Jump to content

Are you really ready for two years of this?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 513
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

They  should  just  accept  the death rate and  carry  on,  instead  they'll  lose  more through the economic  crash.

I know I'm not.   https://www.wired.co.uk/article/uk-coronavirus-lockdown-long-term-plan     I think it's obvious by now that the hopes and promises of this virus situati

Well I'm with Jingthing on this. It's likely going to be 2 years just to get the first wave of infections worked through globally and that's assuming that places like Russia and N Korea divulge what's

Posted Images

11 hours ago, Monomial said:

 

How do I genuinely know that these authorities have *MY* best interests at heart, and not their own? 

 

The answer is simple: they don't, never have, never will

 

Here are two example:

 

1. The multi trillion dollars rescue plans

 

About 5% of the total amount for 95% of the population and the remainder 95% for big business and its shareholders

 

2. The chloroquine treatment of the disease

 

Supported by doctors on the front lines, but dismissed by the so called experts weaseling in the circles of power, who all have strong connections with the pharmaceutical industry

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Metapod said:

Coronaviruses have been around for many years and there has never been a single vaccine developed for them. Then think about stuff like AIDS with no vaccine for decades.

 

People who assume a vaccine is a sure thing have no idea at all.

The vaccine is the carrot hanging at the end of the stick

 

The stick is the 2 week long stay at home order, that is constantly drifting away like a mirage in the desert

 

The donkey is the populace on which the guys holding the stick and the carrot sit

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jastheace said:

 

grow up. there is a reason why governments have put their economies on hold (at enormous cost). not just to save the plebs, but for all.

 

At enormous cost...but not for them!

 

Who among them has lost his job, or reduced his income, and freedom?

 

Everyone is (forced into) making sacrifices, except the politicians.

 

Now, if you believe governments are competent, you need to open your eyes.

 

Long before the pandemic, the world was in a total mess, that was all the making of governments.

 

They didn't suddenly become competent because a crisis came out of nowhere.

 

Since they haven't got a clue about how to deal with this crisis, they simply copy China, which was the first confronted to it...without having any idea of what really happened over there, in terms of numbers.

 

If anything, it seems very likely that the stay at home orders make things worse (see the brilliant results of Italy, Spain and France).

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, simple1 said:

Have a look at Lancet

 

https://www.thelancet.com/coronavirus

 

Below is an example of the problem I have with the experts. Take this one article from that site, for example. This is obviously a very intelligent person who is initimately familiar with the subject, and he makes the following statement in his conclusion:

 

Containment of COVID-19 should remain the focus at the moment. The short-term cost of containment will be far lower than the long-term cost of non-containment.

 

The problem?  There is absolutely ZERO justification for this statement in his paper. It is simply his own personal opinion that he just slaps in during the conclusion. In order to make a statement like this, and to make it responsibly, you need to define the metric you are using for "cost". What things are you including in your calculations, and how is that calculation done? What are your values, vs. the values of the community? What other possible metrics have you considered? Do they all lead to this same conclusion?

 

The problem with opinions like this is we, and governments leaders as well, are expected to give his opinion more credence than our own because it comes from a so called "expert".  He is just a scientist. Not a god. This is not the way science works. The scientific method is broken right now. We need a fundamental rethink of how we deal with situations like this, because what we are doing today is horribly disfunctional.

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30129-8/fulltext

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Monomial said:

Containment of COVID-19 should remain the focus at the moment. The short-term cost of containment will be far lower than the long-term cost of non-containment.

 

The problem?  There is absolutely ZERO justification for this statement in his paper. It is simply his own personal opinion that he just slaps in during the conclusion. In order to make a statement like this, and to make it responsibly, you need to define the metric you are using for "cost". What things are you including in your calculations, and how is that calculation done? What are your values, vs. the values of the community? What other possible metrics have you considered? Do they all lead to this same conclusion?

 

The problem with opinions like this is we, and governments leaders as well, are expected to give his opinion more credence than our own because it comes from a so called "expert".  He is just a scientist. Not a god. This is not the way science works. The scientific method is broken right now. We need a fundamental rethink of how we deal with situations like this, because what we are doing today is horribly disfunctional.

 

The scientific method is not broken, we just lack sufficient data at the moment to be sure about the best way forward. In such a case, surely it is sensible to be cautious, save people's lives in the short term, find out more about the virus, get our health care systems better prepared and work forward from there?

 

What was horribly disfunctional was the lack of immediate preparation when we learned how devastating this could be in Wuhan. What is happening now is a fairly straightforward response to the models we had when decisions had to be made and observations about how the virus was spreading. You may think those decisions were wrong and you may be correct in the long term but nobody could be sure about this.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Monomial said:

 

Below is an example of the problem I have with the experts. Take this one article from that site, for example. This is obviously a very intelligent person who is initimately familiar with the subject, and he makes the following statement in his conclusion:

 

Containment of COVID-19 should remain the focus at the moment. The short-term cost of containment will be far lower than the long-term cost of non-containment.

 

The problem?  There is absolutely ZERO justification for this statement in his paper. It is simply his own personal opinion that he just slaps in during the conclusion. In order to make a statement like this, and to make it responsibly, you need to define the metric you are using for "cost". What things are you including in your calculations, and how is that calculation done? What are your values, vs. the values of the community? What other possible metrics have you considered? Do they all lead to this same conclusion?

 

The problem with opinions like this is we, and governments leaders as well, are expected to give his opinion more credence than our own because it comes from a so called "expert".  He is just a scientist. Not a god. This is not the way science works. The scientific method is broken right now. We need a fundamental rethink of how we deal with situations like this, because what we are doing today is horribly disfunctional.

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30129-8/fulltext

Some unfair comments. The report references the economic effects for SARS (with reference point), quote below,. Accordingly calling out economic effects of Covid from lessons learnt, IMO, is OK.

 

The psychological effects of SARS, coupled with travel restrictions imposed by various national and international authorities, resulted in a major economic loss for the airline industry and world economy in 2003, far beyond the main areas affected by SARS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At some point (soon) life will return to normal. Once they have enough ventilators and field hospitals set up and a treatment drug like the antriretroviral thing or the malaria one.

Some company will start making ventilators for $300 instead of $50,000. They arent particularly complicated perhaps 5% as complicated as a car or motorbike.

At that point - probably in about 2 months they will just open up all countries again. By then there will be equal (ish) infection rates in all countries so there wont be travel restrictions. For example 300 people fly from UK to Bangkok and the plane flies back with 300 people. Theres no increse in risk for either country.

 

Life will go back to normal with a new threat in town.

New threats scare people

Old threats are accepted

 

For example if the motorcycle was invented today - it would be rejected as being far too dangerous.

 

We dont stay at home hiding from the sun for fear of skin cancer. In time this will all be accepted and the hysteria will be over.

 

Old people will decide they dont want to spend their final years hiding and home and want to return to a normal life.

 

Just my 2 cents worth

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

long term im mostly curious if there will be a 300 thb st revival,

but for now im just euphoric i can drive mid day in south and central pattaya

without getting bogged down in traffic jam, im hoping for a permanent

large reduction in population in pattaya

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, brokenbone said:

(snip)  im hoping for a permanent

large reduction in population in pattaya

not the girls though, pls not the girls 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, simple1 said:

Some unfair comments. The report references the economic effects for SARS (with reference point), quote below,. Accordingly calling out economic effects of Covid from lessons learnt, IMO, is OK.

 

The psychological effects of SARS, coupled with travel restrictions imposed by various national and international authorities, resulted in a major economic loss for the airline industry and world economy in 2003, far beyond the main areas affected by SARS.

 

In his conclusion, he specifically states "The short-term cost of containment will be far lower than the long-term cost of non-containment."

 

Again, he does not explain how he arrived at this conclusion. Stating that there are economic consequences is orthogonal to explaining the model you used to evaluate cost. There is no quantifiable metric for cost mentioned anywhere in the paper. What is the specific cost formula employed? What are the input variables? This is nothing more than his opinion with absolutely no justification for what kind of a formula he used.  I don't believe this is an unfair comment. It goes to the very heart of the difference between facts and values. He is stating a value judgement as if it were a fact, and expecting us to simply accept it because he is an "expert".

 

This is wrong. This is not helpful. This leads to nothing but mistrust of scientists and experts by the population. We need to stop allowing this kind of misrepresentation of what science and the scientific method is all about.

 

In order to responsibly make the statement above, show your work. Justify it, and note where you are using genuine facts, and where you are substituting your personal values system in lieu of facts.  That is what scientists should be trained to do. That is how I was trained. This is not what I am seeing during this pandemic.

 

So how can I believe anything I have heard? All I see are experts who are blatantly abusing their status to push their own agendas. Maybe it is objectively the right one, but maybe not. How can any of us know?

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Monomial said:

 

In his conclusion, he specifically states "The short-term cost of containment will be far lower than the long-term cost of non-containment."

 

Again, he does not explain how he arrived at this conclusion. Stating that there are economic consequences is orthogonal to explaining the model you used to evaluate cost. There is no quantifiable metric for cost mentioned anywhere in the paper. What is the specific cost formula employed? What are the input variables? This is nothing more than his opinion with absolutely no justification for what kind of a formula he used.  I don't believe this is an unfair comment. It goes to the very heart of the difference between facts and values. He is stating a value judgement as if it were a fact, and expecting us to simply accept it because he is an "expert".

 

This is wrong. This is not helpful. This leads to nothing but mistrust of scientists and experts by the population. We need to stop allowing this kind of misrepresentation of what science and the scientific method is all about.

 

In order to responsibly make the statement above, show your work. Justify it, and note where you are using genuine facts, and where you are substituting your personal values system in lieu of facts.  That is what scientists should be trained to do. That is how I was trained. This is not what I am seeing during this pandemic.

 

So how can I believe anything I have heard? All I see are experts who are blatantly abusing their status to push their own agendas. Maybe it is objectively the right one, but maybe not. How can any of us know?

 

"The short-term cost of containment will be far lower than the long-term cost of non-containment." 

Again, he does not explain how he arrived at this conclusion.

 

Relax, why would he need to? Perfectly logical conclusion is it not on what we know of the virulent spread of Covid-19?

 

The author is not an economist. But again he was basing his thoughts on the economic effects of SARS which so far as I know are not disputed. Really don't comprehend why you're apparently distressed by a medical researcher's side comments on economic effects. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, CrossBones said:

At some point (soon) life will return to normal. Once they have enough ventilators and field hospitals set up and a treatment drug like the antriretroviral thing or the malaria one.

Some company will start making ventilators for $300 instead of $50,000. They arent particularly complicated perhaps 5% as complicated as a car or motorbike.

At that point - probably in about 2 months they will just open up all countries again. By then there will be equal (ish) infection rates in all countries so there wont be travel restrictions. For example 300 people fly from UK to Bangkok and the plane flies back with 300 people. Theres no increse in risk for either country.

 

Life will go back to normal with a new threat in town.

New threats scare people

Old threats are accepted

 

For example if the motorcycle was invented today - it would be rejected as being far too dangerous.

 

We dont stay at home hiding from the sun for fear of skin cancer. In time this will all be accepted and the hysteria will be over.

 

Old people will decide they dont want to spend their final years hiding and home and want to return to a normal life.

 

Just my 2 cents worth

 

The post corona new normal will probably be full of small changes, like mandatory face mask in public transportation, first 4 opening hours at Supermarkets only serve senior citizens, corona certificate for international travel, etc.

Link to post
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...