International COVID-19 Updates & Discussion 2

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gordon_R

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
20,817

Very interesting article. Its likely that many more scientific controversies will be documented in future.

However its not clear how the world could have reacted or done differently at the time, other than running around shouting "we're all going to die"!? Public reaction has already flip-flopped multiple times in the face of a complex epidemic.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
26,878
Very interesting article. Its likely that many more scientific controversies will be documented in future.

However its not clear how the world could have reacted or done differently at the time, other than running around shouting "we're all going to die"!? Public reaction has already flip-flopped multiple times in the face of a complex epidemic.
The World could have listened to Dr Rothe and her team. The politicians could have taken them seriously and acted.
The Scientific and Medical World could have shoved their preconceived ideas where it fit best.

Instead, they wanted the normal double triple controlled blind studies first in the wake of a virus that does not read textbooks nor takes notice of dogmatic stupidity and "conventional wisdom".
 
Last edited:

buka001

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
16,981
Yeah he actually is a moron. He said the virus would die out in 70 days no matter what we do. That is one of the most moronic things ever said. But he even managed to top himself at the end of May when he came out saying "See, told you so! I was right!" in stark contrast with reality.

Making one moronic mistake doesn't make you a moron, but denying that you made a mistake against all evidence (some as basic as counting to 70) and pretending that you were right surely does. Or maybe it just makes you insane...
118 days since Florida's first case and they are currently seeing an increase of 9500+ cases per day.

He is a moron indeed. Note how even the news article mentioned he was not a medical expert, but some people still thought what he said was important.
 

Gordon_R

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
20,817
The World could have listened to Dr Rothe and her team. The politicians could have taken them seriously and acted.
The scientific and medical Wolrd could have shoved their preconceived ideas where it fit best.

Instead, they wanted the normal double triple controlled blind studies first in the wake of a virus that does not read textbooks and take notice of dogmatic stupidity and "conventional wisdom".

Given the lack of testing resources and a vaccine, the rational response to that information would have been to permanently lock down the entire planet, with its economic and social consequences. We have seen that this strategy does not actually work in SA and most other countries (with rare exceptions such as NZ and Vietnam). We are still in the early stages of this epidemic, and it is too soon to say "I told you so", since the final outcome is still unknown.
 

tetrasect

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
9,105
Given the lack of testing resources and a vaccine, the rational response to that information would have been to permanently lock down the entire planet, with its economic and social consequences. We have seen that this strategy does not actually work in SA and most other countries (with rare exceptions such as NZ and Vietnam). We are still in the early stages of this epidemic, and it is too soon to say "I told you so", since the final outcome is still unknown.

Thing is the Chinese first denied it was happening, then the WHO denied that it can spread from person to person, then every damn country denied that it can be transmitted without someone sneezing or coughing on you, for weeks/months. Flights kept going, globally people were denied tests, the US told people not to wear masks, SA decided to let people queue and gather in crowds to get grants and food, I could go on for a long time... The number of F-ups is monumental.

It was very well known from the beginning how to handle an outbreak of this nature yet nobody actually did what was necessary (China being the exception, even though they should have acted WAY earlier).
 
Last edited:

Verde

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
1,592
Stupid comment. He is most definitely NOT a moron. Why don't you go and look at the source document before making silly comments like these?
I obviously failed in my attempt to be ironic. The graphs I posted clearly prove his point.
 

RedViking

Nord of the South
Joined
Feb 23, 2012
Messages
58,145
OMG is that just bears occupying seats or actually people in bear costume.

WTF

Agree. People in bear costumes I can understand, I wear mine also in public but they don't allow me into restaurants. But teddy bears on seats, why would anyone do that?
 
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Messages
41,699
Florida ... hold my beer

Or California, which is somewhat more worrying than Florida or Texas, since they had a large number of infections at the beginning of the pandemic...unlike Florida/Texas. Indeed California had one of the longest lockdowns yet can't get it under control.

“If I could go back and redo anything, it probably would have been to slow down the opening of bars,” Mr Abbott told a Texas news station on Friday. “A bar setting, in reality, just doesn't work with a pandemic.”

Quite correct...but let's see what happens in the UK after July 4.
 
Last edited:

saor

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
34,263

Verde

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
1,592
Florida ... hold my beer
SD, lockdowns = slows down spread, flattens curve so it takes a lot longer for the epidemic to burn out.
If interventions are very effective it will stop the spread and shorten the epidemic.
If they only slow down the spread it will prolong the epidemic.
If there are no interventions ILI epidemics do take about 10 weeks to burn out.

It however tells us nothing about the infection rate required before the epidemic burns out. It could still burn through 100% of pop (though very unlikely).
 

tetrasect

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
9,105
I obviously failed in my attempt to be ironic. The graphs I posted clearly prove his point.

Not sure if you're being sarcastic now...

SD, lockdowns = slows down spread, flattens curve so it takes a lot longer for the epidemic to burn out.
If interventions are very effective it will stop the spread and shorten the epidemic.
If they only slow down the spread it will prolong the epidemic.
If there are no interventions ILI epidemics do take about 10 weeks to burn out.

It however tells us nothing about the infection rate required before the epidemic burns out. It could still burn through 100% of pop (though very unlikely).

The whole argument the guy was making was that the virus will peak at 40 days and then disappear by 70 days no matter if we intervene or not. There exists no data that proves that point, since it would rely on the virus spreading through space by some kind of unknown magic rather than by known transmission routes.

He also said that the reason some places only had a low percentage of people infected (ie effective lockdowns) is due to some kind of natural end of the virus and that there was absolutely no reason to think that there could be a second wave if restrictions were lifted.

The guy is a complete nutcase and his nonsense pseudoscience is a threat to public health.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top