Jump to content

Please read these medical opinions


Brunolem

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

All of them. This incomplete draft, if genuine, has either been stolen or leaked. In any event it has not been properly reviewed or formally published. So the gutter press have taken it upon themselves to quote or publish it anyway. Quite irresponsible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Logosone said:

Not only did the Robert Koch Institute warn in 2012 of a coronavirus pandemic, witness Bill Gates in 2015 warning of a pandemic. Gives you chills down your spine...

 

 

But I've got Windows Defender included in W10. Does that not stop all virii?

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, nauseus said:

All of them. This incomplete draft, if genuine, has either been stolen or leaked. In any event it has not been properly reviewed or formally published. So the gutter press have taken it upon themselves to quote or publish it anyway. Quite irresponsible.

So the Financial Times, the Guardian, the Spectator, the Times, all gutter press, rather an extravagant indictment of your excellent press. 

 

Of course the paper is genuine the authors have been interviewed and widely quoted. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stouricks said:

But I've got Windows Defender included in W10. Does that not stop all virii?

It's virus. In Latin virus has no plural, it's just virus.

 

In English it's viruses.

 

Virii is the plural of another Latin word.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

When this pandemic will be over, they will discover that they have destroyed the world economy for a virus no more lethal than the flu...

 

A typical example of "act first, think later" which has become the motto of our civilization.

 

Do you really think that just because the corona virus is no longer classified in the same category as ebola or lassa fever that it is not a massive danger to life, as such  do you really think the current actions are not warranted......really, you really believe that!

Edited by saengd
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

logosone , It also states that all confirmed cases of the virus should be sent to the treatment centers and hospitals. So what do you, or they, suggest one does when these centers and hospitals are full to overflowing with very sick patients ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Logosone said:

So the Financial Times, the Guardian, the Spectator, the Times, all gutter press, rather an extravagant indictment of your excellent press. 

 

Of course the paper is genuine the authors have been interviewed and widely quoted. 

From your Guardian link: 

 

Paul Klenerman, one of the Oxford researchers, called the 68% figure the most extreme result and explained that “there is another extreme which is that only a tiny proportion have been exposed”. The true figure, which is unknown, was likely somewhere in between, he said.

 

In other words, the number of people infected in Britain is either very large, very small, or middling. This may sound unhelpful, but that is precisely the point. “We need much more data about who has been exposed to inform policy,” Klenerman said.

 

In other words they don't know! And this is about exposure, not actual contraction of the virus. So, your initial suggestion that a new model by the University of Oxford estimates that half the population of the UK could be infected already and thus the UK is well on the way to herd immunity which is almost achieved there is actually just speculation, guesswork and therefore likely to be false. 

Edited by nauseus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, geisha said:

logosone , It also states that all confirmed cases of the virus should be sent to the treatment centers and hospitals. So what do you, or they, suggest one does when these centers and hospitals are full to overflowing with very sick patients ? 

Maybe vote Labour.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, nauseus said:

From your Guardian link: 

 

Paul Klenerman, one of the Oxford researchers, called the 68% figure the most extreme result and explained that “there is another extreme which is that only a tiny proportion have been exposed”. The true figure, which is unknown, was likely somewhere in between, he said.

 

In other words, the number of people infected in Britain is either very large, very small, or middling. This may sound unhelpful, but that is precisely the point. “We need much more data about who has been exposed to inform policy,” Klenerman said.

 

In other words they don't know! And this is exposure, not contraction.

They don't know for certain in terms of having iron-clad data. Simply because that data is not available yet. The HAVE to hypothesize but you do so within rational parametres if you're an Oxford University academic.

 

And one of the models shows that it is quite possible that most of the UK has already been infected. It certainly would be more than ten times or twenty times the identified cases as Sir Patrick Vallance, the chief medical adviser of the UK has already said.

 

So even your Chief Medical Adviser is using hypothesis and non-iron clad data. He doesn't know for sure that the number of cases is ten or twenty times the identified cases. However it is the most likely conclusion, and quality analysis would dictate that the number of cases is considerably higher than identified cases. 

 

Of course nobody in the world would claim they have the exact number, but the model shows that it is more than possible that more than half the UK's population has already been infected. 

 

Which of course is excellent news. Unless you're 80.

Edited by Logosone
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, geisha said:

logosone , It also states that all confirmed cases of the virus should be sent to the treatment centers and hospitals. So what do you, or they, suggest one does when these centers and hospitals are full to overflowing with very sick patients ? 

What one always does in crowded hospitals, wait until the medical personnel tell you it's your turn?

 

What else can you do? Try another hospital. It's been like that for decades. The underfunded, understaffed NHS has been poorly managed for decades. This is not a surprise. This is not new.

 

We shouldn't let the mass media induced hysteria get to us. I've just seen a perfidious example of this mis-reporting by no-one else but Adam Boulton of Sky News.

 

They did an interview with a New York doctor. The doctor said "It's worse than 911, then we were waiting for lots of patients but they never came".

 

So on goes Adam Boulton to claim straight-faced and serious 'It's worse than 911'.

 

Well of course it would be worse from a doctor's perspective because hardly any patients came after 911. Pretty much anything would have been worse.

 

This is just a small example of how the media twists the truth for ratings and creates panic.

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, geisha said:

logosone , It also states that all confirmed cases of the virus should be sent to the treatment centers and hospitals. So what do you, or they, suggest one does when these centers and hospitals are full to overflowing with very sick patients ? 

Bunk beds?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Chazar said:

its  not as  dangerous  as  driving daily  in Thailand if I check the death rate for  both in the next 6  months, theyre  gonna  need  at least 12000 deaths

A person has a choice whether to drive on the roads or not, they have little choice in whether they frequent places where others are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, geisha said:

It is not only the NHS, practically every country has, or will have, enormous problems handling this crisis. Not something to be taken lightly. 

You're quite right. Almost every country has underfunded its health service, so when push comes to shove they are not able to cope.

 

Except for the shining example of the German health service, which has basically done everything right.

 

We should judge at the end though. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Logosone said:

‘Viri’ does exist in Latin as the plural form of ‘vir’ (man).

Virii would be the plural form of the word virius.

It's simple as chips man.

Param, Paras, Parat, Paramus, Parantus, Parant  - I remember it not very well ????

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Death rates: Italy 10% Germany 0.5%,there is a twenty fold difference?I've read that both have a mean age of 81 years for fatalities so whats the go with that?Surely Italy doesn't have a twenty fold difference in the number of 81 year olds?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, FarFlungFalang said:

Death rates: Italy 10% Germany 0.5%,there is a twenty fold difference?I've read that both have a mean age of 81 years for fatalities so whats the go with that?Surely Italy doesn't have a twenty fold difference in the number of 81 year olds?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBB9bA-gXL4&feature=youtu.be&t=99

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...