12 Experts Questioning the Coronavirus Panic

RedViking

Nord of the South
Joined
Feb 23, 2012
Messages
28,159
You'd quickly change your tube when outsole you know start dying.

It's not just a bit panicky it's a ****ing pandemic... 12 people vs how many experts.
The irony is that OP and his spouse have been very sick. They getting better now, growing some extra balls, forgetting how easily it could have gotten worse leading straight to death. I find it amazing when people get better from something (and others did not) how they dismiss the fact of how lethal it is.

I also find it stupid that you first need half the population wiped out before you consider something as serious.
 
Last edited:

Arthur

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 7, 2003
Messages
25,051
You'd quickly change your tube when outsole you know start dying.

It's not just a bit panicky it's a ****ing pandemic... 12 people vs how many experts.
Not at all. My view isn't based on the people I know being ok for now.

It's a simple clear and irrefutable scientific fact that we don't have the data. Period.

Me getting sick or wife or child dying from Covid-19 can't and won't change that fact.

Oh, another thing: scientific truth isn't determined by counting noses.
 

RedViking

Nord of the South
Joined
Feb 23, 2012
Messages
28,159
Not at all. My view isn't based on the people I know being ok for now.

It's a simple clear and irrefutable scientific fact that we don't have the data. Period.

Me getting sick or wife or child dying from Covid-19 can't and won't change that fact.

Oh, another thing: scientific truth isn't determined by counting noses.
I am not sure if I understand your comments correctly, sorry.

Do you personally think governments taking strict measures to slow the spread was necessary or not?
 

trompie_vyfster

Active Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2020
Messages
58
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
14,876
In my opinion, IF we can all get past the belief that governments are doing whatever they are for their own selfish reasons, that the best motive we could associate with what they are doing is to try and reduce mass panic, nothing more.
 

flippakitten

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2015
Messages
1,871
In a place like South Africa you can thank your lucky stars for a lock down and hope it works.

The alternative is civil unrest like you've never seen before. When the systems cannot cope, dead people left in locations for weeks and people are lying dead in hospital parking lots because that's what will happen when covid19 takes hold and overwhelms and already broken health care system. And no, your medical aid will have no effect at that point, simply too many people are sick.

Don't believe me, keep an eye on Germany, they just opened up 30k - 40k MORE high care beds.

Things are just kicking off and you can downplay it as much as you like, the bat's out the bag best to buckle up and try figure out your future.
 

Archer

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
21,419
The Netherlands is experiencing roughly 60% more deaths than the average, which excludes the last week of corona deaths. This means they are actually approaching almost double the deaths per week compared to the last 10 years. It has also surpassed the peak death rate for the bad flu season in 2017/18. And this is with the Netherlands already being into the 4th week of lockdown.

Looking at that I don't understand how people think government reactions have been too much
 

RedViking

Nord of the South
Joined
Feb 23, 2012
Messages
28,159
In my opinion, IF we can all get past the belief that governments are doing whatever they are for their own selfish reasons, that the best motive we could associate with what they are doing is to try and reduce mass panic, nothing more.
I know I am repeating myself. I don't think the measures they put in place is for their own selfish need. A bad economy is also going to damage the pockets of the corrupt. But there are measures they add that will be used to satisfy whatever agenda they have. Corrupt and power hungry leaders don't let a good opportunity go to waste.
 

NarrowBandFtw

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
18,270
The issue is that the risks from the Coronavirus is highly overstated
I will believe that when the closed cases have significantly less than 20% deaths:
1585995694096.png

as it stands, your odds of survival are higher if you play Russian roulette than when you contract the virus i.e. 1 in 6 chance of death vs 1 in 5 chance of death

dunno about you, but I don't play Russian roulette
 

CataclysmZA

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,639
so yes, this is where it does get quite interesting and it I think that we are seeing this again in Italy, France and Spain. I for example got COVID19 in the supermarket, and that is because the short closing down forced us all to buy food at the same location.

These curves do not however take into account the human immune system and they have to control for age, underlying conditions, air quality etc. It seems like a bit of a broad brush.
This point to the fact again that humans badly judge risk, so the response is more about emotion than anything else.
I was going to make a large rebuttal, but I will instead make two points. You're at the same stage as my mom with this pandemic. It's affecting her mentally, partly because she is highly empathetic with the suffering of others, and because the virus literally came within six feet of my brother and his wife recently. She's overthinking a lot of things.

1) Your personal experience with COVID-19 is clouding your judgement.

You contracted the virus, it was a horrible experience, but you came through and didn't need to be hospitalised. You have taken that experience with the virus and applied it to your preconceived notion before you got infected that it wasn't something to be panicked about. The result is that you question the severity of the reaction of others in managing this crisis, because it looks innocuous now that you've had it. This is a normal, human thing to do. This is called survivorship bias.

2) Your own judgement of risk put you in danger, and you're fighting against that realisation, giving rise to a sense of conspiracy.

I see this in my own family. No-one is trusting of the numbers given out by government because there's an intense disbelief that there's no overarching power running the show. There is no La-Li-Lu-Le-Lo calling the shots. Instead, there are just humans leading us humans, with the same capacity for faults, making mistakes - and believing misinformation and tinfoil hat theories about the deep state - that lead us into a crisis where no-one knows what's going on or what should be happening.

The idea that the mess we're in is our own fault gives rise to a sense of conspiracy. It can't be our fault, surely. There must be some other force out there, that we award anthropomorphic qualities to, that is the real danger. That thing is the evil. That thing is out to get us. That thing mutates to fight us because it knows we're out to get it. That thing is our common enemy.

This is also why people question the wisdom of choosing life over the economy. Are things really that bad? Is it really this necessary? The answer is yes, but unless you've been able to come face-to-face with the disease like so many of our front-line healthcare staff do across the world, you don't have the same kind of understanding that they do.


It's not hype. It's not a conspiracy by the government to take over things, install a worldwide currency, shoot democracy in the back of the head in a dark alley behind the UN building, and install a one world government.

Brazil is doing that and the UK did that until they buckled under pressure. so yes humans overstate the risks despite the evidence, but for some reason we don't sensibly judge the economic risk.
Humans overstate risks because we are biologically primed to do so. The only reason why we're at the top of the food chain, and dominating the planet, is because of our biological instincts. We are smart, yet dumb and panicky animals.

But it's not just average people making these decisions. Shutting down the economy is a recommendation made by people who try to remove their emotions as much as possible from the problem and offer stark opinions based on the data at hand.

You can never predict a pandemic. You know it's coming, but you can never spot it ahead of time, you can't be testing for it ahead of time, and you can never know what level of response it will take to control the spread and flatten the curve. You can only prepare as much as humanly possible, given constraints at the time, and hope that you're ready.

EDIT: And on the subject of the severity of the response, shutting down an economy? China is known to be a cesspool of human rights violations. But even China took the decision to bulldoze roads, shut down manufacturing, halt 70% of domestic air travel, and had the army weld bars into doorways to keep people at home. The most authoritarian government in the world - literally guilty of harvesting organs from prisoners in an effort to efficiently conduct a genocide within their own borders - still made the choice to save lives instead of the economy. They took a hit to their economy that they won't recover from for a decade or more, and in the process they've not only taken the brunt of the early outbreak, but they've also made the most of a humanitarian crisis by sending their best doctors, scientists, and epidemiologists - along with tons of supplies - to other nations struggling similarly.
 
Last edited:

Nicodeamus

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
7,977


So theoretically herd immunity is possible, after millions have been sacrificed and health systems have completely collapsed.
So I think he is wrong in many ways, firstly we know by now that there are antibodies to this virus and it is very unlikely that a 2nd wave would be as disastrous as the first.
I will believe that when the closed cases have significantly less than 20% deaths:
View attachment 812301

as it stands, your odds of survival are higher if you play Russian roulette than when you contract the virus i.e. 1 in 6 chance of death vs 1 in 5 chance of death

dunno about you, but I don't play Russian roulette
that is because they don’t test everyone. Those are only secere cases.

for a better picture look at South Korea
 

NarrowBandFtw

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
18,270
that is because they don’t test everyone. Those are only secere cases.

for a better picture look at South Korea
you cannot assume the untested will magically all be mild and all recover and therefor make the trend go the other way, the untested can as easily be severe and add to the death trend

the only thing truly measured is the closed cases, and 20% of those died, undeniable fact

South Korea is "the gold standard" in containing the outbreak fyi, most of the world is doing a much worse job than South Korea, hence most of the world will have much worse results than South Korea. So no, we can't look at them for a better picture, because most, if not all, countries will have it worse due to having a worse response.

They also only have ~10k cases, that's less than 1% of the world's confirmed infections, they will not be indicative of the global trend at all.
 

flippakitten

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2015
Messages
1,871
you cannot assume the untested will magically all be mild and all recover and therefor make the trend go the other way, the untested can as easily be severe and add to the death trend

the only thing truly measured is the closed cases, and 20% of those died, undeniable fact

South Korea is "the gold standard" in containing the outbreak fyi, most of the world is doing a much worse job than South Korea, hence most of the world will have much worse results than South Korea. So no, we can't look at them for a better picture, because most, if not all, countries will have it worse due to having a worse response.

They also only have ~10k cases, that's less than 1% of the world's confirmed infections, they will not be indicative of the global trend at all.
I would put Singapore as the gold standard, they've managed to keep their numbers low even after being one of the first countries to have a case.

Germany is pretty much the best we have in the western world.
 

ForceFate

Honorary Master
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
22,945
How much better? Lombardy, the area hardest hit in Italy, has one of the best health systems in Europe.
Maybe phrased incorrectly...
Germany has more beds/ventilators per 100k people thus, better equipped than Italy.
 

Tom427

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Messages
137
We can play the numbers backwards and forwards on a hourly basis, and never know what is coming.

But, for example, operating my one-man shop where I build one maschine per year for an overseas client, I demand the right to work. I got threatened of cancellation of the contract, if in two weeks this carries on. And no Rupi or Oppi, or Motsi can bail me out financially.

I already have a cancellation of smaller units which were supposed to be delivered May (3 off) and 4 more in as many months. Now this may be a a once-off situation (only me), but it is similar to many.

As I do demand the right to buy wine.

Note:
Apparently Italy fudged the numbers because they didn't differentiate properly between cause of death.
Also, they have often 10 family members per house, and more.

For fairly healthy people this virus seems to have not much more of an effect than a mild cold. This needs to be said daily, on all media.

But: I also get that Europe don't have townships like us, and this can be fatal for townships. But do them stay indoors in isolation? Doesn't seem like it.
 

Nicodeamus

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
7,977
I was going to make a large rebuttal, but I will instead make two points. You're at the same stage as my mom with this pandemic. It's affecting her mentally, partly because she is highly empathetic with the suffering of others, and because the virus literally came within six feet of my brother and his wife recently. She's overthinking a lot of things.

1) Your personal experience with COVID-19 is clouding your judgement.
No the data drives my judgement and as far as possible, I try to eliminate bias.

You contracted the virus, it was a horrible experience, but you came through and didn't need to be hospitalised. You have taken that experience with the virus and applied it to your preconceived notion before you got infected that it wasn't something to be panicked about. The result is that you question the severity of the reaction of others in managing this crisis, because it looks innocuous now that you've had it. This is a normal, human thing to do. This is called survivorship bias.
No, the experience wasn't that horrible, it felt like a mix between a bad flu and malaria. I have had worse experiences. So that is just plain wrong.

2) Your own judgement of risk put you in danger, and you're fighting against that realisation, giving rise to a sense of conspiracy.
How is it a conspiracy ? I believe that we are overeating based on the WHO data. I told you before that in January it was sensible to shut down the world because we all thought that the Spanish flu is back, now its just becoming silly, because fewer and fewer people are dying from this than we actually thought.

once again this is based on WHO data, the actual points.
I have yet to find anyone to criticize me based on actual WHO data.

Before being a sick person, I am also an engineer and I have had tons of experience looking at an analyzing data.

I see this in my own family. No-one is trusting of the numbers given out by government because there's an intense disbelief that there's no overarching power running the show. There is no La-Li-Lu-Le-Lo calling the shots. Instead, there are just humans leading us humans, with the same capacity for faults, making mistakes - and believing misinformation and tinfoil hat theories about the deep state - that lead us into a crisis where no-one knows what's going on or what should be happening.
I don't really know or cares what happens in your own family. Its not a tinfoil hat conspiracy if I actually look at the DATA. Once again challenge the response based on the DATA, which is what a sensible scientist and engineer needs to do.

The idea that the mess we're in is our own fault gives rise to a sense of conspiracy. It can't be our fault, surely. There must be some other force out there, that we award anthropomorphic qualities to, that is the real danger.
You're repeating the word "conspiracy" over and over, it doesn't make it true and it gives no validity to your argument. I am not suggesting that the new world order is behind all of this. I am suggesting that we are overreacting or not scaling our reaction based on the current DATA. Again in January I thought that a lockdown as needed, but now myself and many other experts in the world (that are leaders in their field) are questioning that approach. It is what sensible scientists and not dogmatists do.

This is also why people question the wisdom of choosing life over the economy. Are things really that bad? Is it really this necessary? The answer is yes, but unless you've been able to come face-to-face with the disease like so many of our front-line healthcare staff do across the world, you don't have the same kind of understanding that they do.



It's not hype. It's not a conspiracy by the government to take over things, install a worldwide currency, shoot democracy in the back of the head in a dark alley behind the UN building, and install a one world government.
I am not saying that, its an obvious strawman. Show me one place where I references a conspiracy or anything that is not based on real data.

Humans overstate risks because we are biologically primed to do so. The only reason why we're at the top of the food chain, and dominating the planet, is because of our biological instincts. We are smart, yes dumb and panicky animals.

But it's not just average people making these decisions. Shutting down the economy is a recommendation made by people who try to remove their emotions as much as possible from the problem and offer stark opinions based on the data at hand.
I disagree, again the Swedes actually looked at the data and they decided to not shut down the economy. So not it was done in a panic, without much public debate and in my view with a strict orthodoxy. Basically the virologists were ignored and the epidemiologists scared people with their doomsday models.[/quote][/QUOTE]
 

Nicodeamus

Executive Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
7,977
The one Great Unknown in all this is the magnitude of the denominator.

The reported number of infections must, with certainty, be only a fraction of the real number in the wild. We know from the Diamond Princess that at least half the infected are asymptomatic or show minor sniffles at worst.

The denominator is the all-important determinant of CFR, and the plain bare truth is we have not the foggiest notion within even two or three orders of magnitude - the testing capacity simply doesn't exist.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if at least five to twenty million South Africans are already infected. By all accounts this is quite a virulent pathogen and it might well have propagated and penetrated far wider than we had thought.

Indeed, I hope it has spread widely, as, absent a vaccine, this is the only way of building herd immunity. Especially before the Southern Winter.

As to the economic and ensuing social and political fallout, those are in my view of far greater consequence than a few dozen thousands of deaths from this or any other pathogen. Human flourishing and wellbeing is under dire threat, but not from this virus.

So yes, I agree we do not know the denominator yet, but what you can do is compare deaths per capity since it is generally difficult to hide bodies.

You find that the countries that went into lockdown did not have a better experience than those who didn't have a lockdown.

I refer you again to this curve.


1586021066475.png

Look at Sweden as the control group. It curls over nicely with the UK and Hubei (that went into lockdown).
 
Top