• 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.
JGrimez said:
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.
Click to expand...

I consider this is a preliminary way to measure. I don't think there's anything shoddy/shady/stupid going on; I think they're considering this new factor, and numbering based on it, then considering that to the yearly/monthly average, comparing to "norm". Since this is such new..."novel" factor, they're just trying to get a picture of the effect, as compared to normal (this will be compared to "normal"). It's kind of like making a painting, building up by layers--at first we may not know what the artist is making, but as they define things more, a picture starts to come into focus? I don't think we can expect to have completely clear numbers, especially to start.

Or it's like cutting a piece of wood to slightly larger than needed, to have room to shave it down precise to need, or a block for a wood-carving.

I wish, at least, someone in the know would address this - because so many people are questioning it. It would make sense to.

Part of the problem is such ability for "awareness" in today's age. Information flies out uncompleted, unexplained often, and people fill in the blanks, often seeing gaps, suspecting some wrong-doing (however I don't mean to give a free pass - to say "don't question"...I'm sure some assholes would take advantage of people's placidity if we all did that).

I think the precautions set in place are wise, considering what we don't know. Many people will point to the low numbers, as validation it's not a big deal -- as if taking kids out of school and stopping people from gathering in sporting venues didn't curb the spread. So many people are doubting the virus even exists at this point - one guy I know who even thought he had it, now suspects some conspiracy -- suspects he was poisoned. To me, it's not surprising at all that some new virus jumped into the human population. Every single one of us has experienced some virus, and we are not the only form of life on earth (not that viruses are, technically considered "life")- It's really surprising that in this globalized high traffic world, this hasn't happened sooner in the modern age. Viruses exist, are constantly, rapidly mutating, and have been a part of life since before we existed- Our genome even contains bits of viral code.

Maybe this is just a warm up- Something required for when the "big, bad one" hits. I'm not saying it's managed perfectly, or that I don't understand the resistance to shutting down- The need for economies to continue going. Hopefully by the next, big bad one, everything we need will be mostly automated... and we can all hunker down and starve it.
 
Last edited:
On my way to work where I am currently collecting source plasma from recovered COVID patients for their antibodies dubbed ANTI-COVID-19 in my company's venture to provide the first isolated injectable form of the immunoglobulin to treat COVID-19
 
Remdesivir: Drug has 'clear cut' power to fight coronavirus
James Gallagher
BBC
April 29th, 2020
There is "clear-cut" evidence that a drug can help people recover from the coronavirus, say US officials.

Remdesivir cut the duration of symptoms from 15 days down to 11 in clinical trial at hospitals around the world.

...

The trial was run by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and 1,063 people took part. Some patients were given the drug while others received a placebo (dummy) treatment.

Dr Anthony Fauci who runs the NIAID said: "The data shows remdesivir has a clear-cut, significant, positive effect in diminishing the time to recovery."

...

The impact on deaths is not as clear cut. The mortality rate was 8% in people given remdesivir and 11.6% in those given a placebo, but this result was not statistically significant, meaning scientists cannot tell if the difference is real.
Click to expand...
Read the full story here.
 
Are you guys sure those numbers are right?


EWsmcytUwAEP0w_.jpg
 
covid19-male-death-neuroscence-public.jpg



Study shows that men have over double the coronavirus death rate of women

by Frontiers | Neuroscience News | 29 April 2020

The study speculates the reason why males are more prone to negative outcomes of coronavirus is due to levels of ACE2, which is significantly higher in males than females.

Males who contract COVID-19 have 2.5 times the death rate of women. Being males is a significant risk factor for worse disease severity, regardless of age. Researchers found a similar trend in data from the 2003 SARS outbreak. The study speculates the reason why males are more prone to negative outcomes of coronavirus is due to levels of ACE2, which is significantly higher in males than females.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exploded across the globe, leaving healthcare staff, policy makers and ordinary people struggling. We still don’t completely understand why some people are more severely affected by the virus than others.

So far, the elderly and those with certain pre-existing conditions appear to be at greater risk. A new study in open-access journal Frontiers in Public Health is the first to examine gender differences in COVID-19 patients. The study finds that men and women are equally likely to contract the virus, but men are significantly more likely to suffer severe effects of the disease and die. The results suggest that additional care may be required for older men or those with underlying conditions.

While most people with COVID-19 experience mild symptoms, identifying the factors that predispose people to severe disease and death could help society to protect and treat those most at risk.

“Early in January we noticed that the number of men dying from COVID-19 appeared to be higher than the number of women,” said Yang. “This raised a question: are men more susceptible to getting or dying from COVID-19? We found that no-one had measured gender differences in COVID-19 patients, and so began investigating.”

Yang and a group of colleagues analyzed several patient datasets to see if there were differences in how men and women respond to COVID-19. This included data on 43 patients who the doctors had treated themselves and a publicly available dataset on 1056 COVID-19 patients.

The virus responsible for COVID-19 is similar to the virus behind the 2003 SARS outbreak, and it attaches to the same protein, called ACE2, on cells it attacks. Given this similarity, the doctors also analyzed a dataset of 524 SARS patients from 2003.

Among the COVID-19 patients, the researchers confirmed that older people and those with specific underlying conditions tended to have more severe disease and were more likely to die. The age and numbers of infected men and women were similar, but men tended to have more severe disease.

Strikingly, in the largest COVID-19 dataset, over 70% of the patients who died were men, meaning that men had almost 2.5 times the death rate of women. And interestingly, being male was a significant risk-factor for worse disease severity, regardless of age.

In the SARS dataset from 2003, the researchers found a similar trend, with a significantly higher mortality rate amongst males compared with females. Interestingly, levels of ACE2, the protein involved in the viral attack in both SARS and COVID-19, tends to be present in higher levels in men, and also patients with cardiovascular disease and diabetes, all of whom have worse outcomes in COVID-19.

However, further research is needed to determine exactly why men with COVID-19 tend to fare worse than women. While the current study has a small sample size, and larger studies are needed to confirm the results, this is the first preliminary indication that male gender is a significant risk factor for COVID-19 severity and death.

The study may have important implications for patient care. “We recommend that additional supportive care and prompt access to the intensive care unit may be necessary for older male patients,” said Yang.

neurosciencenews.com

COVID-19 study shows that men have over double the death rate of women - Neuroscience News

Males who contract COVID-19 have 2.5 times the death rate of women. Being males is a significant risk factor for worse disease severity, regardless of age. Researchers found a similar trend in data from the 2003 SARS outbreak. The study speculates the reason why males are more prone to negative...
neurosciencenews.com neurosciencenews.com
 
JessFR said:
While I believe this particular instance was an honest mistake, it seems hard to deny that the media has a habit of "accidentally" making mistakes that always make something more sensational rather than less. :p
Click to expand...

Like on Fox when they repeatedly kept insisting that when they spent $300 million on something or other, they could have instead spent it by giving every single one of the 300 million Americans $1 million, OMG HOW WASTEFUL. Wish I could find the clip. They all had straight faces too except one lady who looked like she knew what was up but was being told to push the nonsense. I could tell by her almost-smirk.

Just a 6 digit rounding error, it's an honest mistake, anyone could make it in Betsy DeVoss's America.
 
Xorkoth said:
Like on Fox when they repeatedly kept insisting that when they spent $300 million on something or other, they could have instead spent it by giving every single one of the 300 million Americans $1 million, OMG HOW WASTEFUL. Wish I could find the clip. They all had straight faces too except one lady who looked like she knew what was up but was being told to push the nonsense. I could tell by her almost-smirk.

Just a 6 digit rounding error, it's an honest mistake, anyone could make it in Betsy DeVoss's America.
Click to expand...

I remember that, that was hilarious. :)
 
What 23 said:
I don't think there's anything shoddy/shady/stupid going on
Click to expand...
There is though. So I and many others disagree. They're changing death certificates. People who are terminally ill in hospice are getting listed as covid19 deaths. Even a suicide of a young male was listed as covid19. His father protested but was then told the insurance wouldn't pay out on a suicide so he left it as a covid19 death. Italy is saying that 99% of deaths have comorbidities. There is a massive political incentive for governments around the world to justify the draconian measures taken to allegedly combat the virus.

What 23 said:
because so many people are questioning it. It would make sense to.
Click to expand...
Why are doctors who are questioning the effectiveness of the lockdowns being censored? Why is there an attempt to stifle scientific and medical debate?
This fact alone proves a lot.

What 23 said:
I think the precautions set in place are wise, considering what we don't know.
Click to expand...
If that opinion is based on incorrect information then it is not a wise conclusion.
This may have been valid during the early stages of the outbreak (or more likely the public discovery) however that was quite a while ago and now with the new information we should be updating our opinions on the lockdowns. They've proven to not be statistically significant - and the most important thing that people are bizarrely ignoring - are causing many deaths themselves.

Joe [email protected] said:
I've spoken to several care home workers over the years, and all said, in one way or another, that the death of residents was strongly correlated with a cessation of visits from family members.

Current reports are indicating that about half of "covid-19" deaths in the UK will end up being among residents of care homes or the elderly at home. There will be as many, or many more, non-covid deaths among the same demographic (see recent article below).

In the final analysis (done by any reasonable person), the conclusion will have to be that the lock down will have caused the death of more people than covid-19. Mostly the elderly and vulnerable. Those that YOU all insisted that we were saving by imposing the lock down.
Click to expand...



Two new waves of deaths are about to break over the NHS, new analysis warns
NOTE: These new waves of death are NON-COVID and a DIRECT RESULT of the lock down.

TEN THOUSAND (and counting) elderly, who would NOT have died otherwise, ARE DEAD because of the lock down and the DELIBERATE hysteria spread by government and media.

This HAS to be compared to the FACT that the vast majority of 'covid deaths' were among people with 1 or more serious underlying conditions (the true cause of death) and essentially in 'end of life' scenarios.

"The “second wave” is already breaking. It is made up of non-coronavirus patients not able or willing to access healthcare because of the crisis. Based on ONS and NHS data, Edge Health estimates these deaths now total approximately 10,000 and are running at around 2,000 a week."
Click to expand...



What 23 said:
So many people are doubting the virus even exists at this point - one guy I know who even thought he had it, now suspects some conspiracy -- suspects he was poisoned. To me, it's not surprising at all that some new virus jumped into the human population.
Click to expand...
Seems you're ignoring the evidence pointing to this virus being engineered. We know for a fact that dangerous viruses are being tampered with by dubious governments in labs but we don't have evidence of this virus jumping from animal to person. What's more likely regarding "conspiracy" (aka logical explanation that counters the official narrative) is that most people in the world have already been exposed to this virus.

What 23 said:
Maybe this is just a warm up
Click to expand...
Something I can agree with.

JessFR said:
it seems hard to deny that the media has a habit of "accidentally" making mistakes that always make something more sensational rather than less. :p
Click to expand...
Agree. Or mistakes making Trump look bad as opposed to the opposite.
 
Well isn't this a plot twist. The story of the man that dies and everyone tried to disingenuously blame Trump for. Turns out his wife who didn't die (and who was an anti-Trump democrat donor) is now under investigation for the murder of her husband from poisoning. I wonder if she thought she could kill 2 birds with 1 stone - get rid of her husband while also demonizing Trump.

mr peabody said:
Study shows that men have over double the coronavirus death rate of women
Click to expand...

What's your opinion on The Remarkable Discovery That Smokers Are Far Less Likely to Contract COVID-19? And do you ever offer your own opinions or are you just here to spam the official narrative via mainstream articles?

Xorkoth said:
Like on Fox when they repeatedly kept insisting that when they spent $300 million on something or other, they could have instead spent it by giving every single one of the 300 million Americans $1 million, OMG HOW WASTEFUL. Wish I could find the clip. They all had straight faces too except one lady who looked like she knew what was up but was being told to push the nonsense. I could tell by her almost-smirk.

Just a 6 digit rounding error, it's an honest mistake, anyone could make it in Betsy DeVoss's America.
Click to expand...
Was that discussing Bloomberg's campaign and wasn't that Liberal media as opposed to Fox? I don't like defending Fox but "you are fake news"
 
I'd like to hear from everyone who says that we should listen to and trust the medical advice from the World Health Organization.
I'd like to know why specifically they are credible.

WHO Guidelines Encourage Children Younger Than 4 be Taught “Masturbation” and “Gender Identity”
The World Health Organization’s ‘Standards for Sexuality Education in Europe: A framework for policymakers, educational and health authorities and specialists’, advises children be taught about sexually pleasuring themselves and transgenderism before they’ve even fully learned to talk.

The WHO advises that children aged 0-4 are given “information about enjoyment and pleasure when touching one’s body… masturbation.”

Toddlers are also to be encouraged to “gain an awareness of gender identity” and given “the right to explore gender identities.”
Click to expand...



WHO Backpedals Again, Deletes Tweet About No COVID Immunity
The World Health Organization is supposed to be the premiere global authority on diseases, research and information relating to public well being.

Unfortunately, we’ve learned that the agency has been misleading, and appears to have a peculiar proclivity toward disseminating false information and kowtowing to China’s authoritarian government.

The WHO, which is part of the United Nations, is now operating with its credibility diminished, and its suggestions relating to the global coronavirus pandemic are under increased scrutiny.

So it should come as little surprise that the WHO again dropped the ball on information about the COVID-19 crisis last week, when it was forced to walk back a statement on Twitter that struck a fearful tone about the virus.

Reason reported the WHO posted and deleted a tweet Saturday claiming there’s “no evidence” that people with coronavirus antibodies who have already recovered are immune from the virus.

The tweet accompanied a scientific brief published Friday on so-called “immunity passports” that weighed whether governments should allow citizens who have recovered from the coronavirus — and have antibodies — to travel and return to work.

“There is currently no evidence that people who have recovered from #COVID19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection,” the WHO’s deleted tweet, which was a pull quote from the brief, read.

The misleading tweet initiated a flurry of gloomy news reports.

“No evidence antibodies protect people from second COVID-19 infection, WHO says,” CBS News reported.

BuzzFeed News, citing the WHO, told its audience, “No Studies Have Yet Shown That You’ll Be Immune To The Coronavirus If You’ve Been Infected Before.”

NPR also seized on the information, and reported, “The World Health Organization has pushed back against the theory that individuals can only catch the coronavirus once, as well as proposals for reopening society that are based on this supposed immunity.”

Of course, there were those who called out the WHO for its misleading tweet.

Nate Silver, the statistician who founded the statistical analysis site FiveThirtyEight, was among those critical of the agency’s language.

“WHO needs to improve its communication on this. When they say ‘no evidence’ they mean something like ‘no definitive proof, yet,'” Silver wrote. “But the average person is going to read it as ‘there’s no immunity to coronavirus,’ which is likely false and not a good summation of the evidence.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top