facebook. I don't know what it means but it explains why your body is flooded.

The flying monkeys won't believe it. Bill has denied that they repurpose other treatments even though hydroxychloroquine showed such success when used properly as well as other things that have helped. And of course Bill overrides whatever truth he wants to. But they think they already know how to deal with a Bradykinin Storm. We'll see what that means.

the first is an article, the second is the actual study which will probably make less sense to you.

https://www.biospace.com/article/-oak-ridge-researchers-use-supercomputer-on-covid-19/

https://elifesciences.org/articles/59177
 
Skorohod said:
markz said:
We all know who bears responsibility for the pandemic virus.

I wonder, what happened to markz? It's literally a month since he posted on ES last time...

was wondering the same, hes probably found a spot where he actually catches fish instead of toilet paper :D
 
nicobie said:
I always thought he was just another one of Daunty's creations like the guy who was supposedly building a house out in the sticks.

I apologize in advance if by chance I'm wrong.

When have you ever thought I wasn't someone's creation? And when have you ever apologized for anything?

Hey, B, he doesn't think YOU were the other B. Don't you feel cheated.
 
im pretty sure Z is a real Calgarian, you just need to visit his juicing up thread, or go to Skhorods Moscow thread.

i just hope he's fishing but he is a big boy, he snapped his seat post off, id hate to hear that his testicles turned into rim brakes and hes been in the hospital getting new prosthetic ones
 
JackFlorey said:
sn0wchyld said:
Perhaps then you can explain why parts of northern europe, with mask wearing rates at or below 10%, have the same (or perhaps less) rates of death and case rate than other parts of the EU (or USA for that matter) despite those having rates above 90%?
Simple. Mask rates aren't above 90% in the US. Only 44% of US citizens say they regularly wear a mask outside their home. 27% of republicans are proud to say they never, ever wear a mask.

It doesn't prove they're ineffective, but that they are at the very least, not primary in preventing spread/death, and that there's almost certainly other factors involved in their efficacy (such as quality of mask, method of use, etc etc etc).
Absolutely. They are one part of the formula that includes distancing, moving things outdoors, better hygiene, contact tracing and testing/quarantining. They are a big part of it though.


It may reduce aerosoles for instance, but if you touch the mask even once then dont disinfect before touching anything else then your efficacy just dropped dramatically (How often do you think people are doing that? )
Masks are most effective at stopping you from spreading your own viruses. If you touch the mask saturated with your own flora you will not become infected with a new virus, since you already have it.
methodology on categorisation is also worthy of discussion... ie died with or from?
?? Almost no one dies directly from COVID-19 as a primary cause. They die from the pneumonia it creates, or the organ failure it causes, or the blood clots it causes. (Which is why people who are risk for pneumonia are much more likely to die.)

But if someone is shot by a criminal and dies of blood loss, we still call it death by gunshot wound - even if the primary cause of death is exsanguination.
"Simple. Mask rates aren't above 90% in the US."
This doesn't address my point at all - if mask rates vary so much, and masks are 'a big part of it' then why such variant outcomes, that dont correlate with mask rates, suggesting a lack of any causal relationship?

"They are a big part of it though."
Then again why such a poor correlation in otherwise 'similar' countries (relatively speaking)?

"you will not become infected with a new virus, since you already have it."
except if you then go and touch surfaces, shake hands, handle food etc etc etc... the thing (mask) that stopped you spreading it now made your hands a far greater source of infection than they may have otherwise been, given that part of it is often damp from your breath... and the efficacy of the mask in 'stopping the spread' has been lowered considerably, potentially even reversing given how poor the efficacy of the surgical masks can be in ideal conditions. And they do help in stopping you contracting it when infected aerosol/droplet is breathed through the mask vs none.

Where I work masks are mandatory, yet I see most people constantly adjusting the mask, touching the section right in front of their mouth, then going on to touch door handles etc all the time... seeing this now makes it pretty obvious why their efficacy is so poor. Alot of masks only reduce the droplet/aerosol rate by a few %... so it wouldn't take much in the way of poor behaviour/etiquette and fitment to negate/reverse this small gain.
 
sn0wchyld said:
This doesn't address my point at all - if mask rates vary so much, and masks are 'a big part of it' then why such variant outcomes, that dont correlate with mask rates, suggesting a lack of any causal relationship?
?? You claimed that the US is seeing mask utilization "rates above 90%." That is untrue. Hence, your observation that the US is seeing higher infection rates even though we are seeing mask utilization rates above 90% is incorrect.

Further, masks are just one part of the formula. An important part, to be sure - but just one part. If you don't practice good hygiene, still go to bars and parties, and wear a poor/ill fitting mask - you are higher risk even if you wear a mask.

"They are a big part of it though."
Then again why such a poor correlation in otherwise 'similar' countries (relatively speaking)?

From Science Daily:

"There was a clear negative correlation between the awareness or general acceptance of wearing a face mask and its infection rates."

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/06/200624082657.htm

Alot of masks only reduce the droplet/aerosol rate by a few %... so it wouldn't take much in the way of poor behaviour/etiquette and fitment to negate/reverse this small gain.
Yes, you have to use a good mask and use it properly. (As is true with handwashing, distancing, staying home when you are sick etc.)
 
Back
Top