Johns Hopkins Medical Centre - World Coronavirus infection Map by Country.

[Macca]

I did think long and hard before putting up the link below, but all i will say concerning this is post is; if this person is right, then maybe there is a real danger of this strain of Virus mutating into something far more dangerous, and maybe governments around the world know this, which is why they are desperate to stamp it out completely, i don't know, and i don't think many others out there know either, only those who have studied, or those who had a hand in its creation know more than us, all i am saying, is stay vigilent, and don't take unecessary risks!
And no before i get flamed for the platform this is on,i don't usualy visit this site, this was linked from another site i was reading!
https://www.infowars.com/rogue-chine...reated-in-lab/

Interesting, but the paper needs to be critiqued by experts before it's worth seriously considering as a possibility. I'll wait for the peer reviews.

[Marco]

Thanks for your detailed reply, although bloody hell, you are SHITE at doing quotes! Anyway, I'll just respond to this now and get to the rest later:

Because the strategy was based on the data available back in March. The predictions turned out to be way off.

Ok, so WHY aren't they basing their current strategy on the data available NOW, such as that contained in the video you linked to earlier, and studying properly what has *actually* happened? THAT is my point!!

Marco.

[anthonyTD]

Another link to the actual report, rather than having to go to that site!
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitic...ops+to+zero%29

[Marco]

Interesting, but the paper needs to be critiqued by experts before it's worth seriously considering as a possibility. I'll wait for the peer reviews.

Indeed it is very interesting (so thanks for sharing that, Anthony). If it's true though (and the repercussions for that would be horrendous and could trigger a war against China), why didn't they create a deadlier virus?

Because lets face it, although one death is one too many, it's done a pretty piss-poor job so far of killing folk, aside from the very weak!

And what's that got to do with the governments of the world behaving as they've done? If what's contained in that link is true, then how does locking down everything fight it, when that's already been proven not to work?

Marco.

[Macca]

Thanks for your detailed reply, although bloody hell, you are SHITE at doing quotes! Anyway, I'll just respond to this now and get to the rest later:



Ok, so WHY aren't they basing their current strategy on the data available NOW, such as that contained in the video you linked to earlier, and studying properly what has *actually* happened? THAT is my point!!

Marco.

They are. Pubs and restaurants re-opened (no masks while eating and drinking) children back to school, employers urged to end home-working and so on. Too much too soon and you get the pearl-clutchers up in arms. Also, regrettably, we've seen from the start how this has been used as a political football so you have all the 'lefties' who, whilst some may agree with the science, will still use relaxation of restrictions as a stick to beat the government with - evil tories risking all our lives etc etc.

So it's political considerations first, pragmatism second. As always.

[Macca]

Indeed it is very interesting (so thanks for sharing that, Anthony). If it's true though (and the repercussions for that would be horrendous and could trigger a war against China), why didn't they create a deadlier virus?

Because lets face it, although one death is one too many, it's done a pretty piss-poor job so far of killing folk, aside from the very weak!

And what's that got to do with the governments of the world behaving as they've done? If what's contained in that link is true, then how does locking down everything fight it, when that's already been proven not to work?

Marco.

That does seem to be a logical conclusion. If you were going to manufacture a deadly virus you'd surely do a whole lot better. I suppose you could argue it was a work in progress and was accidentally released prior to completion. All highly unlikely though. And unlikely a government would be behind it too. Maybe a Bond villain might try something like that.

[Marco]

They are. Pubs and restaurants re-opened (no masks while eating and drinking) children back to school, employers urged to end home-working and so on. Too much too soon and you get the pearl-clutchers up in arms. Also, regrettably, we've seen from the start how this has been used as a political football so you have all the 'lefties' who, whilst some may agree with the science, will still use relaxation of restrictions as a stick to beat the government with - evil tories risking all our lives etc etc.

So it's political considerations first, pragmatism second. As always.

You're missing the point. The data contained in the video you linked to CLEARLY showed that such actions have had little to NO impact on altering the behaviour of the virus, so......

Why persist with them, and a strategy that's patently FAILING?? ...When the impact it's having is so devastating on people's lives, and in a way that's likely to be more damaging, in the long term, than any effect of the virus?

And why are they continually twittering on about a 'second wave' when the evidence shown in the video you posted, CLEARLY illustrates, based on past behaviour of similar viruses, that that's extremely unlikely to happen?

My basic point is that what they're doing now to supposedly 'help' the situation is likely to achieve the precise opposite!

Moreover, if there's another national lockdown (as has been mooted in the news over the last few days), simply due to exaggerated case figures, it WILL make things WORSE - that's worse in terms of what impact it'll have on things that currently MATTER FAR MORE (as the virulent effect of the virus is clearly in decline), such as the economy and many folks dying from cancer, etc, because they can't get treatment - that'll likely kill far more people than the bloody virus will!

Therefore, I'm afraid logic dictates that there are only two possible reasons that explain the government's current behaviour:

1) Gross stupidity or incompetence.

2) They have an (as yet undisclosed) agenda.

And based on what I've seen, both to date and recently, since this whole thing started, I'm strongly favouring the latter.

Marco.

[Marco]

That does seem to be a logical conclusion. If you were going to manufacture a deadly virus you'd surely do a whole lot better. I suppose you could argue it was a work in progress and was accidentally released prior to completion. All highly unlikely though. And unlikely a government would be behind it too. Maybe a Bond villain might try something like that.

Seriously though, what's interesting is that the argument for that is both well-thought out and plausible (based on the contents of Anthony's link), as in it *could* have happened, but is very unlikely. It's, however, not ridiculous.

My basic point being that there appears to be enough smoke caused, to potentially have started a fire...

Marco.

[Sherwood]

There is so much BS on the Internet about Covid 19, much of it produced by conspiracy theorists with a political axe to grind or by unqualified commentators without the appropriate technical skills and training. The Youtube video posted earlier was authored by a chemical engineer not by a public health specialist or epidemiologist. It amounts to no more than a crude curve-fitting exercise rather than a disease modelling exercise and as such has no explanatory or predictive power. It is already undermined by the fact that infection rates have started to rise alarmingly in many countries in recent weeks. I place my confidence in the work of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation and its director Chris Murray. Chris is a world-renowned expert in disease modelling and played a key role in the global burden of disease work when he was at WHO. The IHME projections for the coming months are frightening.


A few governments briefly flirted with the idea of a strategy based on herd immunity principles but quickly abandoned this when the huge mortality implications were calculated. Herd immunity not the only game in town it is not even an effective approach. It is naive in the extreme to believe that we can regulate the rate of new infections en route to the development of herd immunity such that we do not overwhelm health services in the interim period. Without any mitigation actions, the reproduction rate for Covid appears to be about 3. Clearly, clearly some countries have been more effective than others in reducing this rate, with some achieving rates well below unity (1).


As public health experts have repeatedly reaffirmed, there are effective strategies already available pending the development of a safe and effective vaccine. The key elements of this strategy are: mask wearing, social distancing, avoidance of mass congregating, widespread testing with rapid turnaround of results, contact tracing, and early isolation of infected parties. Johns Hopkins projections suggest that in the absence of the above mitigation efforts, this winter will see health services worldwide overwhelmed by Covid cases.


This will be my last post on this subject. As someone who has worked in international health in around 30 different countries over 35 years my comments are based upon evidence and science. I take no pleasure in predicting that without a strengthening of mitigation measures, we will see the NHS under extreme pressure of collapse in the coming winter. I hope I am wrong but the science and (credible) models suggest otherwise.

[Marco]

With respect, Geoff, like the WHO have got it all right so far, including the model that they created to predict the outcome of the epidemic? Sorry, I see little evidence to place much faith in what that shower of assholes come up with!

So thanks very much, but no, I'll stick instead with the "BS" I consider is the more reliable, based on my judgment criteria. I'll get to the rest of your post later.

Marco.