What is your plan for re-opening?

[Gerry Seymour]

well yes there will be more people outside MY immediate proximity, than in ,,, by about 70 million,,, that a rather obvious statement,

if they have packed 400 people in to a carriage that could reasonably be expected to carry 50 in comfort, Everyone is in several people breathing zone

IF there is only ONE asymptomatic person in that carriage and IF only three people get infected,, in a few days, those three people are in other and equally crowded carriages and 9 people get infected, then they do it again on the way home and tomorrow and the day after...the arithmetic progression is somewhat obvious.

though clearly not to your Gerry is the centre of the universe perspective, as an individual you can only do what you as an individual can do,,, expectations on government are perhaps different, at the very least they shouldnt lie to us by suggesting that bits of rag give any meaningful measure of protection

if as has happened, im dealing with bio waste and the contractor turned up with handkerchiefs as respiratory protection i would send them home,,, COZ..........

Yes. And each of those people will be a meter or more away from most of the people in the carriage. So, effectiveness.

Your assertion on this is similar to saying seat belts are ineffective because you could drown if the car goes in the water.

 

[jobo]

Yes. And each of those people will be a meter or more away from most of the people in the carriage. So, effectiveness.

Your assertion on this is similar to saying seat belts are ineffective because you could drown if the car goes in the water.

maybe effective today, maybe , but tomorrow when the number of asymptotic people have increased your chances of being next to one have increased, over a short period of time the probability reaches one, in fact if the stat that was quoted a few days ago, that 80% of people are asymptomatic has any validity, the probability starts at close to one, allowing your not one of the 80%

the seat belt analogy is disingenuous, seat belt effectiveness is defined by their design requirements, that is they hold you in your seat, something they manage with reasonable regularity.

breathing protection for crowded places has only to be judged by the amount of protection it gives you respiratory system in crowded places

saying it gives you protection if no infected people are near you is nonsensical, saying it gives protection in places that are not crowded only draws attention to its short comings

a more accurate analogy would be people not fastening their belt as the chance of any one of them crashing is extremely low, the chance of any of them crashing is quite high, that why generally they dont allow individual centred decisions to be made, in matters of public health

 

[CB Jones]

Statement released from the WHO today that transmission of the Covid-19 virus from someone who is asymptomatic is very rare.

 

[jobo]

how would they know ?

 

[CB Jones]

how would they know ?

Just passing on the info.

Asymptomatic spread of coronavirus is 'very rare,' WHO says

 

[jobo]

Just passing on the info.

Asymptomatic spread of coronavirus is 'very rare,' WHO says

''More research and data are needed to “truly answer” the question of whether the coronavirus can spread widely through asymptomatic carriers, Van Kerkhove added.''

so rare but they dont actually know how rare rare is, yes that sounds like a WHO statement

 

[Gerry Seymour]

maybe effective today, maybe , but tomorrow when the number of asymptotic people have increased your chances of being next to one have increased, over a short period of time the probability reaches one, in fact if the stat that was quoted a few days ago, that 80% of people are asymptomatic has any validity, the probability starts at close to one, allowing your not one of the 80%

the seat belt analogy is disingenuous, seat belt effectiveness is defined by their design requirements, that is they hold you in your seat, something they manage with reasonable regularity.

breathing protection for crowded places has only to be judged by the amount of protection it gives you respiratory system in crowded places

saying it gives you protection if no infected people are near you is nonsensical, saying it gives protection in places that are not crowded only draws attention to its short comings

a more accurate analogy would be people not fastening their belt as the chance of any one of them crashing is extremely low, the chance of any of them crashing is quite high, that why generally they dont allow individual centred decisions to be made, in matters of public health

Go ahead. Change your position and change mine to be nothin I said. Ignore the science. Whatever works for you.

An interesting side note: the WHO is now saying asymptotic carriers are apparently not effective at transmitting the virus. Not sure what goes on there, but I hope they are right.

 

[jobo]

Go ahead. Change your position and change mine to be nothin I said. Ignore the science. Whatever works for you.

An interesting side note: the WHO is now saying asymptotic carriers are apparently not effective at transmitting the virus. Not sure what goes on there, but I hope they are right.

well no they are not
''More research and data are needed to “truly answer” the question of whether the coronavirus can spread widely through asymptomatic carriers, Van Kerkhove added.''

thats code for we have no idea at all, but WHO admit they are clueless is not a good headline

 

[Gerry Seymour]

well no they are not
''More research and data are needed to “truly answer” the question of whether the coronavirus can spread widely through asymptomatic carriers, Van Kerkhove added.''

thats code for we have no idea at all, but WHO admit they are clueless is not a good headline

You are hilarious. You just argue for the sake of argument. You don’t care about truth or communication.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.

George Floyd was killed on May 25 (2 weeks from today). Should those 4 police officers get infected already?

Why don't we hear any news to report this?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

George Floyd tested positive for coronavirus.

George Floyd was killed on May 25 (2 weeks from today). Should those 4 police officers get infected already?

Why don't we hear any news to report this?

You posted this elsewhere. What is the point of this question?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

You posted this elsewhere. What is the point of this question?

With such close body contact, the virus should have been transferred.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

With such close body contact, the virus should have been transferred.

not "should have" - "could have". There's not a 100% transmission rate. I'm pretty sure even breathing directly into someone's nose while actively infected wouldn't provide a 100% transmission rate.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Returning to the OP topic, I'll have my first class back on Saturday, weather permitting. We'll train outside (at a local park), with significant distance, and will only be doing movement exercises (forms, non-contact weapons work, solo drills). It'll be nice to get back to doing something, though I'm back down to a single student. I still don't know if the dojo is going to survive - I need to call the owner and check in with her.

 

[jobo]

You are hilarious. You just argue for the sake of argument. You don’t care about truth or communication.

i care very much about truth, its just in very short supply at the moment. thats if we term truth as being indisputable facts, rather than people giving their truthful opinion, but truthful opinions are also at a premium

WHO have been incredibly inconsistent on this topic, they have flip flopped from declaring the outbreak as no great problem at all, to projecting deaths in the many tens of millions and all points in between.

in this case they have said, that asymptomatic deaths are rare, but then followed that by admitting its happen on a an unspecified scale scale and then follow that up by saying we need more data to know. just WHAT does rare mean, thats not a scientific term, its a vague appropriation

the headline writers have jumped on just one element of that, and given no prominence at all to the weasel words that followed and for all we know have emitted great chunks of what was said

you personally have previously cautioned people not to take the '' news''headline from reports on science studies at face value, extremely good advice i might say, but advice in this case you have chosen to ignore, presumably because you want it to be true. as do I, but il reserved judgement till its an actual fact, with some sort of data, rather than a vague assurance

 

[jobo]

You are hilarious. You just argue for the sake of argument. You don’t care about truth or communication.

here is a more complete version of what she said curtsy of the BBC, who have still run with the misleading headline, but at least have added context in the text

people with coronavirus but no symptoms infecting others is "very rare", a World Health Organization scientist has said.

Although a proportion of people test positive with no symptoms, it is believed these infections are mostly not passed on.

But people can pass on the disease just before symptoms develop.

The evidence comes from countries that carry out "detailed contact tracing", Dr Maria Van Kerkhove said.

Dr Van Kerkhove, the WHO's head of emerging diseases, made the distinction between three categories:

• People who never develop symptoms (asymptomatic)
• People who test positive when they don't yet have symptoms - but go on to develop them (pre-symptomatic)
• People with very mild or atypical symptoms who do not realise they have coronavirus

Some reports distinguish between these categories while others do not and she said this, along with the relatively small groups of people studied, make it difficult to draw firm conclusions.

Asymptomatic coronavirus transmission 'very rare'

 

[jobo]

You are hilarious. You just argue for the sake of argument. You don’t care about truth or communication.

and heres is WHO latest advice on the use of masks

they dont know if wearing surgical masks are a benefit or not, they think they might be but have very little evidence that is the case and especially they draw only on data for masks that are medical quality or cotton masks that have 15 FIFTEEN layers

as they dont know if proper masks are a benefit, its somewhat precipitous to think that single layer cotton rags maybe so

Guidance on the use of masks for the general public Available evidence Studies of influenza, influenza-like illness, and human coronaviruses (not including COVID-19) provide evidence that the use of a medical mask can prevent the spread of infectious droplets from a symptomatic infected person (source control) to someone else and potential contamination of the environment by these droplets.(54, 55) There is limited evidence that wearing a medical mask by healthy individuals in households, in particular those who share a house with a sick person, or among attendees of mass gatherings may be beneficial as a measure preventing transmission.(41, 56-61) A recent meta-analysis of these observational studies, with the intrinsic biases of observational data, showed that either disposable surgical masks or reusable 12–16-layer cotton masks were associated with protection of healthy individuals within households and among contacts of cases.(42) This could be considered to be indirect evidence for the use of masks (medical or other) by healthy individuals in the wider community; however, these studies suggest that such individuals would need to be in close proximity to an infected person in a household or at a mass gathering where physical distancing cannot be achieved, to become infected with the virus. Results from cluster randomized controlled trials on the use of masks among young adults living in university residences in the United States of America indicate that face masks may reduce the rate of influenza-like illness, but showed no impact on risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza.(62, 63) At present, there is no direct evidence (from studies on COVID19 and in healthy people in the community) on the effectiveness of universal masking of healthy people in the community to prevent infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19

 

[jobo]

You are hilarious. You just argue for the sake of argument. You don’t care about truth or communication.

and since i quoted that bbc article they have modified it with the view of another two experts,

which throws even more doubt on the WHO statement

People with symptoms 'highest risk'
A key question has been whether asymptomatic people pass on their infections on to others.

Contact-tracing studies from a number of countries suggest that while "true" asymptomatic cases "rarely transmit", infection transmission can occur before or on the day symptoms first appear when they may be very mild, according to Prof Babak Javid, an infectious diseases consultant at the University of Cambridge.

People can have detectable amounts of the virus in their system roughly three days before developing symptoms and appear to be capable to passing it on during this period, especially the day before or on the day symptoms begin.

And since people who haven't yet developed symptoms are unlikely to know that they are contagious, pre-symptomatic transmission has "important implications" for track, trace and isolation measures, Prof Javid said.

This emphasises the importance of lockdown measures in "massively reduc[ing] the numbers of people infected," said Prof Liam Smeeth, an epidemiologist at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

While people without symptoms do seem to be capable of infecting others, current evidence still suggests people with symptoms are the highest risk.

A positive result alone doesn't tell you how much of the virus someone has in their system.

And this - what is known as the viral load - along with whether an infected person is sneezing and coughing and what kind of contact they are having with other people, influences how likely they are to pass the illness on.

 

[Headhunter]

Where I am things are getting there. Gyms opening next week but still with social distancing. Cases here are still rising but not hugely. On official stats we have about 300 negatives tests a day and maybe 1 or 2 positive cases a day if that. We have 5 active cases. Obviously there are way more out there that just haven’t been found. I guarantee it’s the same in New Zealand. Our antibody testing results came back saying about 4500 have the antibody showing they had it and that’s compared to 343 so far who have tested positive but it is what it is. I’m considering going to some outdoor classes as long as they can do it safely. It is still a big risk but you gotta keep going as well now. No where can be 100% sure they’re free of it until there’s a cure

 

[Gerry Seymour]

and since i quoted that bbc article they have modified it with the view of another two experts,

which throws even more doubt on the WHO statement

People with symptoms 'highest risk'
A key question has been whether asymptomatic people pass on their infections on to others.

Contact-tracing studies from a number of countries suggest that while "true" asymptomatic cases "rarely transmit", infection transmission can occur before or on the day symptoms first appear when they may be very mild, according to Prof Babak Javid, an infectious diseases consultant at the University of Cambridge.

People can have detectable amounts of the virus in their system roughly three days before developing symptoms and appear to be capable to passing it on during this period, especially the day before or on the day symptoms begin.

And since people who haven't yet developed symptoms are unlikely to know that they are contagious, pre-symptomatic transmission has "important implications" for track, trace and isolation measures, Prof Javid said.

This emphasises the importance of lockdown measures in "massively reduc[ing] the numbers of people infected," said Prof Liam Smeeth, an epidemiologist at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

While people without symptoms do seem to be capable of infecting others, current evidence still suggests people with symptoms are the highest risk.

A positive result alone doesn't tell you how much of the virus someone has in their system.

And this - what is known as the viral load - along with whether an infected person is sneezing and coughing and what kind of contact they are having with other people, influences how likely they are to pass the illness on.

Man, that’s a lot of words. Most of them don’t disagree with what you seem to think they do. Much of that I explained to you days ago. But go ahead and keep arguing if it feels good.