Coronavirus outbreak

[Timbermen]

2 hours ago, samurai said:

CNN is very different now than it used to be back in the 80s.  I very much agree that CNN has become a Fox like echo chamber for a certain audience.  All the cable networks have done very well during the pandemic catering to their echo chamber.   You can just see that by how many people on this topic paste CNN (good) and Fox (bad) video.  CNN is clearly more interested in making money than being objective and balanced. Ted Turner didn't start CNN with the sole purpose of making money.  It is disappointing. They are the anti-Trump network and it is profitable for them.

 

People talk as if a second wave is a foregone conclusion.  But exactly what constitutes a second wave.  The media reported night club clusters in Korea as a second wave.  The premise is based on the lax of social distancing and fall and winter weather.  Interestingly, an argument in favor of lock down was that weather had nothing to do with virus spread because it was just that lethal.

 

 

Also their report claims to know exactly how many people have built up pathogens to it, i didn't know they tested for that. I don't think any one did. Did they test our entire population for pathogens when they can't even test everyone for Covid 19.  All i know is people just claim that anything is a conspiracy theory if it doesn't fit inside their box.  

[JM_]

4 minutes ago, Timbermen said:

Also their report claims to know exactly how many people have built up pathogens to it, i didn't know they tested for that. I don't think any one did. Did they test our entire population for pathogens when they can't even test everyone for Covid 19.  All i know is people just claim that anything is a conspiracy theory if it doesn't fit inside their box.  

you can get an excellent estimate of how many people have been exposed by serology random sampling.

 

BC is going to start doing that soon to find out how many people were exposed here. You can volunteer for it (I did) on the BC CDC site if you fill out their survey. 

 

The option to volunteer for the serology testing and also for a phone tracking system is a the end of the survey which is open until the end of the month. 

 

http://www.bccdc.ca/health-info/diseases-conditions/covid-19/covid-19-survey

[Chicken.]

1 hour ago, stawns said:

I really don't get why people are still holding Sweden up as an alternative approach.  It clearly isn't working.

Because.... we want Petey to stay safe    

[nuckin_futz]

I see there is some debate about Sweden's approach. Saw this research note a few days ago. Figured some of you may find it interesting.

 

Merrill Lynch is downbeat on consumer recovery from the virus - spending will likely remain highly impaired

Wed 20 May 2020 03:33:00 GMT

 

A note from Merrill Lynch comparing Denmark and Sweden which points to a significant implication according to the analysts.

Denmark and Sweden

• the two countries diverged significantly in terms of health care outcomes
• Denmark had 95 deaths per million people
• Sweden had 363 per million (among the highest COVID-19 mortality rates in the world)
• difference points to a large healthcare benefit from lockdown policies

What about the economic costs?

• consumer spending dropped by 25% in Sweden
• by 29% in Denmark
• The 4pp difference between the two declines quantifies the cost of lockdown policies
• 4% of consumer spending is not trivial, it is a small share of the total decrease in consumer spending
• Therefore the data indicate that most of the slowdown occurred due to voluntary social distancing rather than lockdown policies.

If the paper's results are applicable to other countries … implications:

• Even as restrictions are lifted, consumer spending will likely remain highly impaired, with services getting hit the hardest
• In summary, the economic downturn has been primarily because of the virus, not the policy response.

---

'Services hit the hardest' is what we are seeing in the data for Asian countries that are ahead of the curve on recovery. 

[Wilbur]

5 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

I see there is some debate about Sweden's approach. Saw this research note a few days ago. Figured some of you may find it interesting.

 

Merrill Lynch is downbeat on consumer recovery from the virus - spending will likely remain highly impaired

Wed 20 May 2020 03:33:00 GMT

 

A note from Merrill Lynch comparing Denmark and Sweden which points to a significant implication according to the analysts.

Denmark and Sweden

• the two countries diverged significantly in terms of health care outcomes
• Denmark had 95 deaths per million people
• Sweden had 363 per million (among the highest COVID-19 mortality rates in the world)
• difference points to a large healthcare benefit from lockdown policies

What about the economic costs?

• consumer spending dropped by 25% in Sweden
• by 29% in Denmark
• The 4pp difference between the two declines quantifies the cost of lockdown policies
• 4% of consumer spending is not trivial, it is a small share of the total decrease in consumer spending
• Therefore the data indicate that most of the slowdown occurred due to voluntary social distancing rather than lockdown policies.

If the paper's results are applicable to other countries … implications:

• Even as restrictions are lifted, consumer spending will likely remain highly impaired, with services getting hit the hardest
• In summary, the economic downturn has been primarily because of the virus, not the policy response.

---

'Services hit the hardest' is what we are seeing in the data for Asian countries that are ahead of the curve on recovery. 

Makes sense.

 

I can only speak for my family, but I don't see us visiting restaurants like we used to.  Not to say we never will but it will be way less.  We're going to continue to be deliberate about shopping too, no unnecessary trips.  It's not out of fear, it's partly about minimizing risk but mainly about we've seen the benefits in things like improved meal planning habits, the savings in having fun close to home, etc.

[bishopshodan]

32 minutes ago, Ronaldoescobar said:

Isn’t he just mentally ill? Absolutely disgusting and he needs to pay a price imo but thats a quick jump to terrorism charges.

Terrorism?!?!!

 

It's crazy.

I remember when we were all learning about HIV. Eventually people were getting charged for knowingly spreading that disease. I have been thinking about that with covid....say, someone is having an affair with a person that has covid and they know it, brings it home and someone dies from the exposure. Is that criminal? can charges be made? I think maybe something...

 

BUT, to bump it up to terrorism? what the hell? Absolute madness. So, how many individuals are now considered to be carrying biological weapons? Can be locked up for life because they cough? 

I would understand assault with a deadly weapon? maaybe? but terrorism...man, that's a quick slide to a police state.

 

 

[wloutet]

3 hours ago, Me_ said:

CNN is very different now than it used to be back in the 80s.  I very much agree that CNN has become a Fox like echo chamber for a certain audience.  All the cable networks have done very well during the pandemic catering to their echo chamber.   You can just see that by how many people on this topic paste CNN (good) and Fox (bad) video.

I jump back and forth between Canadian News, CNN, MSNBC, and Fox (to see how the other side perceives it). What I was thinking is that a news show that offered a debate on important issues would be neat. One person, or a group, from one side debating logically, one person, or a group, from the other side. If it became popular at least each side would see what the other side has to offer. Or would it just disintegrate into the sides yelling, "You're Fake News", no, "You're Fake News".

[nuckin_futz]

8 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

Terrorism?!?!!

 

It's crazy.

I remember when we were all learning about HIV. Eventually people were getting charged for knowingly spreading that disease. I have been thinking about that with covid....say, someone is having an affair with a person that has covid and they know it, brings it home and someone dies from the exposure. Is that criminal? can charges be made? I think maybe something...

 

BUT, to bump it up to terrorism? what the hell? Absolute madness. So, how many individuals are now considered to be carrying biological weapons? Can be locked up for life because they cough? 

I would understand assault with a deadly weapon? maaybe? but terrorism...man, that's a quick slide to a police state.

 

 

A CFL player was charged with knowingly spreading HIV in 2005. .......

 

Trevis Smith (born September 8, 1976) is a former football linebacker who played seven years with the Saskatchewan Roughriders of the Canadian Football League. Born in Montgomery, Alabama, Smith was formerly a linebacker for the University of Alabama.

 

On October 28, 2005, he was charged with aggravated sexual assault in Surrey, BC for knowingly exposing women to the HIV virus by having unprotected sex with them and not revealing his condition. Constable Marc Searle of the RCMP named a complainant called simply "A. O." who claimed that Smith had assaulted her between November 26, 2003, and May 18, 2005. After appearing in court in Surrey, he was freed on a C$10,000 bail after pleading "not guilty". On November 18, Smith was charged with the same offence in Regina, Saskatchewan after another woman came forward alleging that Smith did not tell her that he was HIV positive before they had unprotected sex.^[1]

 

Smith was found guilty of two counts of aggravated sexual assault—one for each woman—and bail violations on February 8, 2007 and sentenced to 5½ years in jail on February 26, 2007; he unsuccessfully appealed the conviction.^[2]

 

He was released from prison on February 25, 2009 and was deported to the United States.^[3] On August 18, 2012, it was reported that Smith was dismissed from his position as a high school football coach in Birmingham, Alabama, after the George Washington Carver High School learned of his conviction for aggravated sexual assault.

 

*******************

 

How did his employer not perform a background check?

 

The terrorism charge in the other story is probably for interfering with law enforcement.

Edited May 22, 2020 by nuckin_futz

[bishopshodan]

1 minute ago, nuckin_futz said:

The terrorism charge in the other story is probably for interfering with law enforcement.

Interfering with law enforcement can mean a lot of things.

 

Worked nightclubs for 15 years. I saw a few dummies take swings at cops. I never would have thought I was witnessing a terrorist attack. 

 

I guess the meaning is becoming subjective but the designation of that charge holds far worse sentences than assaulting an officer.  

[nuckin_futz]

2 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

Interfering with law enforcement can mean a lot of things.

 

Worked nightclubs for 15 years. I saw a few dummies take swings at cops. I never would have thought I was witnessing a terrorist attack. 

 

I guess the meaning is becoming subjective but the designation of that charge holds far worse sentences than assaulting an officer.  

Taking a swing at someone isn't going to potentially turn their lungs to cement. That cop now is probably going to have to quarantine himself away from his job and family for 2 weeks.

 

My guess is the charge is so severe to deter others from the same behavior.

[Sharpshooter]

2 hours ago, aGENT said:

I've been reading good things about vitamin D 

Some people really can’t handle all that D. 

[bishopshodan]

1 minute ago, nuckin_futz said:

Taking a swing at someone isn't going to potentially turn their lungs to cement. That cop now is probably going to have to quarantine himself away from his job and family for 2 weeks.

 

My guess is the charge is so severe to deter others from the same behavior.

I get that, what was the HIV charges in the case you posted?...'aggravated sexual assault'

 

The severe charge to deter is what I am calling a slippery slope.

 

Do you think it fits the term 'terrorism'?

[stawns]

41 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

I see there is some debate about Sweden's approach. Saw this research note a few days ago. Figured some of you may find it interesting.

 

Merrill Lynch is downbeat on consumer recovery from the virus - spending will likely remain highly impaired

Wed 20 May 2020 03:33:00 GMT

 

A note from Merrill Lynch comparing Denmark and Sweden which points to a significant implication according to the analysts.

Denmark and Sweden

• the two countries diverged significantly in terms of health care outcomes
• Denmark had 95 deaths per million people
• Sweden had 363 per million (among the highest COVID-19 mortality rates in the world)
• difference points to a large healthcare benefit from lockdown policies

What about the economic costs?

• consumer spending dropped by 25% in Sweden
• by 29% in Denmark
• The 4pp difference between the two declines quantifies the cost of lockdown policies
• 4% of consumer spending is not trivial, it is a small share of the total decrease in consumer spending
• Therefore the data indicate that most of the slowdown occurred due to voluntary social distancing rather than lockdown policies.

If the paper's results are applicable to other countries … implications:

• Even as restrictions are lifted, consumer spending will likely remain highly impaired, with services getting hit the hardest
• In summary, the economic downturn has been primarily because of the virus, not the policy response.

---

'Services hit the hardest' is what we are seeing in the data for Asian countries that are ahead of the curve on recovery. 

I believe they are seeing similar scenarios in states like Georgia, Florida etc that opened up early........people are simply staying home for the most part.

[bishopshodan]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

I believe they are seeing similar scenarios in states like Georgia, Florida etc that opened up early........people are simply staying home for the most part.

I saw a stat the other day that said something like 34% of Canadians plan to wait for a vaccine before they start doing regular social things like going to restaurants. Thats a long time to wait and will be quite the ongoing hit the the economy.

[stawns]

4 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

I saw a stat the other day that said something like 34% of Canadians plan to wait for a vaccine before they start doing regular social things like going to restaurants. Thats a long time to wait and will be quite the ongoing hit the the economy.

I won't be going shopping and I won't be doing takeout from any restaurant that has dine in service

[Fan since 82]

38 minutes ago, wloutet said:

I jump back and forth between Canadian News, CNN, MSNBC, and Fox (to see how the other side perceives it). What I was thinking is that a news show that offered a debate on important issues would be neat. One person, or a group, from one side debating logically, one person, or a group, from the other side. If it became popular at least each side would see what the other side has to offer. Or would it just disintegrate into the sides yelling, "You're Fake News", no, "You're Fake News".

I think that's a great idea, but you would need an extremely strong moderator or it would turn into a Geraldo Rivera type of sensationalist show. It would be good for those truly seeking to here both sides but in a way where they each hold each other accountable.

[Ronaldoescobar]

27 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

Taking a swing at someone isn't going to potentially turn their lungs to cement. That cop now is probably going to have to quarantine himself away from his job and family for 2 weeks.

 

My guess is the charge is so severe to deter others from the same behavior.

This would be my guess as well, it just raises some questions when we can see a person that shoots up dozens of people get charged with murder or less, as opposed to terrorism because mental illness plays/ may play a factor.
 

Edited May 22, 2020 by Ronaldoescobar

[Me_]

44 minutes ago, wloutet said:

I jump back and forth between Canadian News, CNN, MSNBC, and Fox (to see how the other side perceives it). What I was thinking is that a news show that offered a debate on important issues would be neat. One person, or a group, from one side debating logically, one person, or a group, from the other side. If it became popular at least each side would see what the other side has to offer. Or would it just disintegrate into the sides yelling, "You're Fake News", no, "You're Fake News".

Sure.

 

But the quote you quoted isn’t from me. It’s from samurai. And I ain’t samurai in any way shape, form, thought, aura, energy, existence or idea.

 

None at all.

 

I think your idea is a very healthy one for society.

 

Edited May 22, 2020 by Me_

[stawns]

Just now, Fan since 82 said:

I think that's a great idea, but you would need an extremely strong moderator or it would turn into a Geraldo Rivera type of sensationalist show. It would be good for those truly seeking to here both sides but in a way where they each hold each other accountable.

If it results in another chair to the face of GR, I'm all in 

[Wilbur]

1 minute ago, Fan since 82 said:

I think that's a great idea, but you would need an extremely strong moderator or it would turn into a Geraldo Rivera type of sensationalist show. It would be good for those truly seeking to here both sides but in a way where they each hold each other accountable.

If you had an established debate format it wouldn't be hard to do.  CBC Radio's Ideas Podcast releases the Monk Debates every year and those are good.  They have view points from both sides spectrum yet remain civil.