The Coronavirus Thread

[JimC]

Vitamin D/Inlammation:

Previous observational studies have reported an association between low levels of vitamin D and susceptibility to acute respiratory tract infections. Vitamin D modulates the response of white blood cells, preventing them from releasing too many inflammatory cytokines. The COVID-19 virus is known to cause an excess of pro-inflammatory cytokines.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 131012.htm

I take a daily Vitamin D tablet, after blood tests a few years back showed that my levels were a bit low. Fuck you, virus!

[Brian Peacock]

Peacock's revenge...

Kal-li-mah!! Kal-li-mah!!

[Brian Peacock]

Since the UK won Europe on Wednesday with the largest number of absolute deaths and deaths per head of population the governments comms machine has gone all out to suggest that lockdown restrictions are going to be eased in Boris' Sunday evening press conference. Headlines last Thurday like 'Happy Monday', 'Hurrah! Lockdown freedom beckons', and 'First steps to freedom' have set the political agenda, with 'sources close to' and 'insiders' suggesting to pliant journalists that the government are eager to 'give people what they want' - this despite a YouGov poll the week before which had more than 80% of respondents saying they thought it was wrong to start loosing lockdown now and weren't sure it woule be right to do so in the next three weeks. The Treasure minister also warned on Friday that people were becoming 'addicted' to the Furlough as he announced measures to winding down that scheme through June and July - apparently keen to take out leaf out of some US governors books hew was also keen to imply that if you don't go back to work when you employer asks you to then you could loose entitlement to any welfare benefits you might have gained during the interregnum.

[Joe]

Study Finds More COVID-19 Cases Among Viewers Of Fox News Host Who Downplayed Pandemic

An April study about the effects of coronavirus media coverage analyzed two popular Fox News cable programs — and claims how one host talked about the threat of the coronavirus resulted in greater numbers of COVID-19 cases and deaths.

Researchers at the Becker Friedman Institute for Economics at University of Chicago took a deep dive into those implications in the working paper "Misinformation During a Pandemic," in which they examined the audience that watched Hannity versus Tucker Carlson Tonight.
...
The paper notes that Carlson was an outlier on Fox and, as early as Jan. 28, spent a chunk of his show discussing the dangers of a global pandemic. He continued to warn of deadly consequences.

On Feb. 25, according to the paper, Carlson warned viewers of the potential impact the outbreak could have in the U.S. "Currently, the coronavirus appears to kill about 2% of the people who have it. So let's be generous for a moment and imagine that asymptomatic carriers are not detected and the real death rate is only say half a percent — that would be one quarter of the current estimates. Even under that scenario, there would still be 27 million deaths from coronavirus globally. In this country, more than a million would die," Carlson said.

Meanwhile, Hannity downplayed coronavirus as just the flu and emphasized that Democrats were politicizing the virus to undermine Trump.

"And today, thankfully, zero people in the United States of America have died from the coronavirus. Zero. Now, let's put this in perspective. In 2017, 61,000 people in this country died from influenza, the flu. Common flu. Around 100 people die every single day from car wrecks," the paper quotes Hannity from his show on Feb. 27.

By mid-March the host changed his posture and began to broadcast CDC guidelines, according to the paper. "If you feel sick, stay at home. If your kids feel sick, don't send them to school or day care. If someone in your household has tested positive for coronavirus, please self-quarantine your entire household. Keep them at home," Hannity told his viewers.

To examine the relationship between viewership of Hannity and Tucker Carlson Tonight and their changes in behavior in response to the coronavirus — washing hands more often, practicing social distancing and cancelling travel plans — the authors surveyed 1,045 Fox News viewers aged 55 or older in early April 2020.

The paper says viewership of Hannity relative to Carlson is associated with approximately 30% more COVID-19 cases by March 14, and 21% more COVID-19 deaths by March 28.

I always knew watching Hannity would make you nuts, but kill you? That's a twist.

[JimC]

Instant karma...

[Scot Dutchy]

A 20% reduction in risk is significant when scaled across the population.

Thhe whole population does not travel on public transport. That is also the maximum possible. Nothing has been proven these all guestimates. No scientific tests can be done either as these are all home made masks. It is a total farce just keeping up the paranoia.

You were the one who mentioned the 20%. We were talking about people on buses, so that's the population we're referring to. Even so, those people get on and off the buses, probably at least two: they go places, like work, or shops, or home, so a 20% reduction in risk for people in that situation does have wider effects in public health terms.

That 20% is the maximum attainable. Masks only work if they are fresh and new and you must know how to put them on and take off otherwise they are a greater source of the virus. They are only required on public transport and only from the first of June which is really weird. So up till now everybody is being exposed to unnecessary risks, if you believe the government, because all the time public transport has been running a reduced service which has resulted in very busy trams and buses. In the trains seats are made physically unusable.
So this is not a farce? Pull the other one it has bells on it.

One thing here that no one bothers about are cyclists. With the mild pleasant weather there are thousands of cyclists on the cycle lanes. When they have to stop for a traffic lights they are all bunched up and the lanes themselves are very full but nobody is bothering about the social distance because spacing out at 1,5m would make it impossible to use the lanes.

[Brian Peacock]

A 20% reduction in risk is significant when scaled across the population.

Thhe whole population does not travel on public transport. That is also the maximum possible. Nothing has been proven these all guestimates. No scientific tests can be done either as these are all home made masks. It is a total farce just keeping up the paranoia.

You were the one who mentioned the 20%. We were talking about people on buses, so that's the population we're referring to. Even so, those people get on and off the buses, probably at least two: they go places, like work, or shops, or home, so a 20% reduction in risk for people in that situation does have wider effects in public health terms.

That 20% is the maximum attainable. Masks only work if they are fresh and new and you must know how to put them on and take off otherwise they are a greater source of the virus. They are only required on public transport and only from the first of June which is really weird. So up till now everybody is being exposed to unnecessary risks, if you believe the government, because all the time public transport has been running a reduced service which has resulted in very busy trams and buses. In the trains seats are made physically unusable.
So this is not a farce? Pull the other one it has bells on it.

One thing here that no one bothers about are cyclists. With the mild pleasant weather there are thousands of cyclists on the cycle lanes. When they have to stop for a traffic lights they are all bunched up and the lanes themselves are very full but nobody is bothering about the social distance because spacing out at 1,5m would make it impossible to use the lanes.

OK, if we say that 20% is the maximum - that's still significant when extrapolated across all public transport routes and users. The death rate in the Netherlands atm is about 1 in every 3000 people, so reducing the risk by 20% would have a positive and measurable effect.

[pErvinalia]

A 20% reduction in risk is significant when scaled across the population.

Thhe whole population does not travel on public transport. That is also the maximum possible. Nothing has been proven these all guestimates. No scientific tests can be done either as these are all home made masks. It is a total farce just keeping up the paranoia.

You were the one who mentioned the 20%. We were talking about people on buses, so that's the population we're referring to. Even so, those people get on and off the buses, probably at least two: they go places, like work, or shops, or home, so a 20% reduction in risk for people in that situation does have wider effects in public health terms.

That 20% is the maximum attainable. Masks only work if they are fresh and new and you must know how to put them on and take off otherwise they are a greater source of the virus. They are only required on public transport and only from the first of June which is really weird. So up till now everybody is being exposed to unnecessary risks, if you believe the government, because all the time public transport has been running a reduced service which has resulted in very busy trams and buses. In the trains seats are made physically unusable.
So this is not a farce? Pull the other one it has bells on it.

One thing here that no one bothers about are cyclists. With the mild pleasant weather there are thousands of cyclists on the cycle lanes. When they have to stop for a traffic lights they are all bunched up and the lanes themselves are very full but nobody is bothering about the social distance because spacing out at 1,5m would make it impossible to use the lanes.

Why do they need to social distance? I thought you said this virus was a beat up.

[NineBerry]

Shows known cases of people tested positive after returning from winter vacation in Ischgl, Austria.

Real numbers are probably a lot higher

[JimC]

The last 24 hours has shown some improvement in the US figures. Only 750 deaths (it has often been over 2000 recently) and around 20,000 new cases (it was nudging 30,000 recently)

[pErvinalia]

It goes down on the weekends as they often don't report till Monday.

[JimC]

Good point, I'll check again tomorrow...

[rainbow]

...better disinfection systems are employed (No, not by injection into the lungs!)

You know, you might have made a good point in there, but when you plug in this kind of idiocy, it makes me think you are easily led, and look to deliberately misinterpret everything Trump says, just like CNN tells people to.

It reminds me that you would have spoken out against wearing masks, as per the WHO (depending on which week you listened to them)

Where did I do this?
You are lying.

What did you mean by the bit in red?


That's the idiocy I refer to, which made me think you are easily led.

I'm not led by Trump's idiocy. You were talking about the WHO when you told your porky. I highlighted it in red for you.
...so you lied about me speaking out against masks.

[rainbow]

That 20% is the maximum attainable. Masks only work if they are fresh and new and you must know how to put them on and take off otherwise they are a greater source of the virus.

How could they possibly be a 'greater source of the virus'?

[pErvinalia]

Because they catch the 5G waves that spawn the virus.