Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - cherrypoptart

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 22
General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: May 30, 2020, 09:22:56 PM »

"The other big lesson from Japan is that masks work. Face coverings have been universal there for months, in large part because “Japanese people [already] feel comfortable wearing masks on a daily basis,” as Shigeru Omi, vice chairman of the Japanese government’s expert coronavirus panel, recently explained. “Many people are allergic to pollen, so they do this during the cedar pollen season from the beginning of the year until spring, as well as to protect against influenza.” As evidence of the efficacy of masks, Japan did not trace any clusters to its notoriously crowded commuter trains, where riders are usually alone and not talking, their mouths and noses fully covered."

"As of Friday, the country of 126 million people — more than a quarter of whom are over 65 — had reported just 16,673 cases and 886 deaths."

If we had been wearing masks from the beginning our death toll if it followed their trend might only be less than 3000 souls. They have crowded trains full of people and they didn't find clusters most certainly because almost everyone was wearing masks and not talking much. So simple. So obvious. And yet we still won't do it.

The other thread about the great unmasking is taking on a new meaning as more and more people decide to throw off their masks and throw all caution and common sense, along with the virus, to the winds.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: May 29, 2020, 04:22:17 PM »
The masks don't do much to stop the airflow. That's not their purpose. They help stop the water droplets the virus rides on.

It's easy enough to demonstrate too. You have someone shouting in your face with their spittle flying all over the place including into your eyes and your mouth if you open it to talk back and up your nose as you inhale and then you get that experience for a minute or so and compare it to how much of that spittle you're getting on and in you when you take out a hanky and cover their mouth with it.

There was the study quoted that the cloth mask only restrict 2% of airflow. But the question is how much do they restrict expelled droplets?

I'd be curious about something else too. If you had an infected person just sitting quietly in a room with their mouth closed at all times how much viral load would you measure in the air and on surfaces compared to if the same person were shouting, singing, laughing, and talking loudly? I don't know but it seems like it would be easy enough to measure and if it's significantly less with a quiet person breathing only through their nose than perhaps we could ask people who refuse to wear masks to at least keep your mouth shut, literally.

As for the idea about only wearing a mask if you are feeling sick well that ship sailed a long time ago. We have over a hundred thousand dead now and almost all of them got infected by someone who wasn't feeling sick, pretty much the only exceptions to that being medical personnel and close family members taking care of the ill.

Having maybe had this I think I experienced why this virus is so different. My only symptoms were very severe chest pain and trouble breathing like an asthma attack. No fever. No coughing. No aches or other pains. No headache. No reason to think I even had anything contagious until this virus came along and we learned more about it. And most people don't experience even that much. That's what makes this one so different and why we need to treat it differently.

General Comments / Re: The Great Unmasking
« on: May 22, 2020, 11:54:25 AM »


"So, you are saying Flynn was tortured, right?"

Was he subjected to severe emotional pain?

General Comments / Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« on: May 22, 2020, 09:28:37 AM »
Didn't Joe Biden engage in plagiarism?

"During an event at the Iowa State Fair, Biden mimicked entire portions of Kinnock's speech from earlier in the year. At one moment, Biden repeated the line that he was the first "in a thousand generations" to graduate from college, gesturing to his wife in the exact same way Kinnock did, while also saying the same line about her education and lineage.

Biden would later acknowledge that he in fact did have relatives who attended college, directly contrasting the Kinnock lines."

I don't know about Tara's possible background of deception but let's just say it's true. Biden also has a background of deception. So if you have two proven liars then who do you believe? Why assume she is lying about the accusation any more than he is lying about the denial if they are both liars? It seems like it would cancel out and you're back to he said / she said.

General Comments / Re: The Great Unmasking
« on: May 22, 2020, 08:54:47 AM »

1. For the purposes of this Convention, the term "torture" means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.


Threatening someone like Brian Banks with a 41 years to life prison sentence if he doesn't take a plea deal for rape and take five years instead seems like it would qualify as inflicting severe mental suffering.

Flynn lost his house and whether he's innocent or guilty he's not getting that back. Causing someone to lose their house to pay their lawyers seems like inflicting severe emotional pain. And threatening their children too.

Going back to Brian Banks, you have to wonder what if...? So what if he didn't take the plea deal? His accuser cries in court and points the finger at him and he gets a life sentence. He never gets out to record her private phone conversation admitting her crime. He never gets exonerated. He's still in prison right now and everyone thinks he is a rapist. If he wasn't why would he have admitted to being one?

General Comments / Re: The Great Unmasking
« on: May 22, 2020, 07:45:05 AM »
Just some interesting reading about the plea bargain process.

I think we talked about this before, the idea that under certain definitions of torture the plea bargain process might actually fit.

I'm not saying I'm against the plea bargain process necessarily but it all comes down to the details. If it's used to get a guilty person to confess and save the tax payers some money then it has a place but separating that out from coercing the innocent to confess to crimes they didn't commit is the rub.

General Comments / Re: Defending one's home in North Carolina
« on: May 15, 2020, 07:48:55 PM »
Would anything be different if the girl had been in there getting raped and murdered at the time and they saved her?

Sure you can call the police but they may be too late. Without probable cause they may not get in at all.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: May 13, 2020, 02:50:18 PM »
If the virus is coming in through the eyes then without eye protection the only protection you have left is the other person wearing their mask. I see very few people wearing eye protection. As far as I know it hasn't been widely recommended. Yes it would be beneficial and if some people are doing that they should be safer but if wearing masks including even do-it-yourself ones is a burden or too much to ask then asking everyone to wear eye protection that would stop the virus seems like it's just not going to happen.

General Comments / Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« on: May 13, 2020, 01:28:20 PM »
Both the Democrats and the Republicans in Congress dropped the ball. I can't think of anyone who was sounding the alarm. As for the information available, all that was necessary was the information we could see in the news coming out of China. This was obviously going to be a monster and everyone in charge with their pollyannic optimism was just as obviously completely delusional at best. Maybe if there hadn't been an impeachment they would have all acted the same way too, heads in the sand with their hands over their ears screaming lalalalala. I don't know. The impeachment certainly didn't help any though.

General Comments / Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« on: May 13, 2020, 01:10:07 PM »
It's obvious in retrospect that Trump didn't take the virus seriously enough. The impeachment proceedings didn't just distract Trump though. They also distracted the Democrats. Of course the Democrats didn't take the virus seriously enough either. I can't help but wonder though if they had been focused on the virus instead of on impeachment maybe somebody would have noticed this one was different. Everyone dropped the ball. They were playing a different game instead.

General Comments / Re: Defending one's home in North Carolina
« on: May 13, 2020, 09:10:06 AM »
Since it turns out the vigilantes were incorrect about these people having any involvement in the missing girl then yes they would be within their rights to defend themselves in their home using lethal force.

But what if the vigilantes had been correct and the girl was there being held against her will and used as a sex slave? Would that make a difference? What if a similar group had done the same thing to Ariel Castro because they suspected he had a missing girl held captive at his house? Would Ariel Castro have been within his rights to shoot them to protect his three sex slaves from being rescued? If that had happened and a bunch of vigilantes went in and rescued those girls without probable cause and without a valid search warrant or law enforcement involvement would it have been illegal to prosecute Castro?

Jeffrey Dahmer also had the police called on him. One of his victims, a 14 year old boy, actually got out and Dahmer talked the police into thinking it was just a lovers' quarrel and got the victim back and murdered him immediately afterwards. If neighbors had formed a vigilante group to investigate him themselves would that have been illegal? Would Dahmer have been within his rights to shoot them dead? I guess the point is there are times when doing things strictly by the law gets innocent children killed and worse. However, this was not one of those times.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: May 12, 2020, 06:21:37 PM »
Maybe a compromise could be that masks are required in grocery stores where people need to go but are optional in other places like movie theaters, restaurants, bars, concerts, and churches. So if people want to go out there maskless and infect everyone to help usher in herd immunity that's their call but they'll only be infecting other volunteers while those who would rather take a pass for a while are afforded that option.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: May 12, 2020, 06:16:18 PM »
The problem with saying to wear a mask if you want to is that defeats the purpose. It's like telling someone if you don't want to get hit by a stray bullet from celebratory gunfire shot up into the air a mile away then don't fire your gun into the air. If others aren't wearing masks then my mask isn't going to help me any. In fact everyone could be wearing masks except one person and if that one person is the spreader then they are all imperiled. Just crystalizing the obvious point of contention here and why people are getting so upset at others not wearing masks.

They still have conditions on who qualifies to get tested. If they have so much extra testing capacity and are closing sites due to limited demand they should consider opening the testing up to anyone who wants one and then also let them be tested anonymously. I mean they are in a car so you could run the plates to find out who they are but these are extra tests on people who now don't qualify to be tested at all so if any of them happen to pop positive that is just bonus information. Why anonymously? That may be the only way some people will want to do it. At least you'll now there is a case and you can give them a handout on voluntary quarantining and mask wearing. But this would be someone who was just walking around maybe spreading it anyway so at least they'll know and hopefully will do the right thing.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: May 12, 2020, 02:36:38 AM »
I tried to read that article but it quickly went into the weeds. It was difficult to understand.

I found this article pretty balanced if much less scientific.

I would put it this way. If someone knows they are sick and contagious and they are going somewhere like an emergency room would they be less likely to spread this virus if they have a mask on or if they don't?

In the church choir group where so many people got infected and they insist they were careful not to touch things, would as many have gotten infected if they had all been wearing masks compared to how many that got infected without any of them wearing masks? Of course it would have been harder to sing but common sense says that fewer would have gotten infected and almost certainly it couldn't have made things any worse. Now sometimes common sense can be wrong, but would more people have gotten infected if the infected person or persons had been wearing masks while they sang? It's hard to imagine how that would be possible. The mechanism by which wearing masks reduces the chances of infecting others is pretty clear. The mechanism by which a mask would increase infections over not wearing a mask requires some contortions especially to demonstrate how the mask would be more dangerous than no mask, for instance the virus would land on the mask and then you'd touch it as opposed to the virus would just land right on your face and you'd touch that or worse yet the virus would ride a droplet right up your nose or into your mouth and straight on down to your lungs.

Of course the masks aren't foolproof. The Chinese doctor who sounded the alarm and later died was convinced he contracted the virus through his eyes. And if it can get in through the eyes can it also escape from the eyes? Could you give someone the virus just by looking at them, like an invisible laser vision attack? And of course the mask has to be worn with some measure of simple common sense, and not like this:

Okay but seriously now, this virus is still largely an unknown quantity. It's far better to err on the side of caution at this point until we learn more. And speaking of learning more, the more we learn the more freaky this virus seems.

General Comments / Re: The Shampeachement Follies
« on: May 10, 2020, 10:05:52 AM »
Of course it's impossible to say what might be different regarding the coronavirus response if the Democrats hadn't gone ahead with the distraction of their shampeachment but it is certain that it was a major distraction at a critical time when the country could least afford it. And of course it didn't just distract Trump either. Maybe some of the Democrats would have had their eye on the ball and raised the alarm about the virus pandemic looming just over our collective shoulders but unfortunately they too were otherwise occupied on matters that were far less pressing. The point is that whole farce was a lot of time, money, energy, and attention spent on something that was a complete waste of all of it when there were far more important matters needing those resources.

Pelosi waving her little impeachment articles now looks a lot like Nero fiddling.

General Comments / Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« on: May 09, 2020, 11:12:33 PM »
Let's not forget that we aren't just voting for a President. This is also the only chance to vote for who gets on the Supreme Court.  We see that party does matter by the number of 5-4 decisions the Supreme Court makes along party lines regardless of the dream of John Roberts that there aren't conservatives and liberals on the Court, just Justices. We have a very good record now for both parties regarding the Supreme Court.

General Comments / Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« on: May 01, 2020, 01:31:46 AM »
That's true that there aren't other accusers with Biden. Maybe he only did it the one time.

Of course maybe he didn't do it at all. Even by her own reports though she doesn't mention that she ever told him no or stop unless I missed it. If it happened maybe he thought it was consensual and then when he found out not quite he took that to heart and never did it again confining himself to shampoo brand guessing and the Japanese style after haircut shoulder rubs.

General Comments / Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« on: May 01, 2020, 12:08:52 AM »

"Bill Cosby might disagree about late complaints going nowhere."

And Weinstein. Both in prison for allegations that came decades after the alleged incidents. I didn't keep up with the whole stories but I think in both cases too women who said they raped him ended up being together with them again voluntarily later, in Weinstein's case voluntarily having sex with him and I think in Cosby's case at least being on friendly terms with him. I could be mistaken about that but the point is that even if women don't say anything at the time, even if they seem to be okay with it for years afterward, that doesn't mean that the man can't be convicted of rape and sent to prison decades later anyway. That plays into Reade's situation the same way it did for the Weinstein and Cosby cases, in her favor by the precedents set.

"Better if he had said he was indulging in persiflage."

Good word. Perhaps another concern is that he apparently doesn't understand the meaning of the word sarcasm.

General Comments / Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« on: April 28, 2020, 03:35:57 AM »

What was interesting to me was that the witness to hearing her story at the time both believes her friend and yet still supports Joe Biden. I reckon there will be a lot more of that than Democrats want to admit. People who believe he is guilty and will support and vote for him anyway. That's gotta hurt.

"LaCasse told Insider she’s a Democrat and plans to vote for Biden despite Reade’s allegation. Still, she felt compelled to stick up for her friend, who has faced a wave of criticism and death threats since accusing Biden of assault.

“I have to support her just because that’s what happened,” LaCasse said. “We need to stand up and tell the truth.”

General Comments / Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« on: April 27, 2020, 12:25:51 PM »
Well as far as I remember nobody even testified that they ever saw the two of them together in the same room. Maybe that was just a talking point though.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: April 27, 2020, 12:22:35 PM »
If everyone is wearing a mask then there won't be much virus floating around on the flying spit so there is very little chance of it floating onto someone else's mask. But yeah if people aren't wearing masks and then their virus gets on yours and you touch it and rub your nose or something then you could be doomed. That's why some people are getting so upset at others not wearing masks. And the people not wearing them don't seem to care about it so it's possible they aren't taking the usual precautions and could be asymptomatic carriers.

I liked this line from a story about the Spanish Flu in San Francisco.

"The man or woman or child who will not wear a mask now is a dangerous slacker," a public service announcement from the American Red Cross said at the time, according to Navarro’s research."

But I do take your admonishment to be careful to heart. I carry my Clorox wipes with me and just wipe my hands with one when I'm done shopping and use it to take off the mask. Then I wipe off the mask and put it in a container I have with $25 worth of pennies and completely surround it with the copper.  Then I wipe off my hands again and wash them when I get home. By the time I need to go shopping again in a couple of weeks (made it 17 days just now) it should be fine.

However, I don't see how not having a mask would be any better. Then the virus instead of landing on your mask will either land on your face or just get inhaled directly. They say perhaps if the virus is on the smaller particles of spit that travel farther and get suspended longer that can be worse because those can travel more deeply into the lungs.

But like I said, I'm not using my mask to protect myself. I'm using it to help protect others just in case I'm a carrier and I don't know it. Did I mention I think I had it back in mid-January? Well I don't want to go all Munchausen up in here without an antibody test but in any case it's still best to play it safe since we know so little about it. But I do feel pretty bad thinking that maybe I was spreading it around without even knowing I had anything contagious.

General Comments / Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« on: April 27, 2020, 12:07:12 PM »
Blasey Ford couldn't even prove she was ever in the same room or the same house as Kavanaugh. Reade at least has that much.  I'm not sure what to believe. If it did happen it seems like Biden thought it was consensual, kind of like in 13 Reasons Why. But women lie a lot and often aren't prosecuted or even held accountable when they do. The person who sent Brian Banks to prison for 5 years for a rape he didn't commit was never charged with a crime even when it was proven that she lied. There is no deterrent to making up stories and if someone is looking for attention it's a sure fire way to get it. On the other hand he is a creeper. No way to tell.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: April 26, 2020, 07:54:47 PM »
A person doesn't wear a mask because they are afraid of getting the virus. They wear a mask because they are afraid they are an asymptomatic carrier and they don't want to spread it to other people. These homemade masks don't keep the virus out. They keep the tiny bits of spit the virus rides on in. That's why touching the masks doesn't matter so much. Wearing a mask you assume you already have it.

It's a completely different situation from medical personnel, basically totally the opposite.

The other side is obvious though. You don't wear a mask to protect yourself. But you do hope other people wear theirs just in case you are not the one infected so that they will be protecting you if they are. It's almost the ultimate in courtesy and good citizenship.

There are some really dumb people out there. Maybe the tide pod eaters were ahead of their time.

The key words in the Trump quote are "something like that".

I didn't get the sense that he was suggesting injecting bleach into someone. He's talking about something new that hasn't been invented yet. I hope anyway...

"A question that probably some of you are thinking of if you’re totally into that world, which I find to be very interesting. So, supposedly we hit the body with a tremendous, whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light, and I think you said that hasn’t been checked, but you’re going to test it. And then I said supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way. (To Bryan) And I think you said you’re going to test that, too. Sounds interesting, right?"

"And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning, because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it’d be interesting to check that, so that you’re going to have to use medical doctors with, but it sounds interesting to me. So, we’ll see, but the whole concept of the light, the way it kills it in one minute. That’s pretty powerful."

It's like someone suggesting you could maybe stop tornadoes by electrically powering the wind turbines so they spin fast enough to counteract the wind of a tornado, just of course being careful that you direct them properly so the winds cancel out instead of multiplying each other and making the tornado even stronger. And then you could use the same principle with the offshore wind farms to stop hurricanes. I mean yeah it's pretty stupid but whatever; just brainstorming. If someone said something like that should they have to worry about a person taking a Chinese silk folding fan with a dragon design on it and running at a tornado or into the middle of a hurricane like a jousting Don Quixote trying to wave the fan furiously enough to create enough wind to stop the storms? It's all just absurd but not anything to get terribly worked up about.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: April 25, 2020, 11:35:56 AM »
"... but are uncertain if they should consider themselves "safe" if the tests come back positive."

I don't know anything more than what I see in the news but it looks like it's too early to know. I'm glad the WHO is erring on the side of caution now. Just because there is no evidence doesn't mean it's not so and hopefully most people will have some immunity but that's not something anyone should count on or take for granted. Another issue is even if there is some immunity how would that apply, if it applies at all, to mutations and new strains of the virus? How dangerous are the other strains compared to this one or more that is causing most of the problems now? Another unknown quantity there.

"The World Health Organization (WHO) said on Saturday that there was currently "no evidence" that people who have recovered from COVID-19 and have antibodies are protected from a second coronavirus infection."

I'm not sure how it's nonsense. Everyone in charge underestimated how deadly and contagious the virus is. They kept travel going long after it should have been halted. The quarantines were insufficient. The CDC testing criteria was absurd. If some of the people who had no travel links to China had been tested earlier we would have known a lot more than we did. It's almost as if they didn't want to know.  By only testing people with China travel contacts it ensured we would remain in the dark as to how widespread it was. And we're still in the dark on that even now because of that. You test someone who had travel contacts to China and they have it and what have you learned? Nothing. Best just to assume they have it if they have symptoms and quarantine them and give them treatment as needed. But you test someone in some other city with no contacts and if they have it that tells you something you didn't know before. We could have caught the community spread much earlier. Then we have the whole mask issue and all the health care professionals catching it and dying. That is not just on the WHO. That's on us too. That's not being prepared. That's a direct result of wearing rose colored glasses and assuming the most optimistic possibilities instead of playing it safe and preparing for the worst.

But as to your point about the WHO being incompetent or worse in bed with China, on that we agree. The mistake we made was to rely on them for anything. The mistake the states made was to rely on the federal government and the CDC. What we learned is that people who are supposed to protect us either can't or just for whatever reasons didn't.

I should qualify what I mean when I say the Trump response to the coronavirus was not competent. Okay now to me I saw this coming but I could have been wrong. It turns out I wasn't. Just looking at what happened in China made it obvious that this was something unlike anything we had ever seen before and the usual measures would be insufficient. And now for the disclaimer. It wasn't just Trump or the CDC or the NIH who dropped the ball. It wasn't just yes men because the same thing happened at the World Health Organization. And they are hardly Trump supporters. Just about everyone in charge of everything got it wrong on this one. The only ones who were right were the chicken littles who screamed that the sky was falling and it's hard to take them seriously when nothing like this has ever happened before. Maybe the closest thing is the Spanish Flu pandemic and this is even different from that. The measures taken by Trump and the WHO and the advice given may have been adequate for the Spanish Flu but this thing is completely new and totally different.

Yes he said now it was sarcasm and I'm going to say he's not being accurate on the sarcasm bit. Maybe he was searching for the right word to indicate he wasn't being totally serious but instead extemporaneous and it didn't come out sounding very intelligent as can happen when you are just freewheeling your thoughts into words. But does his idea have any merit at all?

A lot of us are getting our internet right now via fiberoptic cable. So those are light pulses going through a cable. And a cable is like a tube. When they intubate to let patients breathe they are sticking a tube down into your body. So instead of an air tube maybe make it a light tube with the virus killing light and you shine that down into the body obviously starting with the throat. See if maybe that kills the virus without killing you first. Like chemo. Then you use nanotubes that are only microns in diameter and you thread those down into the lungs and shine it there. See if that helps. Always check with your doctor first. Maybe for something like this also talk to your astrologist. You want to check your stars because they have a lot of exactly the same kind of light we are talking about here, the kind that can kill viruses.

Okay now see that is sarcasm. It'd be funny though if that could actually work.

But I thought intentions were what counted...

Trump's intentions here are good. They aren't even racist. Black people are suffering the most. If there was some way to get a treatment that people could just inhale that would be perfect. He's not talking about people actually using bleach. Just something like it. Sure it may come to nothing and may not be possible with today's technology but there is nothing wrong with brainstorming. He's just saying what he's thinking. Wishful thinking here to be sure but that's not a crime. It doesn't mean he's incompetent. It's just more like science fiction at this point, where like in The Last Ship they invented a cure that could be spread person to person like the virus itself.

Bringing Obama into it, it wasn't that we didn't think he was competent. It wasn't that he didn't know exactly what he was doing. It was that he was and he did. He was competent and he knew exactly what he was doing. It was just the wrong thing. Obamacare. DACA. NASA. Churches not being able to select their own clergy. The NLRB recess appointment the Supreme Court overruled him on 9-0. I mean you look at how many unanimous Supreme Court rulings you had against Obama and compare that to Trump's record in the Supreme Court where not only is he not getting overruled unanimously but as far as I can see in the headlines most rulings are going in his favor.

Now that's not to say that I find Trump's coronavirus response competent. I don't. He and the CDC really dropped the ball on this at just about every turn. There are valid criticisms there. But this extemporaneous talking that he has a habit of doing isn't a problem. If it reveals that he doesn't understand things then maybe that's a good thing. If he just kept quiet and nodded and no one ever knew wouldn't that be worse?

Just looked up the tidbit about unanimous Supreme Court decisions against Obama to make sure I was right and  found that sure enough I was with even Justice Elena Kagan decrying Obama's chutzpah.

I had thought something along the lines of Trump, some kind of way to get cleansing agents into the body to kill the virus. I don't know if it would work or not but we have the ancient example of workers at copper smelters being mostly immune from passing plagues. Was it because they were touching the copper all the time and that was like constantly washing their hands? Or was it because copper atoms were in the air being breathed in and got in their food as well?

Now as with most things beneficial there is certainly harm that could come from copper in this way too. But I wonder what would happen if you took some dire case coronavirus sufferers to a copper smelter. Would it help them any? Would the workers get infected or would the copper kill the virus before it could get to them? If it did work would there be a way to aerosolize atoms of copper? Are there safe levels for it?

Maybe it would do nothing at all. Maybe they'd get copper poisoning. I have no idea but I can appreciate the lines along which Trump was thinking. It's good to think out of the box sometimes like wmLambert is saying. Most of the time it's rubbish but sometimes even the rubbish can lead to a spark of inspiration that results in progress.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: April 22, 2020, 03:16:50 PM »

"One doctor replied that there was a strange blood problem in one of his patients. Despite getting anticoagulants, the patient was still developing clots in various parts of his body. A second said she'd seen something similar. And a third. Then Coopersmith's phone blew up as every person on the text chat reported the same thing.

"That's when we knew we had a huge problem," said Coopersmith, a critical care surgeon. As he checked with his counterparts at other medical centers, he became increasingly alarmed: "It was in as many as 20, 30, or 40% of their patients."

Just some general info.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: April 20, 2020, 03:42:45 PM »
That's certainly in my price range. I may have to mosey over there, pick up a couple of barrels, and put seventy bucks in my pocket.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: April 20, 2020, 03:36:52 PM »
If that holds then the Spanish air decontamination policy may be more helpful than it might first appear if the airflow is different from most places and is effectively trapping and concentrating the virus even outside.

Apparently, this virus needs much higher temperatures than normal to kill too.

Somewhat mixed messages in this article:

"To kill the virus, it took 15 minutes of exposure to 197.6-degree temperatures, the report said.

Researchers, however, noted that most patients have lower viral loads than were tested in the vials, suggesting that lower heat levels could potentially be effective after all to kill the virus.

And preliminary results from a government lab experiment support the theory that warmer weather could slow the spread of the virus, according to a report.

Department of Homeland Security briefing notes that were leaked to Yahoo News, suggested that the virus doesn’t survive long in sunlight, humidity and warmer temperatures.

“Sunlight destroys the virus quickly,” the document said, according to Yahoo News."


If sunlight really does destroy the virus quickly how would that square with the NO2 levels being so important?

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: April 19, 2020, 05:50:06 PM »
And the point is that this isn't a hindsight is 20/20 issue. All of this was obvious pretty early on. I don't know what the deal is with these people but they are beyond incompetent.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: April 19, 2020, 05:35:29 PM »
Aris Katsaris

"Why are certain people keep finding "new revelations" in things I personally knew about for months?"

Exactly. We are in absolute agreement about this.

You look at their quotes about this and how they treated it. They were so dead wrong and outrageously Pollyannaish about it that it's ridiculous. Nobody with half a brain is surprised about how contagious and dangerous this virus is. Anyone with an ounce of common sense could have predicted it. China told us if not in so many words then definitely their actions talked for them. Their doctors told us at the risk of being arrested. And when their doctors started dying off that told us all we needed to know.

People who make the kinds of mistakes our CDC made are dangerous to leave in charge of our safety. Instead of ever erring on the side of caution, at every turn they chose with wild ignorant abandon to err on the side of reckless indifference to deadly danger. From an early travel ban on Europe to the mask issue to the testing criteria to test people we were pretty sure already had it instead of putting at least a few tests out early to suspected cases that if confirmed would have proven how widespread it was, at every decision point these people made exactly the worst possible choice. And there is absolutely no accountability. They just act like nobody could have known any better, nobody could have done any better, and that they did as well as any reasonable person could expect; maybe better even. It's like all those studies that show when people take a test and are asked to rate how well they did they consistently rate their own knowledge and competence as much better than the actuality. That's these guys. So bad and what's worse they don't even know it.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: April 18, 2020, 10:49:47 PM »

"The Spanish government has just "authorized" the military to prepare planes for aerial spraying of disinfectants across major metro areas as confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths continue to rise..."

I had never really considered this an option.

Color me skeptical though on its effectiveness.

I haven't touched anything outside my home without wiping it down first and that includes parts of my car too. Are people really picking it up this way? Particularly outside. If you're going to touch anything that's infected it seems like it would happen indoors where this spray won't reach.

Although... if the virus is just circulating around in the air, in nature, and we can pick it up that way then that's a whole other story and I've wondered about that. Of course if that's the case the spray will still have limited effect because more virus will constantly be produced by people as well as drifting in from outside the spray area.

One also have to wonder if the disinfectant itself is dangerous at all. I doubt it but I guess it depends on what it is. It didn't mention it as far as I could tell in the article. Depending on what it is, if it is a little bit dangerous, that might be another way to encourage people to stay inside for a while. I suppose it's nice that they are pulling out all the stops though to fight back.

General Comments / Re: Dem debates
« on: April 18, 2020, 08:38:51 PM »


"Donald Trump is the first racist in history to have"

This next one is not a first so doesn't make the list but it's also worth pointing out that he is married to an immigrant.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: April 18, 2020, 03:23:44 PM »
Trump is in a no-win situation here. The best he can do, as he's obviously already been advised, is to lower expectations as much as possible.

This is the Kobayashi Maru scenario. No way out.

If people go back to work, they die. If they don't go back to work, the economy dies.

I don't think the Democrats want to keep the economy shut down just to hurt Trump. Their real motivation is to save lives. They have a valid point that the sooner people get back to work, the sooner they will die because of the virus, at least thousands of them. Having said that, it's not beneath many of the Democrats in power to use the situation to their political advantage. The most obvious way, and it has some validity, is to blame Trump for not being better prepared. Maybe if we'd had better tests and more of them we could have done a better job of isolating infected people. I think we'll find that the virus has been here for a lot longer than the official timeline though so we weren't going to keep it out but that doesn't make the testing situation any better. If we had more tests we might find that the mortality and complication rate is "only" double to ten times higher than normal instead of a hundred times higher. Still a big problem but the more information we have the better. Also if immunity holds for those with antibodies then a lot of people could get back to work now.

But back to the main point, that the Democrats would never stoop to using the virus for their political benefit. I don't even see them trying to hide it. But then again neither are the Republicans. There are valid points on both sides to be made because of weaknesses in our systems that the virus has exposed.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: April 18, 2020, 02:30:51 PM »
"Can't you just admit you don't have a single example of the Democrats blaming Trump for the repercussions on the economy?"

Just going to jump in here real quick.

"In a string of recent TV appearances, Biden has explicitly tied the pandemic’s health effects to its economic devastation, casting them as dual crises and yoking both of them to Trump."

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: April 15, 2020, 08:17:37 PM »
We also need to keep the lock down for a while for the healthcare workers who are dying when they shouldn't be just because they don't have the protective gear they need. And just my opinion here but we hear a lot about the N95 masks but from what I understand those are insufficient for this type of job. And we don't even have enough of those.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: April 15, 2020, 03:22:45 PM »
We're starting to see more successful treatment options now.

One sad thing to think about is the hundreds of thousands who die and the millions more who have long term lung damage when a simple cure for the vast majority of them may be just around the corner, a month or two away.

That's a more optimistic reason for trying to flatten the curve, not just to save hospital beds and ventilators used. Maybe eventually most people do get infected but the longer we can delay that the better their treatment options become.

That might be something else that makes this different from the usual yearly flus. With everyone around the world working so hard on this coupled with it's somewhat unique symptoms, great progress is being made on new and sometimes even old forms of treatment.

A month or two may make the difference here. Maybe even weeks if we're lucky. The gains in terms of lifelong productivity by the tens of thousands who are saved both in terms of their lives and their health will be worth it.

Hopefully this doesn't continue for too much longer. Even without a cure, once testing ramps up, and it looks like they may have a new easy saliva test, that can get people back out too if we see that they have some immunity, most of them anyway for the ones for whom the immunity holds.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: April 14, 2020, 03:11:54 PM »
"Let them meet, then put the whole lot of them into an enforced quarantine with each other."

Of course the problem with both of our ideas is when these people end up getting so sick they need ventilators and use up other scarce medical resources because of their folly. We wouldn't go to the extreme of telling them that if you do this then you are on your own. Plus we get back to the problem of these are people who just don't listen because they don't take it seriously. They won't practice social distancing for their own protection and they won't do it even when they know they are infected for the protection of others.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: April 14, 2020, 03:08:02 PM »
I agree it's almost certainly a bad idea to let people purposefully infect themselves even under so called controlled circumstances. I don't recommend it at all.  But it's kind of like the drug problem. Some people just don't listen. Of course in this case it's even worse because when they don't listen they don't just hurt themselves but everyone around them. Well that is still like the drug problem but with the contagion they are infecting others with their problem, not just hurting them indirectly. But the point is for people who just won't listen what do you do? Give them a more controlled environment or just let them do their own thing? I suppose the analogy here would be like giving them a safe room to get high with drugs you know aren't contaminated. Then they have to stay in that room until they are no longer a danger to others. And though the analogy isn't that good, it holds for a little while because no matter how much safer you try to make it, it's still incredibly dangerous with so many unknown variables that could result in tragedy. Well like I said I'm not really suggesting it. Just flying it up the flagpole to watch it get burned, and rightfully burned down too.

But it does make a point. If even trying to do this in a controlled environment is recklessly dangerous and perhaps futile, then letting people ignore the social distancing precautions and just get themselves and others infected is of course even worse. If someone knew there was a room full of infected people, would they willingly go into it and get themselves infected? That's basically what refusing to practice social distancing precautions is.

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: April 14, 2020, 02:55:53 PM »
"Maybe they should all volunteer to get infected."

Now I'm not recommending what I'm going to write next, but it's an idea. Probably a very stupid idea but...

Remember how parents used to have chickenpox parties for their kids? Well if people want to get themselves infected maybe it could be done in a controlled environment. There isn't a vaccine yet but if you want to just get infected and get it over with so you can do your quarantine and get back to work with your immunity pass maybe there could be a way to do it while keeping your initial viral load very small so you get your exposure but hopefully with a little bit less risk compared to what could happen in an uncontrolled environment even with social distancing and precautions.

For instance, there was the bus driver who went viral for scolding a lady for not covering her coughs. He died of the virus a few days later. Maybe he was exposed to a much higher initial viral load by that lady and it got deep into his lungs compared to if he had been exposed in a controlled setting, kind of like a weak live virus vaccine. Of course he may have died even with a very low initial exposure. Now I don't know. Just spitballing this. The point is he didn't have a choice. But if a vaccine is going to take more than a year then this might be an option for some people to help with developing herd immunity but perhaps mitigating some of the risks especially if they insist on ignoring and flouting precautions anyway. I understand it would be challenging to say the least to do this in any sort of lab setting but it might be worth a shot. Of course before any of that can happen we need to get the testing problem sorted.

General Comments / Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« on: April 14, 2020, 04:23:51 AM »
"Yesterday, (Jan.31.2020) Donald Trump further diminished the United States in the eyes of the world by expanding his travel ban not only on the Chinse people, now placing new restrictions on the residents of six more nations that limit who is allowed to come to the United States. And Trump’s adding more countries to his list of who’s not welcome in America. It’s not who we are — and we’ll prove that when we beat Trump this November and end the ban". ~ Joe Biden

General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: April 12, 2020, 05:26:41 PM »
It's not unreasonable to try to tally the costs of our contagion prevention efforts, economic and otherwise, even if in the end people feel they are worth it. I'll add another one. The gyms closing. I think it's worth it but if it goes on for a long time people will be more out of shape and there are health consequences for that too. Even a lot of the workout equipment is sold out at the stores. Sure you try to stay in shape without a gym and that's fine but it's not quite the same and it's not quite as good especially with the after workout steam, sauna, and hot tub gone.

Like with renewable energy, it's good but there are trade-offs and sacrifices and it's important to understand and quantify them both to figure out ways to get around them as well as to determine perhaps when too much is enough.

General Comments / Re: We gotta talk about Uncle Joe
« on: April 10, 2020, 10:46:47 PM »
I like the insights into the sausage factory y'all provide. We just see the results but it's hard to know who to really blame without a lot more information and understanding of the whole process.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 22