Corona Virus Updates Part 6

originally posted by: MonkeyBalls2
Just one thought before bed : What about Fog ?

Isn't that just water droplets suspended in the air ?
Would that be able to transport the virus further, between people waiting in lines etc at the supermarket ?

Would I be correct in thinking that the airborne virus is a liquid particle, at least solid in its fatty sphere. That would have to get through a fogs water particles, rather than move swiftly via the water particles. Fog would probably obstruct and slow the virus movement down.

A flip side, though... despite moving more slowly, would the fogs water particles suspend the virus particles in there air longer than usual?

a reply to: McGinty

From the link in Pasiphae's earlier post, it would seem that Fog/Humidity would actually slow down the propagation through the air, but would enhance the deposit on surfaces.

I think most of the data is based on relative humidity, rather than the presence, or not, of Fog.
Thats also mainly for Tropical area's of the world,as well.
I'm not really sure much research has been done on it, as fog is usually accompanied by either no wind, or a very light wind.
Yeah, i'd be worried it could stay airborne longer, but have no idea on the faesibility.

Won't be queuing up at the shops in the Fog just yet, mask would also get wet/damp pretty quickly i suspect.

a reply to: MonkeyBalls2

Any idea why Sweden's rate has not skyrocketed as of yet? It seems no one wants to talk about it.

originally posted by: Jaellma
a reply to: MonkeyBalls2

Any idea why Sweden's rate has not skyrocketed as of yet? It seems no one wants to talk about it.

Did some research and seems the majority of articles fall into the things are getting worse . Specifically that third item I listed with the % values compared to other similar countries.

1. Active cases are increasing: www.worldometers.info...

2. Senior citizens are getting hit hardest: www.theguardian.com...

3. COVID deaths are rising and they have substantially more deaths than the rest of Scandinavia: www.foxnews.com...


In opposition to that approach I found this article which says their curve may be flattening: www.businessinsider.com...

a reply to: opethPA

Theres also a huge amount of data, and personalisable graphs, on this "Our World in Data" Link

a reply to: opethPA

It seems there's lots of opposing data because no one really knows where to get viable information from.
Is it the doctors?
Are the doctors reporting in unison? Do they have a slant?
Do the reporting agencies have a slant?
Does the media have a slant?
Do the politicians actually have our best interests in mind when they release public health information?

Too many variables....

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: opethPA

It seems there's lots of opposing data because no one really knows where to get viable information from.
Is it the doctors?
Are the doctors reporting in unison? Do they have a slant?
Do the reporting agencies have a slant?
Does the media have a slant?
Do the politicians actually have our best interests in mind when they release public health information?

Too many variables....

Good point.
So many are relying heavily on Johns Hopkins data.
Do we know who is in charge of the show there?

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: opethPA

It seems there's lots of opposing data because no one really knows where to get viable information from.
Is it the doctors?
Are the doctors reporting in unison? Do they have a slant?
Do the reporting agencies have a slant?
Does the media have a slant?
Do the politicians actually have our best interests in mind when they release public health information?

Too many variables....

Good point.
So many are relying heavily on Johns Hopkins data.
Do we know who is in charge of the show there?

I think it is either John or Hopkins, not sure though.

Sorry, just a little bad humor to lighten things up.

I am sure there is a top person, but the reports are from all over. I believe they just collect it, so it is up to individual countries/states to supply the data.

a reply to: butcherguy

I'm not sure if we know who is in charge, but the repository exists on GitHub for those familiar with it. It's what I use to fuel my own app. But the data is only as good as the first person who makes errors within it. Not to mention they've now changed the data format (mostly for the good not bad) 3 times.

Just as a for instance, it seems the Spain numbers from 04-17 to 04-18 were simply keyed wrong and many subscribers, including myself, immediately pointed it out to them via their issues and pull requests.

Though, im a bit laid back as I can understand that data can be a flaky creature.

But to answer your question, I personally do not know if there's a head honcho overseeing that effort. It also likely did not help to withdraw funding from the WHO at this point in time since im sure a lot of that collected information actually CAME from the WHO.

We've been conned - by the Chinese (well the Chinese leaders and their accomplices).

I've always been interested in scams and cons, and have been involved in a few minor ones myself - enough about that I don't want to go to prison.

Something about covid-19 never rung true to me from the start, but I couldn't put my finger on it - well now I can, and the reason it's been so tricky to tie down is because it's a super intelligent scam.

The things that rung my bells were that it seems so tricky to tie down - some people get it and don't even know, it does nothing to them, some people get it and have a flu, some people get it and get really ill and some die.

It seems to be that some people get it, recover, then have it again.

It doesn't make a whole lot of sense, and on top of that it's highly contageous and very easy to catch, and it seems from numbers presenting with the illness that 20% of people who get it need hospital treatment, and 5% need ICU treatment.

So who would do such a thing?

It would be an economic attack, to disable economies everywhere so that the perpetrators can fill the void, buy companies and property on the cheap and become the global leading super power.

But how can that be if the disease kills so many people that your consumers are dead and your own economy is destroyed?

Well it can't be, and this is the super intelligent part of it.

The perpetrators HAVE to be the first effected, so that a) they can recover first so they can be in pole position, and b) they can set the narrative of how bad this disease is, and how it needs to be dealt with.

Enter China - a country where life is cheap, and with supposedly a few hundred people ill they shut down Wuhan and other major cities quarantining 60+ million people, they build emergency hospitals and all the rest.

It must be SUPER bad.

What does the West do?

If China needed to take such drastic action, we'd better do it too. And they did. Shut downs, lock ins, emergency hospitals, ordering ventilators like there's no tomorrow - basically copying Chinas lead.

People think China are lying, they must have had tens of thousands dead - well... what if they didn't. What if they knew they had a unique disease on their hands?

What do I mean?

A disease that is super contageous, like the R0 is not 3 or 4, but 30 or 40. And it's super easy to be infected with it.

What happens when it enters a country?

It spreads like wildfire, it's everywhere, and suddenly the hospitals are overwhelmed - BUT (AND THIS IS THE IMPORTANT BIT) - the hospitals are not overwhelmed because 20% of people who get it need treatment (working on a R0 of 3 or 4), but because everyone has caught it at once.

Stanford University have done a study that suggests that actually the number of people who have the disease could be 50 to 85 times higher than officials believe.

Unless you can test everyone in the country with an efficient test you'll never know the death rate from it, how many people get seriously ill from it, or how many people have it - this will take months - and to get to that point while our economies are shut down - we become weak while the people behind it get rich.

For example in my country (UK) we have supposedly got almost 125,000 confirmed cases - if the TRUE number of infected people is 50 to 85 times higher, then the true number of people who have had this disease is between 6.25 million and 10.625 million.

Even working on the worst case (death rate) number : 16,500 deaths is 0.264% (i.e. less than 1%) - about twice the death rate for flu, but still way less than we're being led to believe.

So basically you have a disease that isn't that fatal for 99.7% of people who get it, it's just that it spreads WAY (i.e 10 to 100 times) faster than flu, bringing ALL of the people who do succumb to it to hospital at the same time.

It then looks like some super killer, we all follow the Chinese lead to "solve it" like they did, and while we're all falling over ourselves worrying it's the end of the world they pick up the reigns and destroy us economically.

And of course this is perfect - you don't want a disease that kills your customers - only one that makes them so scared they spend more and more with you, and give away decades worth of companies for cents on the dollar so they own you lock stock and barrel.

They've conned us and we've fallen for it - we're the suckers, the marks, and we need to wake up fast.

Study: Remdesivir, an anti-viral drug prevents COVID-19 virus progression | WION Dispatch



Remdesivir is killing the virus in monkeys. The ones they gave this drug too had no lung problems the ones they gave nothing to had big problems.

Too bad for the monkeys and too bad for us if this doesn't work but so far it seems to be getting good results yet has a way to go in approval

originally posted by: BPilgrim
a reply to: pasiphae

I seem to remember a poster in Part 1? of this thread who suggested ozone therapy. Don't remember who it was or if he/she is still around, from what I can remember he took some flak for his opintion.

Yes I think you're right. Ozone is kind of controversial and some people think ozone machines are very dangerous.

a reply to: DankyDSmythe

The Stanford Study was only based on data gathered in Santa Clara, California.

People are already calling out potential major flaws in the Study, including this piece from Columbia University Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science.

The Mercury News also has a viewpoint on the potential scandal.

Taking the study as the 100% truth to end all truths, is not how Scientific Studies are done.

This one may have gotten a lot wrong.
So, in short, NO, we have not been conned by the Chinese.


edit : One example : The Tests used have a known potential "2 false positives for every 371 tests". For the whole series done by Stanford, that could account for 50 False positives.

Tweet from Erik van Nimwegen (University of Basel) :

Loud sobbing reported from under reverend Bayes' grave stone.
Seriously, I might use this as an example in my class to show how NOT to do statistics. Note that the CI on specificity includes false positive rates larger than the observed fraction of positives. t.co...

— NimwegenLab (@NimwegenLab) April 17, 2020

Quote from the Mercury News Text :

“Do NOT interpret this study as an accurate estimate of the fraction of population exposed,” wrote Marm Kilpatrick, an infectious disease researcher at the University of California Santa Cruz. “Authors have made no efforts to deal with clearly known biases and whole study design is problematic.”

originally posted by: Drachenfel

originally posted by: McGinty
a reply to: Rich Z

If it’s to be believed, then the elephant in the room is Putin

TD said "Neither China nor the US released this bioweapon. A third party wanted the 2 countries to blame the other."

Which you might think would be Russia, but he said it was Deepstate. Two issues with this, first that any Deep state to have power requires a military force to back them up, so whose military do they use as a proxy.

I do not think that is necessarily the case. If they already have a very strong economic power and FEW but powerful and/or very influential people and/or experts in blackmail in the right positions (and by this I mean not only in 1 country) they could, potentially, use any army in the world for their own benefit, while staying in the background. (I would probably operate like this if I were them).

And second, if humble TennisDawg knows all this then surely the Chinese and US govts know this also? So wouldn't they be working together on this?

Yes, if this is the root of all this mess, they should know if he knows. However, if what I just wrote before is true or even partially true, it could play the way they want. Remember U.S.A. and China were in a "commercial war", and it would be very simple to use the virus as an excuse to gain more economic and political power and turn the commercial leverage to any side.

Also, anyone know what Astr0's info was back n 2014?

I believe this is Ast0's thread some are referencing: astr0, Black Triangles, abductions and the Forever Men of ATS
All threads by Astr0: Link
All posts by Asrt0: Link

Maryland to receive 500,000 coronavirus tests from South Korea

Why it matters: A lack of reliable testing supplies has hindered efforts to understand how widespread the virus is both in Maryland and across the country. Increasing testing is also a key requirement states must reach before they can relax stay-at-home orders.
South Korea's mass testing program has received accolades around the world — and resulted in a significant flattening of the curve of infections there.
Yumi Hogan, the governor's wife, was born in South Korea and took part in the deal, calling the country's ambassador to the U.S.

www.axios.com... gn=organic&utm_content=1100

originally posted by: pasiphae

originally posted by: BPilgrim
a reply to: pasiphae

I seem to remember a poster in Part 1? of this thread who suggested ozone therapy. Don't remember who it was or if he/she is still around, from what I can remember he took some flak for his opintion.

Yes I think you're right. Ozone is kind of controversial and some people think ozone machines are very dangerous.

There shouldn't be any controversy over the fact that ozone can be harmful if you're exposed to enough of it. But just because something is harmful doesn't automatically disqualify it as a treatment, the question becomes, which is more harmful, the disease or the "cure"?

For example, running a fever isn't "good for you", it has a negative effect on you but it's a natural response to some disease because if it kills the disease without killing the host, the host survives.

Some cancer treatments make your hair fall out and obviously that can't be good for you, but if you survive and the cancer doesn't, it may be considered an effective treatment even though it's not good for you.

So even though ozone isn't good for you and it's bad in high enough quantities, that doesn't automatically disqualify it as a treatment option, but it is a case where you'd want to have really good data to decide whether the treatment is worse then the disease or not, and considering carefully dosages or exposure levels.

What I remember about Ozone is someone who was a fan of Tesla built a Tesla machine in their basement which created ozone, and they could barely finish a sentence in the demo video on youtube without a terrible sounding cough, which I suspect was the result of the ozone created by the machine destroying their respiratory system. They had to have an electrician re-wire their house to supply enough power for that machine though, so you're unlikely to get as much ozone from the ionic air purifiers that plug into a standard socket, and use very little electricity. So again, dosage or exposure levels matter.

How does ozone exposure affect my health?

Ozone irritates the respiratory system and may cause health problems by damaging lung tissue, reducing lung function, and making the lungs more sensitive to other irritants. These health problems can occur at levels found in many cities during the summer months. It not only affects people with existing breathing problems, but also can affect healthy children and adults. Persons especially sensitive to ozone exposure are the elderly, infants, children, persons with existing respiratory issues such as asthma or allergies, asthmatics, chronic respiratory patients, pregnant women, smokers, and persons with lung cancer, cardiovascular disease or immune system deficiency. Symptoms include: irritation of the eyes, nose and sinuses; shortness of breath; chest pain; and wheezing or coughing. Other less common symptoms include: blurred vision, headache, nausea, vomiting, and fatigue.

Breathing ozone is not a good idea. This source has a vet saying it's harmful, and another source saying breathing ozone treatment is banned in the US because of damage it causes to lungs:

What is the effect of "Ozone Therapy" on COVID-19 protection?

This is the vet's comment:

Hi, I live in an Italian region very affected by COVID19, a virus sensitive, like all others, to the disinfectant effects of ozone. To kill COVID, you cannot inhale ozone: this would kill you and would have no effect since the virus has already penetrated the respiratory mucosa. So prevention must be done. I am doing 2 things: I have a small environmental generator that purifies the air where I live..

Depending on how the air purifier is made, it could use ozone to purify the air and the stray ions could be neutralized before exiting the purifier if it's well made; I have seen some which are made this way. If the vet is using an ozone-based air purifier to destroy airborne virus particles, that could very well be effective to some extent, but he explains why ozone is not something you want to breathe. There are some other comments on that link but some of the other claims don't seem to have any valid experimental support.

This is the comment about breathing ozone as a treatment being banned in the USA and other countries, but it suggests there are other ways to use ozone:

The therapy is banned in the USA and some other countries on the basis of ozone gas's toxic effect on the lungs when directly breathed; but this is never how it is administered.

Numbers Update for Europe, and Elsewhere :












www.worldometers.info...
bnonews.com...

originally posted by: McGinty

originally posted by: MonkeyBalls2
Just one thought before bed : What about Fog ?

Isn't that just water droplets suspended in the air ?
Would that be able to transport the virus further, between people waiting in lines etc at the supermarket ?

Would I be correct in thinking that the airborne virus is a liquid particle, at least solid in its fatty sphere.

No.

A flip side, though... despite moving more slowly, would the fogs water particles suspend the virus particles in there air longer than usual?

Perhaps.

a reply to: Byrd

Lol, thanks the education

I've spent the last hour with my jaw on the floor because the virus killed the oil industry today. Oil at -$40 a barrel. No driving and flying really took a hit.