Preparing for COVID-19

Find deals on amazon
Kitchen Knife Forums

Help Support Kitchen Knife Forums:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Michi said:
I have to say that I'm worried about the consequence of all the protests over the past ten days or so. These could turn out to be very expensive protests, indeed. I guess we'll find out starting around 15 June or so. I really, really hope that this isn't going to cause a huge spike :(
Click to expand...
Lol. Screw em. It’s been pretty clear by now what common step measures are to be taken to reduce the spread. Can’t fix stupid.
 
Hey @Michi,

Did you catch this article?

We often accuse the right of distorting science. But the left changed the coronavirus narrative overnight

He paints the 'left' and 'right' with too broad a brush. People can hold a complex mix of political and social beliefs. But there are some interesting perspectives there:

The climate-change-denying right is often ridiculed, correctly, for politicizing science. Yet the way the public health narrative around coronavirus has reversed itself overnight seems an awful lot like … politicizing science.

What are we to make of such whiplash-inducing messaging? Merely pointing out the inconsistency in such a polarized landscape feels like an act of heresy. But “‘Your gatherings are a threat, mine aren’t,’ is fundamentally illogical, no matter who says it or for what reason,” as the author of The Death of Expertise, Tom Nichols, put it.
Click to expand...

It is a terribly complex situation. While I support movements against racism... it does seem like these protests could dent the authority of public heath experts. Not in the obvious violation of of best practice, but in the complacency it inspires. Why bother trying to fight the pandemic if there are riots in the streets? And who gets to choose what is worth breaking health orders over? Ok... So if am a supporter of equality and I get to break the rules... shouldn't the weirdo 5G antivaxers get to break the rules without scorn?

... I dunno... it is a complex mess... people are tired, poor, sick, marginalised
 
Luftmensch said:
Hey @Michi,

Did you catch this article?

We often accuse the right of distorting science. But the left changed the coronavirus narrative overnight

He paints the 'left' and 'right' with too broad a brush. People can hold a complex mix of political and social beliefs. But there are some interesting perspectives there:



It is a terribly complex situation. While I support movements against racism... it does seem like these protests could dent the authority of public heath experts. Not in the obvious violation of of best practice, but in the complacency it inspires. Why bother trying to fight the pandemic if there are riots in the streets? And who gets to choose what is worth breaking health orders over? Ok... So if am a supporter of equality and I get to break the rules... shouldn't the weirdo 5G antivaxers get to break the rules without scorn?

... I dunno... it is a complex mess... people are tired, poor, sick, marginalised
Click to expand...

I guess it’s worth mentioning that there is a consistent nonpolitical public health message available here:

1) the earlier protests were explicitly against the measures we need to take to combat the virus, so public health professionals oppose them.

2) the current protests are about racism and inequality. covid is disproportionately deadly to black people, for a variety of reasons rooted in racism. E.g. the fact that black people more often live in places with more pollution and in closer quarters, have less weath, are treated inequitably by the health system, and have may have higher overall stress levels. Fighting racism is therefore in the interest of public health, and so public health professionals approve of these protests. I think that’s what people mean when they say “racism is a public health crisis.”

However, arguing that the protests will help with public health in the future is perhaps not a compelling argument to some, given that they may do immediate damage. I suppose if we could tell the protesters “hey, can you wait to get angry till after the pandemic is over?” that would be the best of both worlds. But something in me doubts this is plausible. Hmm.

A more compelling argument for me is just to say that the current protests were so long in coming and are so important that it’s worth it.

But yea, that’s political, I suppose, and I’m sure many on here will disagree with me.
 
Last edited:
The audit follows a Guardian investigation that found the company, Surgisphere, used suspect data in major scientific studies that were published and then retracted by world-leading medical journals, including the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine.
Further inquiries by the Guardian into Surgisphere and its founder and chief executive, Dr Sapan Desai, have confirmed that:
Click to expand...
• Major institutions including Stanford University, which were described as research partners on the Surgisphere website, said they were not aware of any formal relationship with the company.
• A study that formed the basis of Desai’s PhD may contain doctored images, according to expert claims, and the global medical publishing company Elsevier is conducting a review of his papers published in its journals.
• Claims made by Desai about his qualifications gained since his medical degree have been called into doubt, including his claims to hold two PhDs, a master’s, and affiliations with major universities and colleges. Some of these affiliations have now been removed from his website and online profiles.
The blockbuster Lancet study based on Surgisphere data led to global trials of hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19 being halted in May, because it appeared to show the drug increased deaths in Covid-19 patients.
Click to expand...

A spokeswoman for the University of Utah said it was not aware of any institutional relationship.
Harvard University medical school also said it had “no formal research agreements or partnerships” with Surgisphere
The University of Minnesota said it had no record of anyone at the university collaborating with Surgisphere.
Both the University of Glasgow and Stanford told the Guardian they were not aware of any relationship with Surgisphere.
Click to expand...
 
1) Author of this paper has (apparently) completely fabricated backgound...going back maybe 10 years
2) Company sourcing the data is ALSO fabricated... with fake/underqualified employees
3) Study is also almost surely also phony...

But WHY? And HOW does this BS make it thru peer review at JAMA and LANCET?
 
So, withing two weeks after this...May 5th news story
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/05...ored-warnings-hydroxychloroquine-coronavirus/
We get a study by a fake researcher, and a fake company, with fake data...on May 22nd

https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/22/...ervation-study-death-rate-irregular-heartbeat
That leads to May 25th...WHO stopping "Real" Scienctific" trials of the drug in question, thanks to the "science" in the fake study?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...oroquine-trial-trump-coronavirus-safety-fears
 
But don't worry....The day of/after the Retraction...on Jun 4th...what happens?

"Science" will conjure ... a replacement?

... results were shared via a press release, which the study’s lead authors shared on Twitter. They have not been peer-reviewed or published in a medical journal.
Click to expand...

The early relase of this UNFINISHED EXPERIMENT's DATA data is

ALSO designed to halt any more "real" science ...??????????

June 5, 2020
https://www.statnews.com/2020/06/05...atients-possibly-closing-door-to-use-of-drug/
 
Last edited:
Luftmensch said:
Did you catch this article?

We often accuse the right of distorting science. But the left changed the coronavirus narrative overnight
Click to expand...
I just read it, thanks!

I agree, this really is complex. It is unfortunate that people decided to finally protest against the mis-treatment of black people at a time when doing mass protests is a really bad idea. It is unfortunate, but possibly no coincidence: with so many people out of work, there is plenty of time to go protesting instead. (Conjecture on my part; I have no data to support this idea, but I suspect that the unemployment rate is a contributing factor, as is the pent-up anger about being having to isolate, feeling unsafe, and getting shafted by a virus.)

Personally, I'm in agreement with the protesters. Stopping the inequalities is a good thing, in my opinion. Australia has the same problem with aborigines, who are grossly over-represented in terms of incarceration rate, deaths in custody, shorter life span, child mortality, etc.

Last weekend, Australia had mass protests in all major cities, both to support the BLM movement in the US, and to protest against the treatment of aborigines here. We've had double standards applied by our governments. It's not OK to have spectators at a football match, but it's OK to attend a protest where tens of thousands march shoulder to shoulder. I suspect that this call was made because state governments knew that people would protest anyway. And then they would have had to deal with tens of thousands of "crimes", not to mention getting accused of being racist. The police force would have been completely overwhelmed, and lots of perfectly respectable citizens would have been criminalised. It was a pragmatic call to allow the protests; I don't think there was any other realistic option. People power in action…

Today, Victoria reported eight new coronavirus cases. One of the infected persons attended the protests last weekend. From late next week, we'll start to see what the fallout of the protests is. In Australia, we have infection rates so low that, just maybe, we'll get away with this and put the lid back on the few outbreaks that might result. In the US, I think the picture will likely be much darker :(

I do hope that I'm wrong.
 
Last edited:
HRC_64 said:
1) Author of this paper has (apparently) completely fabricated backgound...going back maybe 10 years
2) Company sourcing the data is ALSO fabricated... with fake/underqualified employees
3) Study is also almost surely also phony...

But WHY? And HOW does this BS make it thru peer review at JAMA and LANCET?
Click to expand...
I've been a peer reviewer for a number of computer science journals, including some highly respected ones (IEEE Internet Computing, CACM, etc.) that are comparable to The Lancet in terms of influence.

Peer review is hard work. It takes hours to read a paper of any substance and to follow up on references, cross-check data, think about the methodology that was used, find flaws in the reasoning, etc.

Peer reviews are unpaid volunteer labor. People do it because they are engaged in their profession and care. But, unfortunately, some also do it because it looks good on a resume to be able to say "expert reviewer for famous Journal X". Or, sometimes, a reviewer knows one or more of the authors by reputation and reasons "if John Smith is an author, this is guaranteed to be good stuff, so I can just rubber-stamp it."

What also happens is that people with a big reputation tend to get co-opted by lesser-known researchers. If there are one or two well-known names among the authors, the paper is more likely to make it through the first submission filter and at least get to review. This has happened to me in the past, when I was pressured to add my name to a paper even though the work I did was only peripherally related to the topic, and the paper was "mostly harmless noise". But the other authors were colleagues in the same lab; it would have been extremely difficult for me to say "no".

There is often reluctance on part of peer reviewers to be honest and say "this is a garbage paper, rejected." Reviewers can be afraid that this will garner them a bad reputation, especially if they are thinking of joining some lab at the institution one of the authors is from, or if they know some of the authors personally.

I've also had some of my "reject" reviews over-ruled by a conference chair. My opinion was that the paper was crap, but the chair decided that I was being far too harsh and that it should be allowed into the proceedings, even though it was basically a paper re-written to sort of fit the theme of the conference, but without any real topical relevance. The publication pressure on academics is immense; their job depends on getting enough papers published each year, which causes a flood of re-hashed papers that have been published previously, and tends to lower the quality of what is submitted.

The journal process is not perfect. Some scientists have questionable ethics. Some scientists are bad scientists, just like some plumbers are bad plumbers. So, even a journal like The Lancet will occasionally publish something that isn't up to scratch. (Check out the story of Andrew Wakefield for a very famous example.)

Scientists once completely rejected Ignaz Semmelweis's germ theory, ridiculing the man. The same goes for Alfred Wegener's continental drift theory. But, in the long run, the scientific process works. We do eventually get to a better and more correct understanding this way, even though the path may not be straight.
 
Last edited:
Michi said:
I agree, this really is complex. It is unfortunate that people decided to finally protest against the mis-treatment of black people at a time when doing mass protests is a really bad idea. It is unfortunate, but possibly no coincidence: with so many people out of work, there is plenty of time to go protesting instead. (Conjecture on my part; I have no data to support this idea, but I suspect that the unemployment rate is a contributing factor, as is the pent-up anger about being having to isolate, feeling unsafe, and getting shafted by a virus.)
Click to expand...

And class.... inequities in the healthcare system and labour markets affect the poor. Disproportionately African Americans and ethnic minorities. It must also be frustrating to be treated like dirt and payed a pittance whilst considered an 'essential' worker.

.... and political dog-whistling. The head of state isnt doing a great job unifying. But I wont go there....

Michi said:
I suspect that this call was made because state governments knew that people would protest anyway. And then they would have had to deal with tens of thousands of "crimes", not to mention getting accused of being racist. The police force would have been completely overwhelmed, and lots of perfectly respectable citizens would have been criminalised. It was a pragmatic call to allow the protests; I don't think there was any other realistic option. People power in action…
Click to expand...

Hehe... only authorised 15mins before the rally. The reason sound awfully dull. A jurisdictional error! But who knows what was going on behind the scenes? Be it hidden pragmatism or a real ****-up, I am sure the majority of police on the ground were relieved! The rally was going to happen and the ruling took away a point of conflict.

I am glad our rates are so low. I am also glad many protesters are wearing masks. But the inconsistency on this really does make the head spin. It gets increasingly difficult to argue the risk of protest is unacceptable the more parliament argues the risk is low enough to start rebooting the economy....
 
Michi said:
I have to say that I'm worried about the consequence of all the protests over the past ten days or so. These could turn out to be very expensive protests, indeed. I guess we'll find out starting around 15 June or so. I really, really hope that this isn't going to cause a huge spike :(
Click to expand...
Fortunately, it appears that the protests did, in fact, not cause a spike.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/01/nyregion/nyc-coronavirus-protests.html
Unfortunately, there are plenty of opportunities for people who do not protest to make things worse.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...tion=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage
The US has 4% of the world's population, and 25% of coronavirus infections.
 
I will give the articles a read.

Michi said:
The US has 4% of the world's population, and 25% of coronavirus infections.
Click to expand...

When I read the USA had reached 42,000 cases in a single day I thought about this...

Surely it has to be some bizarre mixture of broken and functional? The country is rich enough to afford testing and medical care (though I acknowledge this isn't universal). It is also democratic enough to have reasonably transparent reporting. Yet the social and political fabric is under strain and it is affecting mitigation strategies.

Surely this is a case of less democratic and transparent governments not publishing the true extent of their infection numbers? If not... then somebody should tell our friends they don't have to be the best at everything.
 
Luftmensch said:
I will give the articles a read.



When I read the USA had reached 42,000 cases in a single day I thought about this...

Surely it has to be some bizarre mixture of broken and functional? The country is rich enough to afford testing and medical care (though I acknowledge this isn't universal). It is also democratic enough to have reasonably transparent reporting. Yet the social and political fabric is under strain and it is affecting mitigation strategies.

Surely this is a case of less democratic and transparent governments not publishing the true extent of their infection numbers? If not... then somebody should tell our friends they don't have to be the best at everything.
Click to expand...
In my state and county web sites accurate numbers can be hard to find. Recently they eliminated all data from the graph back to 6/10. It has been restored.
There is a sense of entitlement, that mixed with a heathy dose of stupidity goes a long way. Goggle image gay pride parade in Chicago. 1000s shoulder to shoulder. Neighbor kids having a rave in the backyard Friday.
You get the idea.
And your take is accurate!
 
I hope I'm not being too political if I state that I am disappointed that this country has managed to politicize something as apolitical as wearing a mask in public...
 
It seems very odd that our government (California) is claiming that protests are not the cause of the spikes in cases.

1. Cases started spiking 1-2 weeks after protests, coincidence I am sure.
2. Cases are spiking mostly among 18-40 population, same demographic that participated in the protests, another coincidence.

Another interesting factoid is that while it is claimed that protests are not the cause because outdoor transmission is very unlikely, the first thing our governor did is closed beaches, bike paths and trails for 4th of July weekend. All these are outdoor activities. They claim that because protesters were moving briskly, this increased dilution and lowered the cases even more. Can you imagine how much faster bicyclists move?

So which one is it? Outdoor transmission is unlikely or we need to close beaches, trails and bike paths?

Now, they say that protests didn't seem to increase cases in New York, could this be because New York was hit extra hard earlier and that many people already had the virus prior to protests?
 
Michi said:
The US has 4% of the world's population, and 25% of coronavirus infections.
Click to expand...
Documented/ confirmed cases...

Many countries are not doing much testing, and are known to have much higher rates then the official numbers. Mexico is a big one. And some/ many of the central Asian countries (my wife has relatives in Tajikistan, and it's been pretty bad in their capital). Russia's honestly has been debated a bit lately as well.
 
Barmoley said:
It seems very odd that our government (California) is claiming that protests are not the cause of the spikes in cases. ...
Click to expand...

The reports of this I've seen come from various health agencies and are based on contact tracing of confirmed cases. I admit to being surprised the protests didn't (apparently) cause spread. I don't think the beach & trail closures relate much to the spread out recreational uses but rather the clustered together hanging out drinking without masks, social distancing, in groups outside your immediate households that have been photographed and widely reported. At some point closures become symbolic efforts to emphasize the seriousness of the infection. In Sacramento & Orange County private parties have been identified as the major transmission points. I haven't seen equivalent reports for the other hot(-ter) spots we have, but based on national reports I wouldn't be surprised if LA, here in Santa Clara Co, etc. don't have similar problems.
 
Yet-Another-Dave said:
The reports of this I've seen come from various health agencies and are based on contact tracing of confirmed cases. I admit to being surprised the protests didn't (apparently) cause spread. I don't think the beach & trail closures relate much to the spread out recreational uses but rather the clustered together hanging out drinking without masks, social distancing, in groups outside your immediate households that have been photographed and widely reported. At some point closures become symbolic efforts to emphasize the seriousness of the infection. In Sacramento & Orange County private parties have been identified as the major transmission points. I haven't seen equivalent reports for the other hot(-ter) spots we have, but based on national reports I wouldn't be surprised if LA, here in Santa Clara Co, etc. don't have similar problems.
Click to expand...
I am sure the rise is a combination of everything. I am just baffled by, for example bike path closures. Most people that bike don't hang out together and drink as far as I can tell. I don't bike, so could be wrong. I also read that contact tracing in CA is very unreliable and limited. I also question if people who protested and got sick would honestly say where they got sick or give up their contacts. I am also assuming that many protesters also have other group activities outside of protests, as I know people that knew each other would get together and drive to protests in the same cars to the protest sites to limit problems with parking. I also personally saw people standing around in large groups for hours, very close to each other while protesting, very few masks were worn since there was a lot of chanting and slogan screaming, so claims that protesters were moving briskly is just not universally true.

Bottom line is, I don't know, with so many different messages it is hard to know whom to believe at this point. I just see too many coincidences and information that doesn't seem to make sense.
 
WildBoar said:
Documented/ confirmed cases...

Many countries are not doing much testing, and are known to have much higher rates then the official numbers. Mexico is a big one. And some/ many of the central Asian countries (my wife has relatives in Tajikistan, and it's been pretty bad in their capital). Russia's honestly has been debated a bit lately as well.
Click to expand...

That's true. But it's also fair to say our own national testing regimen hasn't been overwhelming either, so that cuts both ways. We also likely have much higher numbers than are being officially reported.

From my point of view, one of the problems isn't just our national response (or lack thereof), but our multitude of state and local responses. Just as an anecdotal story, I live in a tourist town that has, until fairly recently, been keeping a good handle on cases. However, as my state has reopened along with nearby national and state parks we have had an influx of tourists from states that have done less to combat the virus and this has helped contribute to my county and other counties nearby having experienced higher case loads. Furthermore, although there is now a state mandated requirement to wear a mask in any business or public gathering place (not exact wording) that can be enforced by law, many law enforcement agencies are choosing not to enforce it. For instance, the city police where I live are enforcing it but the county sheriff department are not. Talk about unproductive and self-defeating.

I think discrepancies between states and between various local authorities and the swaying back and forth on policies are contributing to making many responses in the US ineffective, frustrating to a wide variety of people, and thus vulnerable to political manipulation from both sides.

@Barmoley I think the uncertainty you are experiencing is what a lot of people are experiencing. There is a lot of uncertainty about this virus, both in the ways it spreads, how best to treat it without a vaccine, what the risk factors are for people in various social scenarios, and how best for governments local, state, and federal to address it while maintaining a functioning society. For me, two things stand out. Masks are an undeniable requirement and testing is an absolutely necessity (not only for helping find and contain the virus, but for the additional information these tests and later treatments provide scientists, researchers mapping spread, and politicians trying to understand what parts of their communities are affected). For me, the fact that both masks and testing are under attack from various parts of government on all levels is needlessly nonsensical and dangerous. Some people will always react irrationally but the job of government is to protect them from themselves if necessary, not provoke them to further heights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top