July 7, 20205 yr 3 minutes ago, DrPhilly said: Ok. At this point we don't know where we are in regard to the burn thru. Have you taken a look at the t-cell studies? If you have a link to a good place I'd be interested. I don't have time at the moment to find a good source. Takes more time to find a source that isn't tainted with some kind of political angle than to read them usually, and I have some deadlines I'm trying to meet IRL If what I know superficially is correct, that some percentage of people have stronger ability to fight off SARS-CoV-2 because of previous dealings with similar viruses, I would think this number might be significant but it's worth noting it wouldn't scale up. That is to say, if you have a baseline of say 20% (SPOOMA, as in "ish pulled out of my a**", so not a real number) of the population that has some level of pre-existing resistance, that number is relatively fixed. It would give you a head-start though.
July 7, 20205 yr 4 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said: If you have a link to a good place I'd be interested. I don't have time at the moment to find a good source. Takes more time to find a source that isn't tainted with some kind of political angle than to read them usually, and I have some deadlines I'm trying to meet IRL If what I know superficially is correct, that some percentage of people have stronger ability to fight off SARS-CoV-2 because of previous dealings with similar viruses, I would think this number might be significant but it's worth noting it wouldn't scale up. That is to say, if you have a baseline of say 20% (SPOOMA, as in "ish pulled out of my a**", so not a real number) of the population that has some level of pre-existing resistance, that number is relatively fixed. It would give you a head-start though. I’ll see if I can find one in English. The studies I read theorized that people developed the t-cells in question as a result of having a milder bout with COVID. They found for example that it was quite common for those family members who had more serious situations with COVID to generate antibodies while others under the same roof who had less serious battles only generated the t-cells. Note: the tests were only run on people who had previously tested positive to COVID.
July 7, 20205 yr 12 hours ago, Jsvand12 said: You are going to need to use smaller words if you want to have a chance of getting your point across to him. I was reading 1100+ page novels by seven. Go clean that mess off of your chin.
July 7, 20205 yr Just now, lynched1 said: I was reading 1100+ page novels by seven. Go clean that mess off of your chin. Which ones?
July 7, 20205 yr 2 hours ago, DrPhilly said: Mostly agree with you here though I tend to believe we are much further along than we all think. One thing that I think we can be more clear about is the fact that we can absolutely get to herd immunity. If we did absoltuely nothing we'd get there. At a terrible cost of course but we would get there. That's the natural order of things. What I interpret you saying is "herd immunity is not achievable thru any reasonable strategy" which is a quite different thing altogether, very relevant mind you. We would need to actively try to spread the virus in order to reach herd immunity without a vaccine. For starters, it's very possible that antibody protection only lasts for a year. Which means that for herd immunity to even have any benefit, you'd need to reach it within a year. It's believed that we'd need 70% of the population to become infected for herd immunity to be reached. Let's take the US as an example. We have a population of 330 million. So we'd need 230 million people to become infected within a year to reach herd immunity. This comes out to needing 630,000 new cases per day. You'd need to have daily COVID parties around the country to even come close to reaching that number. Not to mention that in doing so, you'd absolutely overrun the healthcare system.
July 7, 20205 yr 5 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said: We would need to actively try to spread the virus in order to reach herd immunity without a vaccine. For starters, it's very possible that antibody protection only lasts for a year. Which means that for herd immunity to even have any benefit, you'd need to reach it within a year. It's believed that we'd need 70% of the population to become infected for herd immunity to be reached. Let's take the US as an example. We have a population of 330 million. So we'd need 230 million people to become infected within a year to reach herd immunity. This comes out to needing 630,000 new cases per day. You'd need to have daily COVID parties around the country to even come close to reaching that number. Not to mention that in doing so, you'd absolutely overrun the healthcare system. Agree, we just don't know. I'm not so sure about the need to spread it the way you're describing though. The latest thoughts over here is that it spreads faster than we thought but is less deadly.
July 7, 20205 yr 8 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said: We would need to actively try to spread the virus in order to reach herd immunity without a vaccine. For starters, it's very possible that antibody protection only lasts for a year. Which means that for herd immunity to even have any benefit, you'd need to reach it within a year. It's believed that we'd need 70% of the population to become infected for herd immunity to be reached. Let's take the US as an example. We have a population of 330 million. So we'd need 230 million people to become infected within a year to reach herd immunity. This comes out to needing 630,000 new cases per day. You'd need to have daily COVID parties around the country to even come close to reaching that number. Not to mention that in doing so, you'd absolutely overrun the healthcare system. Just catching up reading the last page or so. You don't think it's possible we may be further along? I was sort of hoping that with regards to the theory of T cells which many have tested for could mean many more folks have had this virus.
July 7, 20205 yr You are also using 70% but I've seen many studies point to lower numbers and 60% is a very common number thrown out there.
July 7, 20205 yr The herd percentage really depends on what the R0 number ends up being at. The lowest-end estimates are between 2.0-2.5, which would put the herd immunity around 60%. I've been using 60% because that's the most generous number I can use when discussing herd immunity. If the actual R0 is 3.0 though, then we're at 67% for herd immunity.
July 7, 20205 yr 1 hour ago, DEagle7 said: Bolsonaro tested positive. That's exactly what he looked like I always thought it was just a funny thing in those movies but damn people really are like that lol
July 7, 20205 yr Guy was identified and fired from his job in like less than 12 hours. Wear a mask, dont be a psycho.
July 7, 20205 yr Just now, Mike030270 said: Wtf happened to Florida over the years? The state is a meme now lol Now? We've been meme'ing since bath salts and eating peoples faces off.
July 7, 20205 yr The woman who who a tantrum at a Starbucks barista wants half the $100K gofundme money and wants to sue gofundme as well https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8488515/Woman-screamed-barista-face-mask-feud-wants-half-100K-tip.html I think she's just pissed he got $100k off her tantrum
July 7, 20205 yr Devos and Trump both saying today that schools must reopen fully in the fall. I just don't get these broad arbitrary decrees that have no consideration behind them. It's like when the colleges said a few weeks ago that their students would all return for fall classes. They're just saying things to say them. Wouldn't it make more sense to say something like "we are working towards fully reopening schools in the fall, that is the goal." ? Saying they MUST is just stupid and incendiary for no good reason. Then they make up this thing that its political and people want schools to be closed for political reasons. Who the F wants that? In reality they are the ones politicizing it with the "must" statements so they can say anyone who disagrees apparently doesn't want kids in school for political reasons. Fall is going to be a train wreck.
July 7, 20205 yr 23 minutes ago, Mike030270 said: The woman who who a tantrum at a Starbucks barista wants half the $100K gofundme money and wants to sue gofundme as well https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8488515/Woman-screamed-barista-face-mask-feud-wants-half-100K-tip.html I think she's just pissed he got $100k off her tantrum We are finally seeing how many crazy people are in the US and still blows my mind with each new news story
July 7, 20205 yr 7 minutes ago, BirdsFanBill said: Devos and Trump both saying today that schools must reopen fully in the fall. I just don't get these broad arbitrary decrees that have no consideration behind them. It's like when the colleges said a few weeks ago that their students would all return for fall classes. They're just saying things to say them. Wouldn't it make more sense to say something like "we are working towards fully reopening schools in the fall, that is the goal." ? Saying they MUST is just stupid and incendiary for no good reason. Then they make up this thing that its political and people want schools to be closed for political reasons. Who the F wants that? In reality they are the ones politicizing it with the "must" statements so they can say anyone who disagrees apparently doesn't want kids in school for political reasons. Fall is going to be a train wreck. When I saw Trump's tweet last night "SCHOOLS MUST OPEN IN THE FALL", I thought, well a serious person would say, "Schools must open in the fall and here's my plan to make that happen safely for students, teachers, and family.' But Trump isn't a serious person. So he just screams about the way things should be, and the smarter of us say, "Okay...and?" and the dumber of us say, "MMhm, that's right, Mr. Trump. Well, uhh, see ya later." As you said - arbitrary decrees, no consideration behind them, vocalized in way to drive a wedge between American voters, but not in a way that indicates an actual plan.
July 7, 20205 yr 10 minutes ago, DaEagles4Life said: We are finally seeing how many crazy people are in the US and still blows my mind with each new news story Yup. Guess I've been living under a rock all this time
July 7, 20205 yr 1 minute ago, Lloyd said: When I saw Trump's tweet last night "SCHOOLS MUST OPEN IN THE FALL", I thought, well a serious person would say, "Schools must open in the fall and here's my plan to make that happen safely for students, teachers, and family.' But Trump isn't a serious person. So he just screams about the way things should be, and the smarter of us say, "Okay...and?" and the dumber of us say, "MMhm, that's right, Mr. Trump. Well, uhh, see ya later." As you said - arbitrary decrees, no consideration behind them, vocalized in way to drive a wedge between American voters, but not in a way that indicates an actual plan. It's like a 13 year old spoiled child became king or something. Its so weird.
July 7, 20205 yr 9 minutes ago, Lloyd said: When I saw Trump's tweet last night "SCHOOLS MUST OPEN IN THE FALL", I thought, well a serious person would say, "Schools must open in the fall and here's my plan to make that happen safely for students, teachers, and family.' But Trump isn't a serious person. So he just screams about the way things should be, and the smarter of us say, "Okay...and?" and the dumber of us say, "MMhm, that's right, Mr. Trump. Well, uhh, see ya later." As you said - arbitrary decrees, no consideration behind them, vocalized in way to drive a wedge between American voters, but not in a way that indicates an actual plan. That's his whole appeal though. He's a talk radio caller and the rest of the talk radio callers like how he's just like them. They complain, offer no realistic solutions and have their feelings reinforced by emotional support "news" all day long.
July 7, 20205 yr 21 minutes ago, BirdsFanBill said: Devos and Trump both saying today that schools must reopen fully in the fall. I just don't get these broad arbitrary decrees that have no consideration behind them. It's like when the colleges said a few weeks ago that their students would all return for fall classes. They're just saying things to say them. Wouldn't it make more sense to say something like "we are working towards fully reopening schools in the fall, that is the goal." ? Saying they MUST is just stupid and incendiary for no good reason. Then they make up this thing that its political and people want schools to be closed for political reasons. Who the F wants that? In reality they are the ones politicizing it with the "must" statements so they can say anyone who disagrees apparently doesn't want kids in school for political reasons. Fall is going to be a train wreck. It's going to be interesting, that's for sure. Miami Superintendent already pushed back and said they will not reopen unless things improve. Then you have to see what all the other organizations like the Teachers Union do. It's going to be a train wreck for sure.
July 7, 20205 yr 4 hours ago, Paul852 said: Which ones? One that sticks out I believe was called Centennial. Read that in 3 days. I wouldn't call most of what I read at the time to be memorable. Whatever the grandparents had in the bookcase. Really got into reading though. That one stuck out because I had sprained my ankle jumping my bicycle that weekend. Grounded.
July 7, 20205 yr 55 minutes ago, DaEagles4Life said: We are finally seeing how many crazy people are in the US and still blows my mind with each new news story Finally?
July 7, 20205 yr 2 minutes ago, lynched1 said: One that sticks out I believe was called Centennial. Read that in 3 days. I wouldn't call most of what I read at the time to be memorable. Whatever the grandparents had in the bookcase. Really got into reading though. That one stuck out because I had sprained my ankle jumping my bicycle that weekend. Grounded. You were grounded for spraining your ankle?
Create an account or sign in to comment