• brennesel@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    2 days ago

    I watched the whole video and several times Allen says “… the overall threat to the general public is low”. He also says “we know very little about the transmission” and “this is not going to be a Covid blow up”.

    Yes, we should take this seriously. But please don’t be overly dramatic when there simply aren’t enough details available yet.

      • brennesel@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        On the contrary. I’ve been here for several years and still have to get used to the fact that it’s becoming more and more like Reddit.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      If one guy on the Titanic said “maybe we shouldn’t hit the iceberg headon”

      That doesn’t mean we’re being careful.

      We’re still headed straight at the iceberg, one guy saying maybe not to didn’t change anything.

      He thinks that people will understand the difference and start treating this like the Andes variant, and that will happen when it’s still just isolated cases and we’ll be able to handle it…

      I don’t trust America’s government agencies run by people like RFK Jr to make the right calls.

      I think the gov will fuck it up, and that makes this go beyond the few isolated cases he’s hoping it stops at

      How much faith do you have in RFK jr to handle this probably? How long do you think before he puts the raccoon penis down and gets directly involved in this?

      • Cypher@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        You need to chill, the R or number of people who will be infected by someone with the Andes variant of Hantavirus is extremely low. Too low to result in a pandemic.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          It’s 2.1…

          Epidemiological analysis estimated an initial median reproductive number of approximately 2.1 before control measures were implemented, decreasing after isolation, quarantine and active contact tracing.

          https://zenodo.org/records/20112944

          2-3x COVID in the UK

          https://www.bbc.com/news/health-52473523

          Are you saying COVID wasn’t a pandemic?

          Logically you are if you’re saying R value determines that and 2.1 means it can’t be a pandemic when COVID was 0.7-0.9…

          But I don’t think there’s a lot of logic at play here

            • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 day ago

              The abstract, in full:

              Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is the causative agent of the ongoing coronavirus disease pandemic. Initial estimates of the early dynamics of the outbreak in Wuhan, China, suggested a doubling time of the number of infected persons of 6–7 days and a basic reproductive number (R0) of 2.2–2.7. We collected extensive individual case reports across China and estimated key epidemiologic parameters, including the incubation period (4.2 days). We then designed 2 mathematical modeling approaches to infer the outbreak dynamics in Wuhan by using high-resolution domestic travel and infection data. Results show that the doubling time early in the epidemic in Wuhan was 2.3–3.3 days. Assuming a serial interval of 6–9 days, we calculated a median R0 value of 5.7 (95% CI 3.8–8.9). We further show that active surveillance, contact tracing, quarantine, and early strong social distancing efforts are needed to stop transmission of the virus.

              So…

              That’s saying the initial R value was 2.2-2.7…

              And in the last studied out real of Andes, they said it was 2.1…

              Since you’re offering to answer questions:

              Why shouldn’t we compare the initial R values since we know both?

              If we have a median R value of something with a best case 40% mortality…

              By that point we’re already fucked.

              Like, I’m starting to doubt facts and/or logic are gonna help you here buddy.

              But that was a nice source you didn’t understand, so thanks for linking that.

              Edit:

              Like, it almost feels like you think “r value” is a set number and not a descriptor of how it’s actually spreading…

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_reproduction_number

              You just don’t understand what the words and phrases you keep using mean…

              Like, if contact is minimized, it will be lower…

              If someone goes the World Cup, it makes the number skyrocket, despite the virus not mutating…

              You just fundamentally don’t understand any of this buddy, and instead of asking questions to learn, you want a slap fight.

              I’m probably going to give up on helping you soon

              • Cypher@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                You want to compare apples to apples now after claiming

                when COVID was 0.7-0.9

                Is that right?

                In the video you linked the expert said this wasn’t a covid situation. You need to calm down.

                You know what, instead of pointlessly having an internet argument now how about we both set a reminder for 1 year from now.

                Let’s revisit this and examine who was right. Should be fun.

                • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  instead of pointlessly having an internet argument now how about we both set a reminder for 1 year from now.

                  Welp, that’s pretty much the proof that neither facts nor logic will work…

                  It’s like if I said “if we don’t hit the breaks the bus is driving off the cliff”

                  And you said that’s only true if the bus goes off the cliff, even if we hit the breaks

                  You think that if there isn’t a global pandemic, it means one couldn’t have happened.

                  I’m sorry buddy, I honestly gave you a lot of chances, but you don’t want facts and logic to try and figure out reality, you have a belief of what will happen, and will say anything that defends that belief.

                  Literally no one will ever be able to change your opinion about any thing.

                  And the fucked up thing is you’re likely proud of that

                  • Cypher@aussie.zone
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 day ago

                    I really like how you misrepresented stats, created strawman arguments and just invented stuff that was never said and claim you’re the only one with facts.

                    The actual experts are saying this won’t be a pandemic.

                    Enjoy having whatever meltdown you’re experiencing. The rest of us will be chilling out in reality.