Sweden took a relatively unique approach to Covid and I feared the worst...

[bojangle]

Who said they would be anything, better or worse? What proof do you have that they would be wayyyyy worse - (they're not in Sweden)? And even if they were twice as bad as they are, what then? Would you not have made that trade off? 60,000 more lives to save maybe millions of lives that are being destroyed right now? Where's the line? We draw these lines every day, why not have the same discussion concerning Covid 19? And when did we cede our right to have input into matters like this to local despots?

Yeah. These local despots are finally getting the cruel control they've been craving. These county health doctors got into the job for the power and control over their subjects. Damn it if they had to wait 102 years since their last reign of power, but now their time has finally come.

I think you're conveniently overlooking the impact of having the hospitals overwhelmed and people who need it not getting the care they need, not to mention the much heavier impact on healthcare professionals. Do you know how many years it takes for them to get trained? How about long-term impact of people saying 'fuck no' to going into the healthcare profession because of the much higher risks during a pandemic like this?

There are a ton of things you're not taking into account. I'm sure you're much more thorough in your stock evaluations.

Exactly. If exponential momentum had set it, all sorts of shortcomings would compound the public health issues for both covid and non covid patients. This would not only cause death numbers to significantly increase, but also death rates for given diseases.

We've been successful in California, but this is a worldwide problem, and we need to be smart and prepared with how we start opening things up.

 

[bojangle]

Are you even reading my posts? lol. I literally have never once said anything about Fauci being wrong. You're just making crap up.

Bojangle, Climber said you debunked the video entirely so I had to make a response earlier here:

https://bayarearidersforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=10567900#post10567900

That's right, I did read that. Couldn't remember. I wouldn't say that I "debunked" the video. I'm no expert in the field. I just wrote my thoughts while watching the video and referenced their information with my understanding of the evidence we have so far, and expert opinions, about this whole pandemic. This whole thing is fluid, and being studied while it's happening, so a lot of info is subject to change. In my lay person opinion, the doctors had a biased agenda, contradicted themselves several times on different points, incorrectly extrapolated data, and downplayed the severity of the disease. Plus, none of their data was peer reviewed. After I wrote my lay person opinions, they were basically validated by a barf field expert as well as associations representing the medical community. When peers saw the video, they denounced it.

But again, I don't have all the answers, and I'm not anyone to debunk anything I'm not an expert in. But I've been trying to keep up with all of this, so I'm not completely coming from left field if the consensus of professionals in the field seem to agree.

 

[tuxumino]

Not the best choice of source but literally the first thing I found...
https://calmatters.org/health/2020/04/debunking-bakersfield-doctors-covid-spread-conclusions/

There is not enough time in the world to keep up with all the nonsense that's being portrayed as science.

If I find something better I will post it.

just like a virus they won't go away

https://www.foxnews.com/media/california-doctor-questions-stay-at-home-orders

"Something else is going on here. This is not about science and it's not even about COVID. When [authorities] use the word 'safe' -- if you listen to the word 'safe', that's about controlling you."

 

[Archimedes]

Yeah. These local despots are finally getting the cruel control they've been craving. These county health doctors got into the job for the power and control over their subjects. Damn it if they had to wait 102 years since their last reign of power, but now their time has finally come.

Rather than be sarcastic, you could actually form a cogent counter argument about why the point I'm making is invalid and support it with some actual data. My argument is based directly on the numbers, both actual reporting Covid deaths and other causes of death in our society. Why not tell me specifically where my logic is wrong?

 

[GAJ]

Rather than be sarcastic, you could actually form a cogent counter argument about why the point I'm making is invalid and support it with some actual data. My argument is based directly on the numbers, both actual reporting Covid deaths and other causes of death in our society. Why not tell me specifically where my logic is wrong?

We were all 100 percent, (I think), behind SIP to not overwhelm our hospitals with the idea that once that had been achieved there would be relaxing of SIP guidelines which is just starting to happen even here.

So I'm guessing some are against that on BARF?

We HAVE to relax them as bailouts, as patchwork as they are, can't go on forever.

Hopefully we can all agree with that.

I believe you and I do and it seems like Newsome is coming around as well.

 

[Bumpits]

So I'm guessing some are against that on BARF?

I'll stick my arm out and say I'm not 100% convinced the SIP was necessary because we went straight to Defcon 1 first. Sure it worked to mitigate the number of cases, but we'll never know the true cost-to-benefit because we didnt try masks and social distancing first. In fact CDC told people NOT to use masks at first and only revised that statement after the federal government confiscated a crap-load of them for their own use, then revised the statement in the first week of april.

That's right, I did read that. Couldn't remember. I wouldn't say that I "debunked" the video. I'm no expert in the field. I just wrote my thoughts while watching the video and referenced their information with my understanding of the evidence we have so far, and expert opinions, about this whole pandemic. This whole thing is fluid, and being studied while it's happening, so a lot of info is subject to change. In my lay person opinion, the doctors had a biased agenda, contradicted themselves several times on different points, incorrectly extrapolated data, and downplayed the severity of the disease. Plus, none of their data was peer reviewed. After I wrote my lay person opinions, they were basically validated by a barf field expert as well as associations representing the medical community. When peers saw the video, they denounced it.

But again, I don't have all the answers, and I'm not anyone to debunk anything I'm not an expert in. But I've been trying to keep up with all of this, so I'm not completely coming from left field if the consensus of professionals in the field seem to agree.

Sure, but find me data on COVID-19 test results that is peer reviewed. All the test data we have are from people with severe respiratory symptoms driving themselves to the hospital and paying/using insurance to pay for the test themselves, then waiting over a week to get results back because the labs were backed up, to the point that by the time they received a positive test result the patient's health had declined and they were already being hospitalized.

Now that flu season is over the number of tests being taken are plummeting, theyre allowing asymptomatic patients to take the test, but the test is still not free. There's no random or unbiased samples of the general population being taken, so yes, while their data may be flawed, it's problems are consistent with all the other data that's out there.

And again i think it's disingenuous to claim that because they own a private practice their intentions must be putting money over health. We do not have a nationalized healthcare system in this country. We like to pretend that we do, but we don't. All hospitals are for-profit so you can point a finger at anyone in america's healthcare industry and say the same thing. It's like calling a human self-interested. It's not helpful or beneficial to the discussion because it's true for everyone. You have to move past why someone's motivated to speak up and simply look at what they're saying. Just like there's undoubtedly a lot of people with asthma, obesity, diabetes, smoker's lungs, hypertension, or just making more money on unemployment than their actual job. They COULD want to keep the country and the economy closed for as long as they can because doing so improves their odds of survival, or prevents the economy from leaving them behind. All of that is a normal part of human nature, which is why you just focus on the facts.

 

[Smash Allen]

i've appreciated your contributions bumpits, thanks :thumbup

same goes for archimedes, bojangle, slo, snaggy, etc.

i feel lucky to be able to participate/observe a diverse and respectful discourse during these times :thumbup

 

[GAJ]

I'll stick my arm out and say I'm not 100% convinced the SIP was necessary because we went straight to Defcon 1 first. Sure it worked to mitigate the number of cases, but we'll never know the true cost-to-benefit because we didnt try masks and social distancing first. In fact CDC told people NOT to use masks at first and only revised that statement after the federal government confiscated a crap-load of them for their own use, then revised the statement in the first week of april.

Family and friends were practicing social distancing prior to SIP.

Conferences in SF started getting canceled as early as February 14th even though the Moscone Center had already started ramping up sanitation measures.

So people were taking steps before even social distancing was discussed let alone shelter in place.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/busines...ce-as-coronavirus-15056782.php#photo-19037860

 

[Bumpits]

Family and friends were practicing social distancing prior to SIP.

Conferences in SF started getting canceled as early as February 14th even though the Moscone Center had already started ramping up sanitation measures.

So people were taking steps before even social distancing was discussed let alone shelter in place.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/busines...ce-as-coronavirus-15056782.php#photo-19037860

I work in tech and yes we started working from home long before any city declared a state of emergency. long before any county or state declared sheltering in place. Even today san francisco is well-ahead of any other county in California terms of sheltering, mostly due to the fact that SF is all tech and finance, so we can work from home.

But all of that is meaningless because we have nothing to compare it to. We didnt try something else first. NYC has double the population density of SF. Its far more blue collar, and connected by cultural bottlenecks like the subway system. SF’s historically crappy public transit system and lack of housing density may be its saving grace, maybe not. I think if you look at all the factors NYC was always going to be the epicenter and SF was always going to fare relatively better.

 

[Dr_SLO]

I'll stick my arm out and say I'm not 100% convinced the SIP was necessary because we went straight to Defcon 1 first. Sure it worked to mitigate the number of cases, but we'll never know the true cost-to-benefit because we didnt try masks and social distancing first.

These were the thoughts of those who had jurisdiction over practically every location that has seen the largest outbreaks. Social distancing on its own in these locations failed catastrophically hence the move to SIP. Sweden has been the outlier and not the norm. Their results look good right? There are two caveats. Firstly, the outbreak isn't over and their data are very cyclical, suggesting something funky with the epidemiology. Secondly, their numbers look like every other country in Europe, 20,302 cases and 2,462 dead, a case fatality (CF) of 12%. This is nowhere near the projected CF for SARS-CoV-2 and demonstrates a massive under sampling. Use a reasonable CF of 0.5% and Sweden's cases are closer to half a million, 0.5% of the population. They have a long way to go!

 

[GAJ]

These were the thoughts of those who had jurisdiction over practically every location that has seen the largest outbreaks. Social distancing on its own in these locations failed catastrophically hence the move to SIP. Sweden has been the outlier and not the norm. Their results look good right? There are two caveats. Firstly, the outbreak isn't over and their data are very cyclical, suggesting something funky with the epidemiology. Secondly, their numbers look like every other country in Europe, 20,302 cases and 2,462 dead, a case fatality (CF) of 12%. This is nowhere near the projected CF for SARS-CoV-2 and demonstrates a massive under sampling. Use a reasonable CF of 0.5% and Sweden's cases are closer to half a million, 0.5% of the population. They have a long way to go!

Yes, I was in New Orleans on March 8th through the 11th.

Everything was 100 percent "normal," Frenchman Street was packed as usual.

It went pear shaped FAST.

I left to drive to Miami which I left two days early on the 21st due to my 35 year old daughter going into a panic about my safety which was nice as it got me out on the last United nonstop to SFO.

Even spent 2 nights before I left in Key Largo.

All was normal other than table distancing at a Key Largo restaurant and grocery stores in Miami were running out of TP.

Dade County went pear shaped shortly after I left.

 

[Bumpits]

The countries with the lowest rates of infection were in Asia because they were all wearing masks, and because of that low rate of infection they persisted with normal economic activity. Meanwhile the CDC chose to tell everyone that masks only work on people with doctor faces through February, march, and the first week of April. Nobody in any american epicenter was social distancing or wearing masks. In January china imported 2 BILLION 3M N95 masks from wildfire stricken Australia in preparation of this strategy, around the same time politicians were selling stocks and notifying nobody.

 

[Climber]

The countries with the lowest rates of infection were in asia because they were all wearing masks, and because of that low rate of infection they persisted with normal economic activity. Meanwhile the CDC chose to tell everyone masks only work on people with doctor faces for about two months.

Wow. What world do you live in? :wtf

You seem intent on keeping your bias intact. If something doesn't confirm it, you seem to ignore it.

There was a member here years ago with the same traits (out_like_trout), it was pointless to argue with him because he would never stray from his stance regardless of the proof anybody provided.

 

[Dr_SLO]

That isnt really true, is it? Where's this debunking?

Just a note, I'm not singling out the individual with the quote. I'm using it as a good statement.

There seems to be some confusion about the scientific method. What the two healthcare professionals did in their video was not scientific method. Note even close. Hence the backlash from all and sundry in the scientific and healthcare communities.

The scientific method relies on rigorous peer review. What does that mean? When I perform a piece of research and want to publish that work, I will submit my manuscript to a journal for peer review. The journal will then choose 3 people who are anonymous to me who will then read my manuscript. They will critique the data and the subsequent conclusions that I have stated. The three reviewers provide their written critique to the journal with a recommendation to either accept, make minor modifications, make major modifications or reject my work for publication. If I need to make modifications (I have published more than 30 papers and have needed to make modifications to them all; this is the norm), I must edit my manuscript accordingly and answer each of the reviewer's questions before sending it back to the journal. The reviewers will then look at my rebuttal and make their final recommendation. This happens for every journal where peer review is performed, which is 99.99% of published scientific literature.

The reason the two healthcare professionals got such a hard time is because it did not stand up to peer review by the scientific community. As the video was so public it probably got assessed by the entire scientific community who is currently researching SARS-CoV-2 and COVID. That's a lot of people. I can't emphasize how many but there will be virologists, epidemiologists, statisticians, and all the other 'ologists and 'icians out there, not just three people as you get with a normal peer review process.

Peer review is powerful. It keeps data and conclusions drawn from that data tightly confined without over interpretation and misleading statements. Do those things happen under normal peer review? Yes, but it is significantly reduced. The two healthcare professionals entered a lions den and, deservedly, got chewed up and spat out. It doesn't matter how people feel about the data. If it doesn't stand up to scrutiny via a peer review process it will be made known, which is why it's a good thing that peer review is kept behind closed doors. The healthcare professionals should have written a letter to a reputable journal to have the data and conclusions peer reviewed before going public.

 

[Bumpits]

Wow. What world do you live in? :wtf

You seem intent on keeping your bias intact. If something doesn't confirm it, you seem to ignore it.

There was a member here years ago with the same traits (out_like_trout), it was pointless to argue with him because he would never stray from his stance regardless of the proof anybody provided.

Im going to ask you again to cut out the personal attacks and stick to the debating facts like I have or just not address me. I'm not into the insinuations. I havent said fauci is wrong. I'm not out_like_trout, I have been providing proof of everything Im saying and if you want more just ask.

Japan, South Korea and China have been statistical outliers.

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsa...the-outbreak-without-shutting-everything-down

 

[Dr_SLO]

The countries with the lowest rates of infection were in Asia because they were all wearing masks, and because of that low rate of infection they persisted with normal economic activity. Meanwhile the CDC chose to tell everyone that masks only work on people with doctor faces through February, march, and the first week of April. Nobody in any american epicenter was social distancing or wearing masks. In January china imported 2 BILLION 3M N95 masks from wildfire stricken Australia in preparation of this strategy, around the same time politicians were selling stocks and notifying nobody.

There is still no credible evidence that wearing masks in the wider community has a significant effect on preventing the transmission of viral infections at the population level. A lot of this push for masks has come from the #mask4all project. This is another example of flawed analysis and group think which is nicely explained by The Royal Statistical Society's article The effectiveness of cloth masks has been misrepresented by #Masks4All

Don't get me wrong, masks are useful when used appropriately in the right settings where needed.

 

[Bumpits]

Peer review

Agreed. There is varying degrees of data quality and peer reviewing data helps rank data by their varying levels of quality. If there is better quality data refuting what they're saying that's one thing. But we're all relying on poorly collected data at this point, which makes their data at least consistent with the quality of everything else.

 

[Dr_SLO]

Japan, South Korea and China have been statistical outliers.

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsa...the-outbreak-without-shutting-everything-down

There are very clear reasons why these countries had significantly reduced transmission. None of which relied solely on social distancing. The US missed the boat by a long shot to be able to use contact tracing and social distancing as the preventative measures. The US did not respond in a timely manner and everyone in the US is paying the price for that failure. The data are very, very clear on that point.

 

[Bumpits]

There is still no credible evidence that wearing masks in the wider community has a significant effect on preventing the transmission of viral infections at the population level

There's also no evidence that COVID-19 is transmitted by touching contaminated surfaces. The closest we've gotten is that you MAY get covid-19 by touching things. The quality of data we're working with is relative.

https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-can-spread-as-an-aerosol.html

The data seems to be trending towards the virus being spread through aerosolized droplets. People wearing masks creates a 2-way protective barrier to prevent carriers from spreading the virus, and potentially stop people from inhaling it. Yes I agree that DIY masks are less effective. A teeshirt wrapped around your face is roughly 3 times less effective than an n95 mask. It's not nothing 'tho.

 

[Dr_SLO]

Agreed. There is varying degrees of data quality and peer reviewing data helps rank data by their varying levels of quality. If there is better quality data refuting what they're saying that's one thing. But we're all relying on poorly collected data at this point, which makes their data at least consistent with the quality of everything else.

There is no such thing as varying degrees of data. There is data and interpretation of the data. The interpretation is the critical factor in peer review. The healthcare professionals failed to interpret the data in a way that would withstand the peer review process, hence the backlash. They had data but their interpretation was incorrect and misleading, which amounts to scientific misconduct. If I were to do something similar I could lose my job. That's how serious of an issue this is.

Andrew Wakefield, with his fraudulent paper on MMR back in 1998, which has now been retracted, has been responsible for the deaths of thousands of children due to measles because of incorrect and misleading information. He was thrown out of the medical community. The scientific community does not take misconduct lightly.