On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 17:25:24 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 10:11:02 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 4/12/20 8:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/11/2020 9:57 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 15:23:13 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 4/11/20 1:32 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 09:29:26 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 4/10/20 9:42 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 16:31:10 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cud7...ature=youtu.be

Fauci is just hoping nobody compiles the things he said that turn out
to be wrong. He might cost them some grant money.


Oh, so you think Fauci is as intellectually full of **** as you
are, eh?

He certainly seem to be very flexible in what he believes is true. The
"facts" seem to change daily and mostly toward the idea that this was
a lot of hysterical hype. The CDC and NIH guidelines are letters in
the sand that disappear at every tide change ... IOW about twice a
day.


Indeed, Fauci is a scientist who absorbs new data and evaluates it.



Science seldom supports an estimate that changes by a factor of 3600%
in 2 weeks. (2.2 million to 60,000) . It also seems pretty unlikely
that science makes the leap from "A home made face mask is useless" to
recommending them for anyone in public.
Those are politically knee jerks, not science.
Nobody wants to tell Nanna she is wasting her time but I bet most
hospitals are throwing those home made face masks in the trash. I know
I would not be happy if my surgeon showed up with a Granny's "do rag"
on his face.


Not quite that bad Greg.

The estimate of 2.3 million deaths was based on doing *nothing*.

The estimates of up to 240K deaths which was reduced first to
84K and then to 60K are based on everyone following the CDC
recommendations precisely.



Apparently science doesn't mesh with Greg's loonytarian preference of
doing nothing.

There is not much "science" in these "do rag" masks.
They are certainly more than useless without any kind of sterile
protocol in place. Stuffing a dirty rag in your pocket that has been
collecting whatever was in the air and then reusing it contaminates
your hands, your pocket and anything else you put in your pocket.

They did an interesting demonstration here using U/V powder and the
mask wearing little blonde news girl glowed like a christmas tree
after an hour of typical activity, including under her mask.

Dipping them in a solution of clorox and water solves that problem. Even gives
the wearer some clean hands.
--

Freedom Isn't Free!

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 17:29:07 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 18:36:34 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

justan wrote:
Wrote in message:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 16:31:10 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cud7...=youtu.beFauci
is just hoping nobody compiles the things he said that turn outto be
wrong. He might cost them some grant money.

Fauci is just reacting to the available data. In the beginning
there was just models. You should wish that your mind will be as
sharp and flexable when you reach his age.

What no one is saying, is no matter what the curve, the area below the
curve is the same.

True, If you are 80 with COPD, this is as likely to kill you in July
as it is now.

Keep your fingers crossed for a 'cure' of some sort.

https://nypost.com/2020/04/11/doctor...drug-cocktail/
--

Freedom Isn't Free!

wrote:
On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 18:36:34 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

justan wrote:
Wrote in message:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 16:31:10 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cud7...=youtu.beFauci
is just hoping nobody compiles the things he said that turn outto be
wrong. He might cost them some grant money.

Fauci is just reacting to the available data. In the beginning
there was just models. You should wish that your mind will be as
sharp and flexable when you reach his age.

What no one is saying, is no matter what the curve, the area below the
curve is the same.

===

That's not necessarily true. If an effective treatment or vaccine
comes along, the tail of the distribution curve will be trimmed at
some point.


Only if a vaccine. If it is just infection, then pretty much the same
area.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 15:48:01 -0400,
wrote:

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 18:36:34 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

justan wrote:
Wrote in message:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 16:31:10 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cud7...=youtu.beFauci
is just hoping nobody compiles the things he said that turn outto be
wrong. He might cost them some grant money.

Fauci is just reacting to the available data. In the beginning
there was just models. You should wish that your mind will be as
sharp and flexable when you reach his age.

What no one is saying, is no matter what the curve, the area below the
curve is the same.

===

That's not necessarily true. If an effective treatment or vaccine
comes along, the tail of the distribution curve will be trimmed at
some point.

Unless they skip the clinical and animal trials, that will be over a
year from now. I doubt we can hide that long.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 17:32:21 -0400, John wrote:

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 17:06:45 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 07:14:11 -0400, John wrote:

On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 21:57:54 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 15:23:13 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 4/11/20 1:32 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 09:29:26 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 4/10/20 9:42 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 16:31:10 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cud7...ature=youtu.be

Fauci is just hoping nobody compiles the things he said that turn out
to be wrong. He might cost them some grant money.


Oh, so you think Fauci is as intellectually full of **** as you are, eh?

He certainly seem to be very flexible in what he believes is true. The
"facts" seem to change daily and mostly toward the idea that this was
a lot of hysterical hype. The CDC and NIH guidelines are letters in
the sand that disappear at every tide change ... IOW about twice a
day.


Indeed, Fauci is a scientist who absorbs new data and evaluates it.

Science seldom supports an estimate that changes by a factor of 3600%
in 2 weeks. (2.2 million to 60,000) . It also seems pretty unlikely
that science makes the leap from "A home made face mask is useless" to
recommending them for anyone in public.
Those are politically knee jerks, not science.
Nobody wants to tell Nanna she is wasting her time but I bet most
hospitals are throwing those home made face masks in the trash. I know
I would not be happy if my surgeon showed up with a Granny's "do rag"
on his face.

You are sounding much like CNN. There was a very high, non-mitigation estimate,
and a much lower estimate with mitigation. As Spain and Italy were used as
inputs, the output was high. Adjustments have been made based upon actual US
data and we see the result.

Of course, you knew that.

I knew that the demographic and geography made them bad models if that
is what you mean.

As it turns out, you were correct. But so were they when they modified the
model. You start with what you have.


I've seen no recommendations for surgeons to wear home made facemasks. The
purpose of the facemask for the public is to contain the virus if one is a
carrier. A cloth mask, although not perfect, is much better than no mask. Common
sense says that.

The thing that is flawed is it makes the mask wearer much more likely
to be infected unless they follow a far stricter protocol than simply
stuffing the rag in their pocket between wearings. It becomes a very
effective vector for the virus.
Fauci and the experts used to say that

In this case, the purpose of the public wearing the mask is so carriers will not
spread the virus as much. The wearer of the mask is not the one being protected,
although there may be some little protection.

It is still more of a feel good gesture than a real panacea unless the
public gets a whole lot better at the protocols than the girl on the
news. She was wearing a mask and gloves and within an hour she was
coated with the U/V powder used to simulate germs. She was leaving a
trail behind her along with being infected herself.
I did learn one thing. Washing your hands is only half of it. Wash
your face too. This girl had contamination on her face could quickly
be spread to her sinuses after she had washed her hands and taken off
the mask.
If you are serious about this, you almost need to be using "clean
room" protocols.

OTOH at my age, I am not supposed to be infected asymptomatically. It
is supposed to knock my dick in the dirt right away ... if you can
believe what you hear.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 17:33:55 -0400, John wrote:

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 17:20:55 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 08:34:56 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 4/11/2020 9:57 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 15:23:13 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 4/11/20 1:32 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 09:29:26 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 4/10/20 9:42 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 16:31:10 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cud7...ature=youtu.be

Fauci is just hoping nobody compiles the things he said that turn out
to be wrong. He might cost them some grant money.


Oh, so you think Fauci is as intellectually full of **** as you are, eh?

He certainly seem to be very flexible in what he believes is true. The
"facts" seem to change daily and mostly toward the idea that this was
a lot of hysterical hype. The CDC and NIH guidelines are letters in
the sand that disappear at every tide change ... IOW about twice a
day.


Indeed, Fauci is a scientist who absorbs new data and evaluates it.



Science seldom supports an estimate that changes by a factor of 3600%
in 2 weeks. (2.2 million to 60,000) . It also seems pretty unlikely
that science makes the leap from "A home made face mask is useless" to
recommending them for anyone in public.
Those are politically knee jerks, not science.
Nobody wants to tell Nanna she is wasting her time but I bet most
hospitals are throwing those home made face masks in the trash. I know
I would not be happy if my surgeon showed up with a Granny's "do rag"
on his face.


Not quite that bad Greg.

The estimate of 2.3 million deaths was based on doing *nothing*.

The estimates of up to 240K deaths which was reduced first to
84K and then to 60K are based on everyone following the CDC
recommendations precisely.

Since we are all likely to get it eventually, the only thing I see
this doing is "flattening the curve" and not having it all happen at
once, They pretty much say that too. It is unlikely a vaccine will be
here before this thing runs it' initial course. This curve is likely
to look more like a decreasing sine wave as the virus waxes and wanes
through society ... assuming we stay locked down and start venturing
out over time.

Good, you see the purpose - flattening the curve.

It still doesn't change your chances of being infected and at our age,
dying. It just prolongs the suspense.

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 17:35:22 -0400, John wrote:

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 17:25:24 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 10:11:02 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 4/12/20 8:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/11/2020 9:57 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 15:23:13 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 4/11/20 1:32 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 09:29:26 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 4/10/20 9:42 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 16:31:10 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cud7...ature=youtu.be

Fauci is just hoping nobody compiles the things he said that turn out
to be wrong. He might cost them some grant money.


Oh, so you think Fauci is as intellectually full of **** as you
are, eh?

He certainly seem to be very flexible in what he believes is true. The
"facts" seem to change daily and mostly toward the idea that this was
a lot of hysterical hype. The CDC and NIH guidelines are letters in
the sand that disappear at every tide change ... IOW about twice a
day.


Indeed, Fauci is a scientist who absorbs new data and evaluates it.



Science seldom supports an estimate that changes by a factor of 3600%
in 2 weeks. (2.2 million to 60,000) . It also seems pretty unlikely
that science makes the leap from "A home made face mask is useless" to
recommending them for anyone in public.
Those are politically knee jerks, not science.
Nobody wants to tell Nanna she is wasting her time but I bet most
hospitals are throwing those home made face masks in the trash. I know
I would not be happy if my surgeon showed up with a Granny's "do rag"
on his face.


Not quite that bad Greg.

The estimate of 2.3 million deaths was based on doing *nothing*.

The estimates of up to 240K deaths which was reduced first to
84K and then to 60K are based on everyone following the CDC
recommendations precisely.



Apparently science doesn't mesh with Greg's loonytarian preference of
doing nothing.

There is not much "science" in these "do rag" masks.
They are certainly more than useless without any kind of sterile
protocol in place. Stuffing a dirty rag in your pocket that has been
collecting whatever was in the air and then reusing it contaminates
your hands, your pocket and anything else you put in your pocket.

They did an interesting demonstration here using U/V powder and the
mask wearing little blonde news girl glowed like a christmas tree
after an hour of typical activity, including under her mask.

Dipping them in a solution of clorox and water solves that problem. Even gives
the wearer some clean hands.

That is great if you only go one place a day and you have time for it
to dry between wearings. In her case it was more about what she did
after she took it off.

Actually I have been thinking about this and looking at my stash of
Costco stuff. I turned up a 240 pack of deluxe paper dinner napkins. I
think if you used alligator clips and rubber bands, fold these over
once and used that for a mask, (the size seems good) you could chuck
it and start with a fresh one every time.
I may put some in a zip bag and keep them in the car in case we do go
to a mandatory mask thing but I am certainly not reusing them. I would
still scrub up before and after wearing it and be really careful
getting it off and into the trash.
By the standard, an N-95 is supposed to catch 95% of anything bigger
than 0.3 microns. I wonder what 6 layers of that napkin material would
stop. It is certainly a lot more than an old, washed 100 times T
shirt. I think I would grind fiberglass with it if I could get a
tighter fit to my face.
I do still have some N-95s here tho and I am saving them for tasks
like that. I am way more afraid of emphysema or VOCs than Covid.

On 4/12/2020 8:57 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 17:33:55 -0400, John wrote:

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 17:20:55 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 08:34:56 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 4/11/2020 9:57 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 15:23:13 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 4/11/20 1:32 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 09:29:26 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 4/10/20 9:42 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 16:31:10 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cud7...ature=youtu.be

Fauci is just hoping nobody compiles the things he said that turn out
to be wrong. He might cost them some grant money.


Oh, so you think Fauci is as intellectually full of **** as you are, eh?

He certainly seem to be very flexible in what he believes is true. The
"facts" seem to change daily and mostly toward the idea that this was
a lot of hysterical hype. The CDC and NIH guidelines are letters in
the sand that disappear at every tide change ... IOW about twice a
day.


Indeed, Fauci is a scientist who absorbs new data and evaluates it.



Science seldom supports an estimate that changes by a factor of 3600%
in 2 weeks. (2.2 million to 60,000) . It also seems pretty unlikely
that science makes the leap from "A home made face mask is useless" to
recommending them for anyone in public.
Those are politically knee jerks, not science.
Nobody wants to tell Nanna she is wasting her time but I bet most
hospitals are throwing those home made face masks in the trash. I know
I would not be happy if my surgeon showed up with a Granny's "do rag"
on his face.


Not quite that bad Greg.

The estimate of 2.3 million deaths was based on doing *nothing*.

The estimates of up to 240K deaths which was reduced first to
84K and then to 60K are based on everyone following the CDC
recommendations precisely.

Since we are all likely to get it eventually, the only thing I see
this doing is "flattening the curve" and not having it all happen at
once, They pretty much say that too. It is unlikely a vaccine will be
here before this thing runs it' initial course. This curve is likely
to look more like a decreasing sine wave as the virus waxes and wanes
through society ... assuming we stay locked down and start venturing
out over time.



Good, you see the purpose - flattening the curve.

It still doesn't change your chances of being infected and at our age,
dying. It just prolongs the suspense.


That's true. I think there has been so much talk about rates going
down, etc. that the concept of "flattening the curve" has been forgotten.

When the curve is flattened, all it does is extend it over a
greater period of time. The original idea was to prevent hospitals
from becoming overwhelmed. In that respect, it has worked.

I've been charting the number of confirmed cases in Plymouth County
with a population of approx. 500K. On March 1st there were no
confirmed cases. This morning there are 2024. The slope continues
to go up at the same rate it has for the past 2 weeks.


--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 20:55:47 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 17:32:21 -0400, John wrote:

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 17:06:45 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 07:14:11 -0400, John wrote:

On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 21:57:54 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 15:23:13 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 4/11/20 1:32 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 09:29:26 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 4/10/20 9:42 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 16:31:10 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cud7...ature=youtu.be

Fauci is just hoping nobody compiles the things he said that turn out
to be wrong. He might cost them some grant money.


Oh, so you think Fauci is as intellectually full of **** as you are, eh?

He certainly seem to be very flexible in what he believes is true. The
"facts" seem to change daily and mostly toward the idea that this was
a lot of hysterical hype. The CDC and NIH guidelines are letters in
the sand that disappear at every tide change ... IOW about twice a
day.


Indeed, Fauci is a scientist who absorbs new data and evaluates it.

Science seldom supports an estimate that changes by a factor of 3600%
in 2 weeks. (2.2 million to 60,000) . It also seems pretty unlikely
that science makes the leap from "A home made face mask is useless" to
recommending them for anyone in public.
Those are politically knee jerks, not science.
Nobody wants to tell Nanna she is wasting her time but I bet most
hospitals are throwing those home made face masks in the trash. I know
I would not be happy if my surgeon showed up with a Granny's "do rag"
on his face.

You are sounding much like CNN. There was a very high, non-mitigation estimate,
and a much lower estimate with mitigation. As Spain and Italy were used as
inputs, the output was high. Adjustments have been made based upon actual US
data and we see the result.

Of course, you knew that.

I knew that the demographic and geography made them bad models if that
is what you mean.

As it turns out, you were correct. But so were they when they modified the
model. You start with what you have.


I've seen no recommendations for surgeons to wear home made facemasks. The
purpose of the facemask for the public is to contain the virus if one is a
carrier. A cloth mask, although not perfect, is much better than no mask. Common
sense says that.

The thing that is flawed is it makes the mask wearer much more likely
to be infected unless they follow a far stricter protocol than simply
stuffing the rag in their pocket between wearings. It becomes a very
effective vector for the virus.
Fauci and the experts used to say that

In this case, the purpose of the public wearing the mask is so carriers will not
spread the virus as much. The wearer of the mask is not the one being protected,
although there may be some little protection.

It is still more of a feel good gesture than a real panacea unless the
public gets a whole lot better at the protocols than the girl on the
news. She was wearing a mask and gloves and within an hour she was
coated with the U/V powder used to simulate germs. She was leaving a
trail behind her along with being infected herself.
I did learn one thing. Washing your hands is only half of it. Wash
your face too. This girl had contamination on her face could quickly
be spread to her sinuses after she had washed her hands and taken off
the mask.
If you are serious about this, you almost need to be using "clean
room" protocols.

OTOH at my age, I am not supposed to be infected asymptomatically. It
is supposed to knock my dick in the dirt right away ... if you can
believe what you hear.

Again, you missed the point. Wearing the mask is to protect others, not
yourself.

She should have started with a mouthfull of the powder and blown it through the
mask.
--

Freedom Isn't Free!

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 20:57:02 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 17:33:55 -0400, John wrote:

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 17:20:55 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 08:34:56 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 4/11/2020 9:57 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 15:23:13 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 4/11/20 1:32 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 09:29:26 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 4/10/20 9:42 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 16:31:10 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cud7...ature=youtu.be

Fauci is just hoping nobody compiles the things he said that turn out
to be wrong. He might cost them some grant money.


Oh, so you think Fauci is as intellectually full of **** as you are, eh?

He certainly seem to be very flexible in what he believes is true. The
"facts" seem to change daily and mostly toward the idea that this was
a lot of hysterical hype. The CDC and NIH guidelines are letters in
the sand that disappear at every tide change ... IOW about twice a
day.


Indeed, Fauci is a scientist who absorbs new data and evaluates it.



Science seldom supports an estimate that changes by a factor of 3600%
in 2 weeks. (2.2 million to 60,000) . It also seems pretty unlikely
that science makes the leap from "A home made face mask is useless" to
recommending them for anyone in public.
Those are politically knee jerks, not science.
Nobody wants to tell Nanna she is wasting her time but I bet most
hospitals are throwing those home made face masks in the trash. I know
I would not be happy if my surgeon showed up with a Granny's "do rag"
on his face.


Not quite that bad Greg.

The estimate of 2.3 million deaths was based on doing *nothing*.

The estimates of up to 240K deaths which was reduced first to
84K and then to 60K are based on everyone following the CDC
recommendations precisely.

Since we are all likely to get it eventually, the only thing I see
this doing is "flattening the curve" and not having it all happen at
once, They pretty much say that too. It is unlikely a vaccine will be
here before this thing runs it' initial course. This curve is likely
to look more like a decreasing sine wave as the virus waxes and wanes
through society ... assuming we stay locked down and start venturing
out over time.

Good, you see the purpose - flattening the curve.

It still doesn't change your chances of being infected and at our age,
dying. It just prolongs the suspense.

Which is why I said early on that I'd as soon catch it quickly, before the
hospitals got full!
--

Freedom Isn't Free!