• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

Covid-19 Outbreak of new SARS-like coronavirus (Covid-19)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry... T'was my opinion at the time. Now it's not.
lol <3

I intentionally told everyone I had over that I was or could be sick, I would list honestly whatever symptoms I had, no one told me they got sick after being with me, and I intentionally did quarantine myself quite a bit over these last two months.

I also would have honest conversations with people about if I was self-quarantining, if I had gone out and done anything with anyone, if we're seeing our family/older citizens etc or what not. I intentionally am trying to be with people my age for this reason vs older.
 
lol <3

I intentionally told everyone I had over that I was or could be sick, I would list honestly whatever symptoms I had, no one told me they got sick after being with me, and I intentionally did quarantine myself quite a bit over these last two months.

I also would have honest conversations with people about if I was self-quarantining, if I had gone out and done anything with anyone, if we're seeing our family/older citizens etc or what not. I intentionally am trying to be with people my age for this reason vs older.

Right but seeing random people isn't quarantining yourself. You could have it and be asymptomatic and then give it to someone else and they could give it to their grandma who's in poor health. That's what my beef was.
 
Dr Artin Massihi: "But now that we have the data we're seeing that 96-97% of patients completely recover, and those 4 patients (out of 100) that die, they have 90% comorbidities - heart failure, emphysema, rheumatoid athritis, lupus, they're on immunomodulating medications, they're immunodeficient, HIV - these are the people that are dying. You get some healthy people that die but that's an infinitesimal number. Tiny."
I figured this would be the case btw.
 
Right but seeing random people isn't quarantining yourself.
Every time I was sick I would wait out the 5-7+ days after symptoms of illness past. "Lockdown" isn't a quarantine of healthy people, it's merely a reduction of civil rights. I was never pro-lockdown for healthy people because it's like, oh yeah, that makes sense... who's going to truck in food? Who's going to put food on the shelves? Sick people? ... does that make sense? Every time I had illness symptoms no matter how mild I would wait a few days out after. It led to a lot of loneliness these last few months... have been in excellent health lately.

You are also not understanding I don't live in a world where I'm living off the land. I live in a highly population dense city. One trip to a grocery store (without any food thanks to "STOCKPILE FOOD no wait DON'T do that" federal suggestions...) may or may not have groceries + exposure to dozens and dozens of people scrambling for the last pack of meat, chicken, pork, the last container of cleaning product, the last roll of toilet paper...

Quarantining people = more illness. Grocery stores reduced hours, so I have to go shopping (asymptomatic carrier or not I'll never know because there will never be enough testing...) around dozens/hundreds of people. Many of whom are way older than me.

I could have easily engineered being ALONE if that is what the suggestions were. Shutting everything down was a really dumb move and it led to a lot more person-person contact.

You've also missed the posts in TL where I bitch about how people will walk right up to me as if this whole thing is a big sham. 8(

I am keeping my 6 feet personal space when I want it / 100% of the time in public... most people are not.

You could have it and be asymptomatic and then give it to someone else and they could give it to their grandma who's in poor health. That's what my beef was.
That's on them (negative responsibility) and furthermore WHY I would give people the "I COULD BE SICK/AM SICK" warnings... does that make sense? This makes them double-think their decision making.

Many people are still working / have to work or are deemed "essential workers"... some of my friends are at worse health than I am. Not everyone has the luxury or financial position to self-quarantine.

All the government had to do was not cut me off benzos to save health care $ and I would have been totally happy by myself sleeping through a long period of time and instead they took me off state-run healthcare that was working for me.. perhaps DJT's ruining the ACA cost people lives just to rip Obama's name off "Obamacare" even though that's not what the act was called...
 
Who Controls The British Government Response to COVID-19?

UK Column said:
"The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants" — Albert Camus

As Britain hurtles headlong towards neo-feudalist governance with heightened surveillance, micro-management of society and an uptick in fascistic policing of the draconian measures imposed to combat the "threat" of Covid-19, it is perhaps time to analyse the real forces behind this "new normal".

There is now serious doubt over the correlation between lockdown and saving lives. Reality is creeping into the Covid-19 dialogue. It is becoming apparent that people are getting sick because they are being isolated and effectively living under house arrest, condemned as "murderers" if they so much as think about breaking curfew, being snitched on by neighbours for "gathering" more than two people together in their back gardens.

The following graph was produced by UK Column and demonstrates the lack of correlation between lockdown and "saving lives":
noon_lockdown_v_lockdown.jpg



The numbers game is acting in many instances as a smokescreen. It is impossible to rely upon "official" statistics, that vary wildly from one website to another: statistics that rely upon unreliable and sporadic testing procedures. and based upon death certificates that misrepresent the actual cause of death as Covid-19, regardless of pre-existing medical conditions. Statistics, too, that were set in stone very early on in the development stages, when the perspective was limited and compressed, before a true picture could be seen. The newly emerging statistics are now increasingly undermining initial conclusions and pointing to the futility and negative consequences of lockdown.

It is now accepted that there is a high mortality rate among the elderly in care homes in the UK and globally — among the same elderly civilians who are being "asked" to sign DNRs (Do Not Resuscitate) forms. This amounts to signing their own death warrant, should they present any of the Covid-19 symptoms. They will be neglected, isolated from their families when at their most vulnerable and left alone to die, even though it is possible that they have not contracted the virus.

Instead of offering proactive and positive suggestions that will enable our immune systems to combat the disease, the British Government is ensuring conditions that will suppress immune systems to dangerous levels and create the perfect environment for Covid-19 to flourish.

Britain has now received an estimated 1.4 million new benefit claims for welfare payments, "about seven times the normal level". The government has pledged to bail out "80% of pay of workers who are temporarily laid off" but I have personally spoken to self-employed individuals who find themselves falling between the cracks that qualify them for financial support and now face an indefinite period of time without income.

These measures are being imposed in a country that, since 2012, has seen an exponential growth in child poverty to potentially sub-Victorian levels. In March 2019, the number of children living in "absolute poverty" grew by a staggering 200,000 in a twelve-month period, to a total of 3.7 million. How will this number be further impacted by lockdown?

How did we arrive at this point? Who steered the UK Government towards this questionable and alarmist lockdown policy? The unexamined assumption is that conclusions were formed on the basis of sound epidemiological analysis and research by doctors and scientists who care about our welfare.

The reality is what we will examine in this article. Neil Ferguson, a professor at Imperial College, was responsible for the modelling of a response to Covid-19. His virtual model was recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and it passed through into policy with virtually no scrutiny. Ferguson's dramatic prediction of 500,000 deaths in the UK became the foundation of Boris Johnson's U-turn from herd immunity to collective quarantine.

While some understood that Ferguson later reduced his mortality calculations, he actually doubled down on his projections on Twitter, insisting that without drastic lockdown measures being taken, the numbers would be even higher.
 
1-health.jpg



Massive U.S. contact tracing effort 'of critical importance'

by Katie Pearce | Johns Hopkins University | 27 April 2020

Before the United States can reopen safely, a new workforce at least 100,000 strong should be in place to trace the contacts of people diagnosed with COVID-19, according to a report from the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security and other experts.

A long-used public health tool, contact tracing aims to break the chain of transmission of a contagious disease by identifying and alerting those who may have been exposed to it. Traditionally, a trained contact tracer will interview an individual diagnosed with the disease to determine all of their recent contacts, then reach out to those contacts to provide further information—which may include a recommendation to self-quarantine. In the past, this meticulous strategy has been used to help control Ebola, SARS, sexually transmitted infections, and tuberculosis, among other communicable diseases.

With the global outbreak of COVID-19, public health experts believe contact tracing will be a critical step for containing the virus, alongside social distancing and widespread testing. Many countries have already deployed extensive contact tracing, including New Zealand, Iceland, Taiwan, Singapore, and South Korea.

The United States, too, is gradually ramping up efforts—including a new hiring surge funded by the CDC, a Google/Apple tech partnership, and a statewide program in Massachusetts. In New York, Gov. Andrew Cuomo is working with Bloomberg Philanthropies to launch a massive contact tracing program that will include online training from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

"In the absence of a vaccine, we think this is really the big public health tool we have to control transmission of COVID-19," says Crystal Watson, a lead author of the new report and assistant professor in the Bloomberg School. "We need to push hard for this."

The report acknowledges that a contact tracing effort of this magnitude—"and of this critical and historical importance for the functioning and reopening of society"—is without precedent. In an interview with the Hub, Watson offered more insight on the significance of this approach and the challenges ahead.

---

Is contact tracing on the scale the report suggests achievable in this country?

It's going to take a lot of work and some imagination and probably changing the rules in some ways to do things differently—but I do think it's achievable. We're seeing that other countries have implemented contact tracing and are able to contain the virus at a relatively low level in their communities.

We're also seeing parts of the U.S. start to put this in place, so that's encouraging, but it's not enough. We need to hire what we believe is up to 100,000 people or more to complete this work. So what we need first is funding and commitment from the federal government and Congress, to really scale this up in a way that's required. Our report suggests the need to dedicate approximately $3.6 billion for state and territorial health departments to make contact tracing wide-scale.

What are the likely outcomes if we try to reopen the country without robust contact tracing in place?

We don't know exactly how many people are still susceptible to COVID-19, but we're relatively confident that it's a very large percentage of our population. So if we reopen and we don't have the capacity to find each case, isolate them, then trace their contacts and put them in quarantine, this virus will start to circulate widely again in our communities, and we will see again a big surge of cases, a surge of hospitalizations, and a surge of deaths. If we don't reinforce these measures, things may get a lot worse.

As the report notes, privacy protections in the U.S. may prevent aspects of contact tracing we're seeing in other countries. What are the implications of that?

The U.S. won't be able to replicate a contact tracing effort like the one in South Korea, for example, which can use medical records, phone GPS records, credit card transactions, and closed-circuit TV.

We need to have conversations here about how to sufficiently protect privacy in this context. But there has to be a balance between personal privacy and getting health departments the information they need to act quickly. The Google and Apple partnership [to offer Bluetooth-enabled apps to track potential exposure to COVID-19] is promising, but it's unclear how public health officials will be able to use that information. I don't think we've struck that right balance yet with the technologies that are out there.

As unemployment skyrockets, to what extent can contact tracing create a new source of jobs?

This is a huge workforce that we need to engage. It may include many types of people: public health experts, retired health care workers, but also people outside the field. Contact tracing is an intensive activity, but it doesn't take a lot of time to train staff. We need people who are meticulous, who can make people comfortable and treat the task with sensitivity. Fluency in different languages is also a plus because we need to reach all communities.

So I think this is a great opportunity to put people to work who have either been laid off because of the pandemic, or who otherwise just want to be directly involved in the response.

 
^absolute bullshit. Critical importance my ass.

This isn't even a conspiracy. THEY ARE ADMITTING IT:

 
You know, it's not uncommon for death certificates to have multiple causative factors listed. For instance, morphine overdose leading to aspiration of vomit and cardiac arrest in association with comorbid obesity and sleep apnea. It's not wrong to claim a cardiac arrest led directly to death, but there was also a chain of events that needed to occur for that cardiac arrest to happen - it didn't happen spontaneously.

I don't see why it's such a major issue that people are overestimating morbidity from COVID19. Erring on the side of caution when making major health policy decisions seems to be a logical move. If you overact, the economy takes a bump and people get antsy. If you don't respond quickly enough you get something akin to the AIDS epidemic in the 80s (Everyone laughed about the gay plague wiping out the fags and junkies, until straight white married Christians started getting it, and by then it was widespread) where people's lives are severely disrupted if not ruined outright, stigma abounds, and people have to say goodbye too soon.

And this talk that measures are somehow too extensive, and the disease isn't a big deal. You have a right to behave how you feel, but there is no obligation for you to be served in any manner. Such people are free to eat things they find on hospital floors too, and I would encourage them to do so if they feel that they can make a convincing case of how it's not a big deal, I'll even phone the local hospital and let them know to keep a bed warm and ventilator ready in the ICU for them (after they get security to stop them looking for yum-yums on the floor/looking in potted plants for loose pills)

I get the feeling that some people think that any disruption of their status quo is unacceptable. Stores and businesses aren't closed due to concerns of safety, it's either out of personal spite or due to a conspiracy!
 
You know, it's not uncommon for death certificates to have multiple causative factors listed.
Y'know what's uncommon, doctors being pressured to list covid19 on a death certificate by higher-ups even though it wasn't a significant cause of death and also for them to add deaths to the covid tally who have not even been tested positive for the virus. If you don't think this is suspicious then you probably also think that all of the new rules are there for our own safety to protect us from a virus.


95213029_10158059883123820_8886296586783555584_o.jpg

^More evidence from UK govt. stats that early on in the hysteria, deaths in care homes jumped significantly. This trend has increased since then. (NOTE: The majority of excess deaths were NOT covid-19). That means that those people who have been cheering the lock downs in order to protect old people have, in fact, been killing more old people in care homes than they have protected.

Britain’s non-coronavirus death rate has spiked: What's going on?
 
Y'know what's uncommon, doctors being pressured to list covid19 on a death certificate by higher-ups even though it wasn't a significant cause of death and also for them to add deaths to the covid tally who have not even been tested positive for the virus.

I would hope so. How many cases of this have happened?

The implication is that these elderly are all just getting worked up and a bad case of the vapors? The government is intentionally inciting panic over a non-issue because ... the magic 8 ball said so?

If you don't think this is suspicious then you probably also think that all of the new rules are there for our own safety to protect us from a virus.

I'm a bad example, I also believe in things like vaccines and have a few tattered shreds of trust towards humanity left.
 
I would hope so. How many cases of this have happened?
When the alleged NYC death total was around 10,000 NYT said that 3,700 of those hadn't been tested for positive results.
As for the doctors I've heard of around 5 being dictated to to fill out forms differently than they have for their entire careers. Including a MN Senator who's also a doctor:
Senator and Dr. Reveals HHS Document Coached Him on How to Overcount COVID-19 Cases



and have a few tattered shreds of trust towards humanity left.
So do I. However when you understand that the elites who call the shots do not possess any humanity then things start to make more sense.
 
in romania the state wants to uplift the restrictions on 15 may, until now you had to complete a declaration and your movements were restricted, we only have 10k known cases but considering that the state has done only 100k tests I think that by 15 june the lockdown will be put back. the only thing that held back the ignorant part of our society were the big fines, after 15th of may idk what will happen...

the schools and universities stay closed but everything besides malls and bars plus concert venues will open. the mask wearing will be mandatory in closed spaces and public transport

movement outside the house for people under 65 is 6am to 10pm and for over 65 is 11am-1pm and 7pm-9pm, but it will change for them to 7am-11am and 7pm-10pm, only going to work and nearby grocery stores or pharmacies is allowed plus urgent medical care
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow, that really puts it into perspective. For those stating "yeah many more deaths than this already occur"... yes it's true, but these are additional deaths on top of the others that happen for other reasons. Almost 60k deaths (so far) is a lot of people...

On top of that we have no idea of the long-term ramifications of getting this disease. Maybe none. But maybe some.
 
Wow, that really puts it into perspective. For those stating "yeah many more deaths than this already occur"... yes it's true, but these are additional deaths on top of the others that happen for other reasons. Almost 60k deaths (so far) is a lot of people...

On top of that we have no idea of the long-term ramifications of getting this disease. Maybe none. But maybe some.

Additionally, many of these deaths might well have been prevented.

There's a big difference between accepting deaths we can't realistically avoid, and just not giving a shit about huge numbers of deaths we could have avoided.
 
Wow, that really puts it into perspective. For those stating "yeah many more deaths than this already occur"... yes it's true, but these are additional deaths on top of the others that happen for other reasons. Almost 60k deaths (so far) is a lot of people...

On top of that we have no idea of the long-term ramifications of getting this disease. Maybe none. But maybe some.

A little more perspective.. It took the Vietnam War 10 years and covid less then 6 months
 
Last edited:
pre script Im a librarian.. and really piss on your opinions about that.

I find it pathetically comical that President Trump has ordered the very people he has been trying to evict back to work because they are so essential in this crisis.


Hey Trump, do you know who does this vital work day in and out?



Maybe the wall is to keep them from leaving essential jobs because they are openly exploited for profit and treated so poorly?

 
Last edited:
Almost 60k deaths (so far) is a lot of people...
It would be if that was the legitimate tally.
However (as admitted) many/most of these deaths are people who died WITH covid in their system, not necessarily FROM covid. That changes the entire death toll.
Some had not even tested positive for the virus yet they are listed as a covid death.
To believe this death toll and especially enforce policies based off that is unscientific and dangerous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top