Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
You were talking about 'races', JACK. The genetics of different 'races', JACK. Targeting different 'races', JACK.

So, stop being a lying bitch, ok, JACK?

Meanwhile, there's NO indication the virus was engineered to do this specifically. When you tinker with genetic code, you can come up with all sorts of results - including accidentally disabling one function.

---

Quote:

---

You can look at my math. At 100% infection rate not even 500,000 die here from this, and the number could be quite a bit smaller.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

You can look at my math. At 100% infection rate not even 500,000 die here from this, and the number could be quite a bit smaller.

---

Quoting this for future evaluatio ... mockery.

---

Quote:

---

SIX: You can look at my math. At 100% infection rate not even 500,000 die here from this, and the number could be quite a bit smaller.

KIKI: Quoting this for future evaluatio ... mockery.

SIX: Why do you feel the need to bother?
Have I ever deleted a post that you can recall?
I'll save you some time. The answer is no.
And at 61,000 we're a long way away from a half a million, baby.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
No. That's a lie.

The classifications for Coomph deaths in the US pile everything else into it, and that's why ours is so high compared to other countries. You stub your fucking toe and they'll call it a Coomph death.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

lol.

Stupid Karens, carelessly Karening and being all Kareny until everybody hates them.




BTW...

Check out at around 8:30 in the video when a kid from Michigan that committed suicide was later tested positive for the virus and they attributed his death to The Coomph.

Then fucking tell me that my theory, that I proposed all the way back when all of this bullshit started, about that 25 year old Pharm tech who died a "coronavirus related" death doesn't hold water.



EVERY DAY THAT PASSES I LOOK BETTER AND BETTER.


And the both of you look more and more like T and Cap'n Crunch, and anybody else here who was drinking Maddow and Olbermann's Koolaid the last 3 years.

Fucking Deep State tools. Even sadder the fact that you don't even realize what you've become.


Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
Unable to deal with reality like the fragile snowflake you are?

---

Quote:

---

SIX: You can look at my math. At 100% infection rate not even 500,000 die here from this, and the number could be quite a bit smaller.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

SIX: You can look at my math. At 100% infection rate not even 500,000 die here from this, and the number could be quite a bit smaller.

---

BTW - what's 0.4% x 325M?

That's the fatality rate you think is just like a cold, times your proposed 100% infection rate.

Is the result 500,000?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Coronavirus Uses Same Strategy As HIV To Evade, Cripple Immune System: Chinese Study Finds

The ORF8 Protein of SARS-CoV-2 Mediates Immune Evasion through Potently Downregulating MHC-I
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.24.111823v1

https://www.zerohedge.com/health/coronavirus-uses-same-strategy-hiv-ev
ade-immune-response-chinese-study-finds

---

Quote:

---

I watch Madcow!!! Even when nobody else does!

And I'm TOTALLY ironic when I post this!
Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

I can't think, I can't read, I don't care about anyone but me.


But I'll keep pretending I'm smart.

Time will prove me right about myself!


And I'm TOTALLY ironic when I post this!
Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I ran across this at Moon of Alabama

Quote:

---

How Cluster Cases Drive The Covid Pandemic

One of the many mysteries of the Covid-19 pandemic is how the disease actually spreads. We were told to wash hands and about the dangers of droplets in one to one contacts. But newer evidence continues to point in another direction.

There are more and more reports about cases where the infections seems to have spread by aerosol, droplets smaller than 5µm in diameter, instead of by bigger droplets or fomites like surfaces and objects. Lambert Strether has collected reports of cluster cases in restaurants, buses, ships and a callcenter where aerosol transmission was the most likely cause:

There’s mounting evidence that airborne transmission indoors is a key — perhaps the main — pathway to SARS-COV-2 transmission. In this post I want to look at why that’s so, give examples, and suggest a simple heuristic to stay safe....

That paragraph is footnoted with a link to a WHO recommendation from March.

---

WHO has been corrupt since the beginning

Quote:

---

Since then much has been learned about cluster cases in which aerosols were the most likely transmitter of the disease.

Aerosols are droplets smaller than 5 micrometers. At that small size they do not fall to the ground but float in the airstream. Unlike droplets they are not a problem outside of closed rooms as the normal air movement will start to disperse them immediately.

A study in Hubei tracked down 318 cluster creating incidents in which at least 3 persons were involved. It found that only one happened in open air. A Japanese study says that the risk of infection indoors are 19 times higher than outdoors.

An early study has found that the secondary attack rate in households defined as "the probability that an infection occurs among susceptible people within a specific group (ie, household or close contacts)" is quite low at some 35%. Other studies have come to even lower values of some 25%. There were a number of reports of families where only one or two persons were infected while other members of the household did not catch the disease.

But the overall reproduction rate R0 of Covid-19 is estimated to be somewhere between 2 and 3. That means that without isolation measures each newly infected person will on average infect 2 to 3 other persons. How does that fit with the relatively low secondary infections in households?

Science has published a must read piece that explains this conundrum:

Other infectious diseases also spread in clusters. But COVID-19, like two of its cousins, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), seems especially prone to attacking groups of tightly connected people while sparing others. It's an encouraging finding, scientists say, because it suggests that restricting gatherings where superspreading is likely to occur will have a major impact on transmission and that other restrictions—on outdoor activity, for example—might be eased.
...
Most of the discussion around the spread of SARS-CoV-2 has concentrated on the average number of new infections caused by each patient. Without social distancing, this reproduction number (R) is about three. But in real life, some people infect many others and others don't spread the disease at all. In fact, the latter is the norm, Lloyd-Smith says: “The consistent pattern is that the most common number is zero. Most people do not transmit.”

That's why in addition to R, scientists use a value called the dispersion factor (k), which describes how much a disease clusters. The lower k is, the more transmission comes from a small number of people. In a seminal 2005 Nature paper, Lloyd-Smith and co-authors estimated that SARS—in which superspreading played a major role—had a k of 0.16. The estimated k for MERS, which emerged in 2012, is about 0.25. In the flu pandemic of 1918, in contrast, the value was about one, indicating that clusters played less of a role.

Current estimates of the dispersion factor k for SARS-CoV-2 vary between 0.1 and 0.5. That means that cluster infections from relatively few superspreading events drive the epidemic more than single transmissions from one person to another person.

This explains the success of the Japanese strategy which brought the epidemic in that country down without ordering strict lockdown measures:

As of Thursday, Japan had confirmed more than 16,000 infections and about 900 deaths from the virus, by far the lowest figures among the Group of Seven major economies.

Japan has urged people to avoid environments with what it calls the “Three Cs”, meaning close contact in closed-off, crowded spaces, where experts say most infections have occurred.

Without knowing if the measures would work Japan picked the right strategy. Only those events and places where superspreading is most likely to occur where shunned. Additionally the people in Japan actually wear their masks and generally health conscious and disciplined.

---

I think masking plays a far larger role in limiting the spread than avoiding the "three C's".

Quote:

---

Unfortunately it is unlikely that 'western' nations will develop such discipline.

Yves Smith has written about her recent personal experience in a hospital in Alabama where even the staff was not wearing masks and was also otherwise quite careless. This at a time where numbers in Alabama are surging.

---

MORE AT https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/05/cluster-cases-drive-the-covid-pa
ndemic.html#more

So maybe there really ARE super-spreaders ... people who just shed and transmit viruses way more efficiently than anyone else.

So every time you have a LARGE group of people in relatively cramped indoor circumstances ... church, gym, sporting event, political rally, assisted living facility, military training, dance club etc ... not only do you increase the number of people potentially a risk, you also significantly raise the probability that a super-spreader will be among them.

That doesn't explain Los Angeles' steady incremental increase of infections and deaths, tho. I'm not privy to the details of Los Angeles' data, but - mostly- clusters have not been identified.




-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

#WEARAMASK

---

Quote:

---

Counties with the most COVID-19 cases
McConnell: Next stimulus bill will be 'final' one
Bloomberg logo Study Linking Hydroxychloroquine to Covid Risks Questioned

(Bloomberg) --

Scientists are raising questions about a study that linked antimalarial drugs to increased heart risks and death among Covid-19 patients.

The study, published last week in The Lancet medical journal, found high rates of dangerous side effects in patients treated with hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, and some work on testing the drugs in patients has been suspended based on the concerns it raised. A group of some 120 researchers signed a letter pointing out inconsistencies, calling on the authors and The Lancet to reveal more details about their analysis.

Backed by U.S. President Donald Trump, who has said he took a course of hydroxychloroquine to ward off the virus, the drugs have become a political and medical bone of contention. A separate scientific article that had lent support to using them against the coronavirus was withdrawn by its authors last week because of the controversy.

Not long after The Lancet study was published, the World Health Organization suspended a portion of a global study of potential Covid-19 treatments that included the antimalaria drugs because of safety concerns. On Friday, the WHO released a summary of its results to date, saying it found little or no benefit from use of the drugs compared with standard care, whether or not they were paired with an antibiotic. The agency cautioned that the evidence was of “very low certainty.”

Where Are We in Quest for Coronavirus Drugs, Vaccine?: QuickTake

French drugmaker Sanofi said Friday that it was halting patient recruitment in its trials of hydroxychloroquine for treating Covid. The company also said it will stop releasing the drug for off-label use in Covid-19 “until current safety concerns are cleared by WHO.”

Researchers have said that hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine need to be tested against the coronavirus in randomized clinical trials before they can be recommended. Only Gilead Sciences Inc.’s remdesivir has been shown to benefit patients by this measure.

The Lancet study, led by Mandeep Mehra of Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, looked at the medical records of 96,000 coronavirus patients around the world, about 15,000 of whom were treated with antimalarials. Some of the patients also received antibiotics that are thought to enhance the benefit of the antimalarial drugs.
High Doses

The letter pointed out 14 major shortcomings in the paper, including that computer code used to analyze the data wasn’t made public, and that no information was included on the medical centers that contributed data. It also said that rates of deaths reported from Africa seemed “unlikely,” that the daily doses purportedly received by some U.S. patients appeared higher than recommended, and that the level of chloroquine use in some continents was “implausible.”

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
Apparently an independent audit is being done on the HCQ study. The Lancet published an 'expression of concern'.

https://marlin-prod.literatumonline.com/pb-assets/Lancet/pdfs/S0140673
620312903.pdf

"Important scientific questions have been raised about data reported in the paper by Mandeep Mehra et al — Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis1 — published in The Lancet on May 22, 2020.

"Although an independent audit of the provenance and validity of the data has been commissioned by the authors not affiliated with Surgisphere and is ongoing, with results expected very shortly, we are issuing an Expression of Concern to alert readers to the fact that serious scientific questions have been brought to our attention. We will update this notice as soon as we have further information."

---

Quote:

---

The Lancet is stringently edited and peer-reviewed to ensure the scientific merit and clinical relevance of its diverse content.

https://www.journals.elsevier.com/the-lancet/

---

Quote:

---

... this way of counting the days is misleading, and it will take a while longer before we know whether restrictions have been eased too much or not.

---

Quote:

---

Mackie writes that the collapse in mobility when lockdown restrictions were imposed played a key role in driving the reproduction number (R-naught) below one. But, mobility has not been the only development weighing on the reproduction number, with JPM claiming that a number of other developments, including the buildup of immunity in the population, the reduced susceptibility of young people, the prospect of self-isolation of vulnerable individuals, the impact of weather and the impact of wearing masks and increased hygiene, (emphasis in original) all exert downward pressure on the reproduction number as mobility increases.

The bank’s analysis suggested that only when mobility increases more than halfway back from full-lockdown levels to pre-lockdown levels is there a risk of the reproduction number moving back above one. (emphasis in original) This suggests that, in assessing the risk of a second wave (or counting down the days to one), we should start counting the days from the moment that mobility in each country returns to the halfway mark. (emphasis in original)

---

Quote:

---

The bank’s conclusion: “A second wave of COVID-19 infection may or may not come to Western Europe. But it is much too early to assume that it won’t.”

One final note: we are confident that the largest US bank being one of the biggest beneficiaries of a new round of massive QE to be launched by the Fed if and when a second wave hits, had almost no (emphasis in article) impact on this analysis.

---