21st Century Pandemic Timeline

I realized that this thread has been sucked into the ATS event horizon from the day I posted it. I will occasionally link this thread to recent related topics, but it seems to serve no purpose to update this thread or a duplicate one I have on another forum. I do edit and update this timeline though, anyone who may be interested can find the current and updated timeline at the following link.

Dead Drop Zero Safehouse

This is where I post any research before anywhere else (like ATS), I sure the the information in the Drops are worthy of the folks here. In addition to that forum I gave a link to, all that is saved on the cloud and off line hard drives. This information will not disappear, I'm making sure of that.

You've been waiting so long to add "Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus" to the list. Alas www.theblaze.com...-gdpra reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

originally posted by: MJTank108
You've been waiting so long to add "Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus" to the list. Alas www.theblaze.com...-gdpra reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

Apparently antibiotic resistant staph began in the late 1950s, outside of the scope of this timeline. I'm not aware of any MRSA outbreak that serious to be included in the 21 century timeline. If you know about this, please share some links.

The evolutionary history of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)

a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

It is fairly obvious to me that previous outbreaks, for previous epidemic diseases in the 20th Century, were dealt with.

Perhaps the real story is the ineptitude of those who were supposed to lead and direct, during the latest of similar?

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck
Perhaps the real story is the ineptitude of those who were supposed to lead and direct, during the latest of similar?

Necro thread?

This outbreask was dealt with. It was just dealt with poorly by authoritarians with no regard for decades of science. This meant it came at enormous unnecessary cost to human health and wellbeing. That's why all previous pandemic plans didn't tell you to shut down human rights and commerce over a low IFR respiratory illness that is destined to become endemic. You let it happen and mitigate through rational and effective measures like education. You don't lie and inflate numbers to drive fear. This was all a gross deviation from what it was supposed to be and I know because I managed the damn plans for all these different contingencies.

You can say this is how it was supposed to work and that not going far enough was the problem, but I can't buy that lie because I managed these plans myself. These were accepted by the federal agencies that provided the grants and used mostly data from CDC templates, so you can't convince me that I'm incorrect about this being the case in 2018.

I have not seen you offer a single opinion that deviated from what the people leading and directing how the world responded said, except to criticize them for not going further. Are you changing your mind? You also supported vaccinating as many people on earth as possible in the midst of a pandemic, which has been demonstrated... on it's very best day... to have done nothing to stop the spread of COVID (which itself was paid for by the people you say we should trust).

I'm guessing this will end up being some cherry picked reasons that happen to exclusively impugn political adversaries of status quo and will be based on no actual evidence. I'd love to be surprised and hear some honest critique of the gross failures of the entire Western world. It would be a breathtaking sight if it included accounting for and accepting that you have been wrong about things too.

You could start by just admitting you don't agree with leaders either knowingly lying to the public during emergencies or withholding information that is relevant to the public's personal health decisions. Both are documented to have happened all across the Western world, including the Pfizer CEO who lied during his PR/marketing tour. I guess he pays some of their salaries so he can say what he wants on the news without challenge. We can also include the CDC officials lying about vaccine adverse events being investigated when they hadn't been, only to finally discover well over 100 flags that the public was told didn't exist. The list goes on.

The first step in deradicalizing is accepting there are valid opinions other than your own and many of them, no matter who you are or what you thought you knew, will be right. If you can't accept that you are radicalized to a belief and are not really capable of engaging in a scientific discussion about it.

originally posted by: Ksihkehe

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck
Perhaps the real story is the ineptitude of those who were supposed to lead and direct, during the latest of similar?

Necro thread?

This outbreask was dealt with. It was just dealt with poorly by authoritarians with no regard for decades of science. This meant it came at enormous unnecessary cost to human health and wellbeing. That's why all previous pandemic plans didn't tell you to shut down human rights and commerce over a low IFR respiratory illness that is destined to become endemic.

Lockdowns, quarantine, and social distancing, have existed in principal (and were enacted by some individual city-states in law), since the Black Plague of the 14th Century. The concept of quarantine and isolation goes back to ancient Roman times.

And while the Black Plague was not a respiratory disease, it did become pneumonic once the numbers of the infected gave it enough of a host base to mutate in. Yersinia Pestis in pneumonic form had a CFR of close to 100%, but it's septicemic form only had a CFR of about 60%. There does not seem to be much scientific or medical literature on IFR, probably because it involves a guessed at total number of infections, and not measured hard data.

Four years in to the COVID-19, it now appears that it has been the 8th most deadly pandemic in history.

You let it happen and mitigate through rational and effective measures like education. You don't lie and inflate numbers to drive fear. This was all a gross deviation from what it was supposed to be and I know because I managed the damn plans for all these different contingencies.

You can say this is how it was supposed to work and that not going far enough was the problem, but I can't buy that lie because I managed these plans myself. These were accepted by the federal agencies that provided the grants and used mostly data from CDC templates, so you can't convince me that I'm incorrect about this being the case in 2018.

You managed those plans?

Then, wouldn't that make you one of those people... ?

I have not seen you offer a single opinion that deviated from what the people leading and directing how the world responded said, except to criticize them for not going further. Are you changing your mind?

No. By and large, most of the worlds response was too little, too late, and if money was involved, they chose to save money above all other priorities.

You also supported vaccinating as many people on earth as possible in the midst of a pandemic, which has been demonstrated... on it's very best day... to have done nothing to stop the spread of COVID (which itself was paid for by the people you say we should trust).

Even now, very few countries have achieved a level of immunization among the populace for it to overturn the infectiousness of the disease.

What was evident from the gathered statistics is a marked fall in the case fatality of COVID-19 among those who were immunized.

So, even though it falls short of some magic cure that you seem to believe it should have been, it was actually highly effective in the real world. It still is.

I'm guessing this will end up being some cherry picked reasons that happen to exclusively impugn political adversaries of status quo and will be based on no actual evidence. I'd love to be surprised and hear some honest critique of the gross failures of the entire Western world. It would be a breathtaking sight if it included accounting for and accepting that you have been wrong about things too.

You could start by just admitting you don't agree with leaders either knowingly lying to the public during emergencies or withholding information that is relevant to the public's personal health decisions. Both are documented to have happened all across the Western world, including the Pfizer CEO who lied during his PR/marketing tour. I guess he pays some of their salaries so he can say what he wants on the news without challenge. We can also include the CDC officials lying about vaccine adverse events being investigated when they hadn't been, only to finally discover well over 100 flags that the public was told didn't exist. The list goes on.

The first step in deradicalizing is accepting there are valid opinions other than your own and many of them, no matter who you are or what you thought you knew, will be right. If you can't accept that you are radicalized to a belief and are not really capable of engaging in a scientific discussion about it.

You won't even acknowledge the validity of the CFR and its international scientific and medical acceptance.

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

It is fairly obvious to me that previous outbreaks, for previous epidemic diseases in the 20th Century, were dealt with.

Perhaps the real story is the ineptitude of those who were supposed to lead and direct, during the latest of similar?

Perhaps. Inept or not, reactions should be placed on the timeline so it can be compared to the rest of the events.

Those outbreaks, epidemics, and pandemics of the 20th century belong on another timeline for a proper comparison. I suggest you take a month or two to do that research and put up a 20th-century timeline that covers the last 20 years of that century like I did for the 21st century.