jesus this thread must have corona

for what it's worth people

1. I shared a study done by cambridge not by the ccp

2. i was not promoting any conspiracy theory, i was simply posting what was considered smoking gun evidence of one to give people background info for the upcoming "where did it come from who was behind it" debate that is certainly on the horizon especially since many in the west are openly discussing legal action vs china

3. nowhere did i state anything else

4. the general response was "lol there's no white people in china, you are clearly a liberal, omg why are you supporting ccp propaganda"

5. none of the above listed in #4 are true btw

seriously guys, you should be ashamed at yourselves for attacking me for sharing some news, wtf is wrong with you people?

Like I have explained 10x before:
1/ If a country of the first world sinks into "a great depression"-type of event because of a 2/3-month shutdown, that country its economy was **** anyway and was always going to collapse at some point. The first world countries are very wealthy these days, there is a long list of steps between the current status of first world countries and "living on a bowl or two of rice per day". Of course what happens in the first world will have effects on the rest of the world and that can be dramatic, especially if corona is able to truly ravage a poor country which has not really happened yet. I am not disputing that and have never disputed that.

2/ Your presented scenarios are not correct. You act as if the 2 scenarios are:
A/ Lockdown and huge economic collapse follows, and huge death follows.
B/ If you don't lockdown, huge death follows anyway.

Multiple points why this is wrong:
*We have multiple points of data that show a lockdown can be successful. Unfortunately, now also many countries are failing.
*Long-term huge economic collapse is far from a certainty.
*There is no proof that there is no huge amount of prevented death by locking down.
*Most importantly, you are completely overlooking one of the scary things of this virus, which is the large amount of people requiring hospital care. China had to build hospitals and put people in random buildings of which 1 collapsed.
Lombardy & Madrid had to stop servicing 60 year olds. If 10% or 15% of a population has it at the same time, which will happen if you don't lock down, the healthcare system will collapse. What do you think will happen if the healthcare system collapses? It would be a recession 10x worse than a 2-3 month shutdown. Please provide me your argumentation why that wouldn't be the case.

Fwiw in Europe multiple countries are not reporting this at all, and some countries update them 1 or 2x a week, which is why you can see weird dead spikes in France their graph for example. In Belgium we are having a major issue with the virus being very present in long term care facilities. 42% of corona-deaths come from these facilities, and it will likely be >50% or >60% by the end of this outbreak, because it's significantly less under control than our 'normal outbreak' (daily figures show around <130 hospital & home deaths & >180 care center deaths).

Belgium locked them down long term care facilities in March 11th. All visits have been forbidden since this date, only personnel & doctors are allowed in. That is the day Italy locked down and Belgium had 314 total cases & 3 total deaths. The virus still got in via the personnel and and spread incredibly fast.

If this happens you get herd immunity faster and things go back to normal quicker after mass death. This is especially true if 15% tested positive actually means 40-50% infected. Your pandemic is literally over in a few weeks.

I think you are naive that an event that includes >2% of a Western country dying, collapse of healthcare system, people dying in their homes without any help,... would result in everything going back to normal after it's done. It would also result in an economic recession without precedent in recent times.

You are also making assumptions about immunity that we are not certain of. If it is true that you only develop immunity after getting really sick, herd immunity is far off after what you describe. We are also not certain how long immunity lasts. You are saying "lets kill a huge amount of people" because if these optimistic assumptions are correct, we'll be fine.

My basic premise remains the same:

What is the cost for a first-world economy locking up for 2/3 months?
My argument is it is nothing compared to the potential costs of not doing it.
Sure there is an optimistic scenario where 2% of the country dies in 3 months and suddenly it disappears and everyone goes back to normal. Do you really believe that is the most likely scenario?
The likely scenario is chaos for months, huge economic recession, huge loss of life, civil unrest & violence, collapse of various structures (healthcare, law enforcement,...),...

lol I didnt say lets kill alot of people

I'm arguing that if you have mass death from most of the population getting infected, your pandemic is over shortly after. Its likely that people would be immune for atleast at a minimum of a few months. Immunity isn't contingent on how sick you get.

Economically mass death works out pretty well as grim as it is. The alternative is a severe depression for years.

In a case where antibodies don’t last, or don’t provide enough immunity, we are just borked anyway.

There really is no way to get around that Covid-19 is expected to stick around and we are just managing the spread, flattening the curve if you will, until sufficient number of us gets infected and healthcare capacity gets built up, to handle the increased volume.

The alternative is not months of shutdown. It’s years of shutdown plus Manhattan Project+ effort to develop hitherto unknown, at least untested, antiviral/vaccination technologies.

That’s well past the point where economic misery translates to massive human suffering and deaths, even in first world countries.

Yup, I don't see a scenario where shutting down for only two or three months does anything but screws us if the virus doesn't turn out to be as bad as everyone thought or screws us because it is as bad as everyone thought, and we just delayed the inevitable.

Ray dalio from Bridgewater Hedgefund has a series on linkedin in where he studies the rise and fall of empires. His idea is that throughout history there have always been long periods of peace and stability followed by short periods of depression/war. When several things come together: increasing gap between the rich and the poor, falling interest rates, new upcoming empire threathening old empire the depression/war is natural and needed to reset the system. He sees conditions very smiliar to 1930s and thinks the transfter of wealth/power from USA to China was bound to happen anyway, and the corona crisis just speeds things up a little bit.

You said the Cambridge study repeating CCP propaganda was "evidence," and you should be criticized for that, because it isn't. The CCP has done nothing but cover up, obfuscate and lie this whole time. Given that, there is no reason to believe "reports of Americans spreading the virus in Wuhan" (or whatever the exact propaganda is), regardless if some study decides to repeat it.

If you (and some percentage of Chinese) choose to believe this propaganda because it makes you feel better about being part of such a horrible government that unleashed such a horrible plague on the world through their obfuscation and lies (by convincing yourself maybe it didn't) than go for it.

There is certainly plenty of parallels in how the American people believe propaganda that makes them feel better about themselves, so it is not like this is some unique moment in history.

I had to jump into an icy pond to save a golden retriever that couldn't get out, well crawl 50' out and fall through. The dog gave up trying to get out after 15 minutes.

Keep in mind the virus itself isn't a constant. It is going to evolve, in part due to pressure we create by our behavior (we are its environment). If we make it harder for the virus to spread through social distancing, its possible we put pressure on it to evolve into a milder form.

In fact that is generally how these things work over time.

This is a pretty dumb hot take. The reason that the third world has so many lives to begin with: the kindness of rich old white people (notably the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations). They saved over a billion lives and a billions more owe their very existence to them. The most active and effective large scale life-saving work in Africa right now is being done by the world's richest man.

Rich capitalist boomers have done far more for the poor than governments, the UN, you, or any socialist that ever lived.

There's a deeper problem at work as well, which is that helping the poor merely increases the problems, because the poor breed like rabbits to beyond whatever carrying capacity the land has. You know why Ethiopia has famines? Not because of its weather (there's plenty of arable land and produce even in droughts) but because they've bred so much that the available land can't come close to supporting that many people long term. Same reason for large environmental destruction in the third world - too many people.

There is no easy solution. The problem is in the breeding habits and work ethic of the poor, and nothing else.
Poverty is awful, but mostly self inflicted.

Europe has had plenty of times of starvation. During WWII there wasn't a rat, cat or dog left in many Nazi occupied cities. But they rebuilt back into robust economies while the poor did nothing. China certainly remembers starvation and they locked everything down and do nothing to help your third world breathen.

It's a bit of running a joke among volunteers - when you go to volunteer in the third world to build shelters or schools or dig wells for clean water, the locals sit around in the shade watching you, pointing curiously and sometimes laughing at the dumb white people working so hard in the heat. That sums up the third world and their problems nicely.

This seems a little silly. Shutdown to prevent 50K deaths/day, then 6 weeks later when you open up, do testing and contact tracing to control it better. In the meantime, the stockpile of masks, quick tests, knowledge of control and treatment measures gets greatly improved. Summer transmission drop helps as well to get to a controllable situation.

Good luck with that. We weren't able to protect health workers in hospitals from getting infected despite them having years of training on how to avoid infections, and the fact that they knew they were at high risk. But in six weeks we are going to be able to train our entire population how to avoid becoming infected, especially since we have a television network that appeals to half the country that has been telling them to reject the advice of intellects for the past 20 years.

If this thing is as dangerous as you think it is, you had better come up with a much better plan than face masks.

no i didn't, if i did, please quote me on it

you can't though because i didn't write that

here, i'll save you the effort, find where i wrote that you total ffing ******

If there were enough masks available and it was made compulsory for everyone to wear one in public, the virus would likely be wiped out within a month.

We couldn't protect at ground zero of the infection with trillions of viruses floating around, therefore we can't control this in the population? That's your counter?

Here's my counter to your Ultradumb™ point: China's health workers had very high infection rates - many even died! - and yet the country is infection free and reopening, even in Wuhan. Bam, your point is stone dead.

This is why I don't trust a word you say about vaccines or your claimed "expertise" - you can't analyze things with even the minimal necessary rationality.

Reject the advice of intellects? What the **** does that even mean? This advice, from the world's peak infectious disesases body, was from the world' leading experts on infectious diseases:



The US experts ****ed up the one thing that could have mitigated and controlled it - the testing ramp. The infectious disease community in the US ****ed this up with trillions of dollars damage from their comical incompetence. Now we should listen to these worthless losers?

And it's not just the US. Every country in Europe (except the far right ones) screwing up this pandemic. And these same "intellects", failing to take early action, decided a late lockdown was essential. So you're now disagreeing with the "intellects" you so laud.

Why? Face masks work great in Korea and Japan and Taiwan and China, with their economies open (three of those never even shut down). You have literal proof that lockdowns + facemasks/testing/forced distancing working - even in heavily infected areas (Hubei is 1/6th the size of the US), and you still want to go with your dumb analysis contrary to the facts

Yep, the anti-mask view of experts (and their stopping of importing foreign masks) has done tremendous damage. If Fauci and Birx were competent, here's what would have happened:

- Aggressively ramp mask production in January
- Involve the private sector on parallel test kit development, rather than banning them, hard left socialist style. That alone would have stopped it
- Advise people to wear masks, stimulating mask production earlier and slowing early spread

How does jsb explain Japan if not masks?

You pick on masks but it's testing, tracing and treatment that will be key. How fast and how effective it will be (and I reckon it will take a while) is not down to the competency of the public. The shutdowns are just buying us some time and minimising breakdown of healthcare provision.

In addition some immunity is building and habits are adapting - that might include masks.

Plus we get closer to some possible vaccine which will help a bit or a lot.

Either they work or they don't.

If they didn't protect health care workers at "ground zero" of a virus, how are they going to protect someone from being infected who has likely never worn a facemask for a prolonged period of time in his life?

Do you really think that this is a solid plan? Dios Mio. Good luck with that. I am sure that the entire US society will simply fall in line with this.

Also, the virus really hasn't impacted anywhere in a major fashion outside of the US, Europe and a small part of China. I mean, do you want us to believe that people wearing masks in Korea have saved millions of lives in Indonesia as well? Or Mexico? Or basically everywhere else in the world?

Be better than this.

I didn't remember the exact wording you used. I am sure in your mind this means you are right, but the point is exactly the same regardless.

The Cambridge study confirms absolutely nothing, other than they have the ability to parrot CCP "reports," and you should be criticized for whatever thought process lead you to that conclusion.

It wouldn't surprise me at all that that sentence about the Americans in Wuhan was thrown into the news article by a CCP editor. It is very suggestive and you are supposed to read it and come to the erroneous conclusion that you did. That is how propaganda works.

You need 5 factors to beat this:
*Virus needs to be present in a low number of the population. I'd speculate how much, but have no idea. There are probably almost no places in Europe & USA rn that are at this number.
*Only open up economy & restrictions in ways where social distancing can be respected, people also need to wear some form of masks. Probably doesn't need to be a high-level mask.
*Huge amount of testing.
*Tracing of new infections as good as possible.
*Make sure that people are aware of the risks: Temperature checks should really become something everyone does daily. If someone is sick, self isolate and report that you are sick if the symptoms are in line with Corona. If necessary, enact temporary laws to make sure the rules are respected.

If these 5 factors are met, I think the infection will be under control for the most part.

There's some other stuff that needs to be thought about. Like, do we reopen cinemas & gyms? Do we need to change playground rules in schools? How are they doing this in Asia?

You keep highlighting that there are some countries that aren't ****ed up right now. Why is this important to you? These countries will undergo the same if there is an outbreak.

Maybe there are some other magic formulas to prevent an outbreak we haven't thought of. It doesn't make the slightest difference to countries where there is an outbreak. Please explain why this is at all relevant?

That's sad because many people physically can't do the work of caring for a bedridden heavier adult at home. A business opportunity right now might be to convert some private nursing homes or assisted living facilities around the country to strict quarantine facilities where the staff actually lives there (similar to a cruise ship) and no one goes in or out of the compound for the next year or two.


Many governments (including the U.S.) and charities around the world DO try to save those lives.

We already produce enough food to feed everyone in the world. One of the biggest problems in getting aid to the people who need it is that most of it (I read 90%) gets stolen by the countrymen of the starving people.

If it's money, a large part gets embezzled by corrupt government leaders who use the money to buy expensive houses overseas (in places like Malibu, CA or Vancouver, BC) to hide the money.

If it's supplies, even when the United Nations sends in military-style armed convoys, it still gets stolen by armed gangs. The gangs aren't starving, they sell the supplies to get more money and power.

So it's more of a systemic cultural and supply chain problem than a problem of people not wanting to help or not trying to help.

My wife works in a health care clinic. In a 3 week period they went from a policy of "no worker is allowed to wear masks" to "you can electively wear your own mask" to "everyone has to wear a mask at all times"

The latter coincided with their clinic finally receiving a massive supply of equipment after having none for a long period of time.

Clearly what happened is the powers that be were caught unprepared, and decided to utilize a strategy where they pretended to "discover" things about the disease to confirm what we already knew, the importance of PPE, as PPE finally became available.

This is all about deflecting accountability and legal responsibility. So now in a court of law all the health care workers and patients who got sick due to unpreparedness of our authorities will have no legal recourse against their employers, who were "just following CDC recommendations" at the time.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if legal teams weren't heavily involved in this expert response. I would actually be surprised if they weren't.

I disagree. The reason they didn't recommend PPE is the same reason they responded comically to this pandemic: There was no hard evidence of the kind normally required for recommendations, and the experts refused to act without hard evidence. Experts gave absolutely awful advice during SARS too, because they're idiots, not because of a shortage.

I agree that at some point they tried to save masks for health care workers, but that was long after much more could have been done. The experts in the West didn't see this coming.
Yeah man, either you kill people drink driving or you don't, so what's the point of banning drink driving? Either medical treatments work or it doesn't, and since they don't work 100%, let's just stop giving treatments that don't work 100% of the time? Hell, biological containment labs have accidents, containment doesn't work 100% of the time, so let's just do away with all the safety protocols designed to lower the odds, because "either they work or they don't". Either flu shots work or they don't, so why get them since they don't work 100% at reducing transmission or even getting the flu?

Why is it that everyone I call a moron goes on to provide high levels of proof of being exactly what I say they are?

Masks decrease transmission rates substantially. You only need to get the rate below 1 to stop the pandemic. Every bit helps. For example, social distancing might reduce transmission rates by 0.7. Masks add 0.5. Hand washing behavior adds 0.2. Staying at home when sick adds 0.3. Mass testing and tracing adds 1.2.

You only have to get it below 1, and stopping the majority of infected spittle from sneezes, coughs and speaking from flying into the eyes and mouths of others greatly reduces transmission rates.
I literally explained to you why this is the case. Gave you working examples of masks working. It's basic physics that if viruses are mostly transmitted by large droplets and spittle from talking, that blocking the majority of those will reduce transmission.

You don't know what people will do until you try it. We had the experts at the WHO and CDC literally saying you don't need masks if you're healthy, while experts who aren't worthless losers (Korea, Japan, Hong Kong) said you should wear masks. Some of those experts who said not to have now reversed, proving their advice was bad.

And Iran and Turkey. All of the world's cold places with high China and Italy flow got heavily infected. Exponential growth through the population takes many months. Wuhan, the epicenter, took >2.5 months to get to 100 deaths. The lockdown of infection areas and global travel has further limited growth.

I had the same argument with the moron Brass early in this thread, about how there were no meaningful cases outside of China and therefor infection rates were so low in Western Europe and this would turn out to be a nothing. You really want to use that logic again? It's all about time to spread exponentially + how bad the early/ongoing infection importing was plus how many measures are taken to stop it plus how warm the country is. Every country is the same, otherwise.
There hasn't been enough time to "save millions of lives". The virus hasn't had enough time to spread through the population in most places. You need early frequent infection from Chinese to have a high count now. 6 day doubling exponents take many months to spread to even 0.1% of the population.

The spread rate is far lower in hot humid countries, just like other airborne viruses.
You're demonstrably a moron with no critical thinking skills who doesn't get to tell anyone to be anything.