Sponsored by

VGoodiez 420EDC
  • Welcome to VaporAsylum! Please take a moment to read our RULES and introduce yourself here.
  • Need help navigating the forum? Find out how to use our features here.
  • Did you know we have lots of smilies for you to use?

COVID-19

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm in an isolated rural location and rarely go off the property. I grow most of my food so groceries is only an occasional activity and I get contact free curbside delivery. I don't tend to go into stores, but I wear a mask and keep my distance from others when I do. Since March, most of my human contact has become virtual; through Zoom, phone calls, texts etc.That said, I'm solidly in the high risk category so I'm hedging my bets by taking every single precaution available to me. I would want to know if I've come in contact with someone who's been infected not only for myself but so that I can isolate and stop myself from spreading it to others. To me, that is the key. There is still so much that is unknown about this virus, it's long and short term effects and transmission patterns. I'm just not taking any chances but everyone has to determine their own risk tolerance and make the decision that they are comfortable with.
I completely see the usefullness of this app and I wasn't referring to people OS
Our gov spy's on us more than most and holds our data for a min of 7years
Many message apps and other international companies are shocked at Aus law and some choose not to do business in our country due to the privacy issues to their customers

So I don't trust our government here with a spy app on my phone

I totally understand what you mean

tbh if it was my world not everyones - in Aus I'd want everyone else in the country to use that app except anyone I deal with
That way my info is safe but the app essentially does what it is supposed to
That's my selfish wishes not reality though

Also here our news on multiple channels has multiple updates a day and you can if you care to be informed keep an eye on places to avoid for the most part

The ignorant many who are just going about their business as normal are the ones hurting the rest
One guy went to two pubs here and spread it for a second wave and today had first death from that cluster

Why are pubs open and why go if they are

Shit, I mean people used to isolate the sick kid in a family to their room
These days the herd mentality is whole family gets sick
In "olden days" medicine was less advanced and the whole family couldn't afford to get sick

People can't grasp this thought these days though
Same as the anti vax crew never saw polio or the rest

I wish you all all the best and safety for you and yours
It's going to be a long haul worldwide

Wish I was in NZ or Tazzy where they shut borders and kept shit clean atm
 
Last edited:
Herd immunity never made sense with this virus. Herd immunity would be killing part of the herd.

They are just finding out children under the age of 5 have more of the virus in their nasal passages. That doesn’t surprise me. Have you ever seen a 4 year old or younger child sneeze? A lot of snot in there for such a little person. Every day or so they are finding out something new. It’s ever changing. We can’t just sit and wait for a cure. Need to be proactive and try to live with it for the near future.
 
Learned a lot about herd immunity from The Atlantic article, below.

A New Understanding of Herd Immunity
The portion of the population that needs to get sick is not fixed. We can change it.
JAMES HAMBLIN
JULY 13, 2020

In normal times, herd immunity is calculated based on a standardized intervention with predictable results: vaccination. Everyone is exposed to the same (or very similar) immune-generating viral components. We are able to calculate what percentage of people need that exposure in order to develop meaningful immunity across the population.

This is not the case when a virus is spreading in the real world. Instead, the complexities of real life create what modelers refer to as heterogeneity. People are exposed to different amounts of the virus, in different contexts, via different routes. A virus that is new to the species creates more variety in immune responses. Some of us are more susceptible to being infected, and some are more likely to transmit the virus once infected. Even small differences in individual susceptibility and transmission can, as with any chaos phenomenon, lead to very different outcomes as the effects compound over time, on the scale of a pandemic....

[Gabriela Gomes] describes a model in which everyone is equally susceptible to coronavirus infection (a homogeneous model), and a model in which some people are more susceptible than others (a heterogeneous model). Even if the two populations start out with the same average susceptibility to infection, you don’t get the same epidemics. “The outbreaks look similar at the beginning. But in the heterogeneous population, individuals are not infected at random,” she told me. “The highly susceptible people are more likely to get infected first. As a result, the average susceptibility gets lower and lower over time.”

Effects like this—“selective depletion” of people who are more susceptible—can quickly decelerate a virus’s spread. When Gomes uses this sort of pattern to model the coronavirus’s spread, the compounding effects of heterogeneity seem to show that the onslaught of cases and deaths seen in initial spikes around the world are unlikely to happen a second time. Based on data from several countries in Europe, she said, her results show a herd-immunity threshold much lower than that of other models.

“We just keep running the models, and it keeps coming back at less than 20 percent,” Gomes said. “It’s very striking.”

If that proves correct, it would be life-altering news. It wouldn’t mean that the virus is gone. But by Gomes’s estimates, if roughly one out of every five people in a given population is immune to the virus, that seems to be enough to slow its spread to a level where each infectious person is infecting an average of less than one other person. The number of infections would steadily decline. That’s the classic definition of herd immunity. It would mean, for instance, that at 25 percent antibody prevalence, New York City could continue its careful reopening without fear of another major surge in cases.

“If there is a large variability of susceptibility among humans, then herd immunity could be as low as 20 percent,” [Tom] Britton told me. But there’s reason to suspect that people do not have such dramatically disparate susceptibility to the coronavirus. High degrees of variability are more common in things such as sexually transmitted infections, where a person with 100 partners a year is far more susceptible than someone celibate. Respiratory viruses tend to be more equal-opportunity invaders. “I don’t think it will happen at 20 percent,” Britton said. “Between 35 and 45 percent—I think that would be a level where spreading drops drastically.”

...Any such herd-immunity threshold is context-dependent and constantly shifting. It will change over time and space. It varies depending on the basic reproduction number—the average number of new infections caused by an infected individual. During the early stage of an outbreak of a new virus (to which no one has immunity), that number will be higher. The number is skewed by super-spreading events, such as when one person in a choir infects 50 others. And the number in a dense city such as New York should be expected to be higher than that in rural Alaska. “Within certain populations that lack heterogeneity, like within a nursing home or school, you may even see the herd-immunity threshold be above 70 percent,” [Shweta] Bansal says. If a population average led people in those settings to get complacent, there could be needless death...
 
But it implies that if someone has a high risk tolerance, then it's acceptable for them to disregard protective measures, particularly if they're unconcerned with infecting others or with the broader societal effects of an uncontrolled pandemic. No one should reasonably be in this category, but not everyone is reasonable (there are fewer every day).
Yes, I understand what you are saying, but these measures are voluntary. If I had my way, they would be mandatory. In the nearest village, store doors are locked and people are admitted one shopper or family unit at a time. No mask, no admittance. Refuse to sanitize your hands upon admittance and you will be asked to leave and will not be able to make a purchase.

We have strong leadership here. Our Health officials constantly, daily, reinforce the behaviours we must collectively embrace to stop the spread. Dr Bonnie Henry has become a national icon who's slogan has permeated the nation; Be kind, be calm and be safe. The daily message of respectfully protecting ourselves and others has been a critical component. I've personally witnessed people in my life who think they can let down their guard if they don't hear that reinforcing message over and over and over. Daily encouragement to follow the best behaviours works.
 
But it implies that if someone has a high risk tolerance, then it's acceptable for them to disregard protective measures, particularly if they're unconcerned with infecting others or with the broader societal effects of an uncontrolled pandemic.
Hmmm....not necessarily. There still is, within reasonable measures, a wide spectrum of chosen behavior commensurate with individual risk tolerance which, at the same time, is not irresponsible or cavalier.

My GF really has not left her house since the virus popped up and intends to continue to not do so until there is a vaccine and she has gotten it and she recognizes that this may not be until next Apr/May.

I do go out to the grocers and such errands but consider my behavior to be totally responsible while I view her's as overboard.

I don't comment on her chose risk level and she doesn't comment on mine.

Just because she doesn't see it my way, doesn't mean either of us are "wrong"

Right?

And I actually do not agree that I need "trusted leaders" as in fucking politicians to tell me what to do. And yes, I think everyone needs to consider what level of nanny state they are willing to accept when they ask themselves which candidate to entrust with our government.
 
Hmmm....not necessarily. There still is, within reasonable measures, a wide spectrum of chosen behavior commensurate with individual risk tolerance which, at the same time, is not irresponsible or cavalier.

No doubt what @Squiby meant - "within reasonable measures". What she said, "...but everyone has to determine their own risk tolerance and make the decision that they are comfortable with," can be (and has been) used as a justification for what you probably mean by "cavalier" behavior. That's confusing the perceived risk to oneself with the risk unknowingly posed to others. With the risk to ourselves, we can of course be as cautious as we'd like.

And I actually do not agree that I need "trusted leaders" as in fucking politicians to tell me what to do. And yes, I think everyone needs to consider what level of nanny state they are willing to accept when they ask themselves which candidate to entrust with our government.

Can you imagine trusting someone's leadership in an emergency? Having someone tell you to do something you don't want to do, but you do it because you trust them to determine what's best for everyone?
 
1596392619359.png
 
MERS = Middle East Respiratory Syndrome
SARS = South Asia Respiratory Syndrome
legionellosis pneumonia = Legionaries Disease cause nobody cares what you call members of the American Legion
COVID = can't possibly call it the Chinese virus cause...well, that would be racist....in an election year.

:rant: :cursing: :lmao: :lmao:
 
Hate to put the mod hat on but if we can stop the China references to Covid-19 in future posts & memes it will be appreciated.

We have members of all ethnicities & nationalities on this forum. This is not a case of being the PC police or anything like that so please don't read into something that is not there. This is a global pandemic & affecting all of us to one degree of another. I hope you are all keeping as safe as you can during these crazy times.

FB_IMG_1596245574790.jpg
 
My brother and his wife, they are in their mid seventies. They aren’t sick but were able to take a test for covid - that was 14 days ago. My opinion that is absolutely unexceptable after 6 months in this pandemic. People are frustrated! He came to visit yesterday, we all sat outside six feet a part from each other. No hugging when they left.
 
Last edited:
if we can stop the China references to Covid-19 in future posts & memes it will be appreciated.
Yeah, why is that?

What rule is this breaking?

And just because someone calls it the China virus is not to say that Chinese people are being singled out for blame anymore than middle eastern or south asians were wrt to those two other viruses.

Bet we have middle eastern people and asians other than Chinese on this board and I don't see anyone clamoring to change the names of those two epidemics.

Sorry, but yeah....this does sound like the PC police to me.
 
It seems there's a long history of mask resistance in the US. Alas, we are a stubborn people.:disgust:

The Mask Slackers of 1918
As the influenza pandemic swept across the United States in 1918 and 1919, masks took a role in political and cultural wars.

By Christine Hauser
Aug. 3, 2020

More than a century ago, as the 1918 influenza pandemic raged in the United States, masks of gauze and cheesecloth became the facial front lines in the battle against the virus. But as they have now, the masks also stoked political division. Then, as now, medical authorities urged the wearing of masks to help slow the spread of disease. And then, as now, some people resisted.

In 1918 and 1919, as bars, saloons, restaurants, theaters and schools were closed, masks became a scapegoat, a symbol of government overreach, inspiring protests, petitions and defiant bare-face gatherings. All the while, thousands of Americans were dying in a deadly pandemic.

00xp-1918masks-06-superJumbo.jpg


Note the two men standing in back to the right. The chinstrap style caught on, yet the hanging-from-one-ear style did not. And why do only males get pig-like snouts?
 
Sorry, but yeah....this does sound like the PC police to me.
Indeed it is.... or more appropriately... the FHP (Forum Harmony Police). I think all members will agree that usually the moderators on this forum don't step in unless there's been a report. And that is the case this time.

So how about graciously accepting that and knocking it off?
 
Warning point issued
Indeed it is.... or more appropriately... the FHP (Forum Harmony Police). I think all members will agree that usually the moderators on this forum don't step in unless there's been a report. And that is the case this time.

So how about graciously accepting that and knocking it off?
Sure mom...be as gracious as you like. And god forbid that some twinky...ooooh, reported it. I certainly don't want to get cancelled now, right? LOL
 
ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR. ON THE REALITY OF OUR TIME: Every part of our lives will be subject to control. This virus is about training us for submission, training us to do what we’re told.
To not go to the beach unless we’re told, to not kiss our girlfriend without their permission. They’re turning us into production units and consuming entities.
They are going to rob us not only of our democracy and our liberties but our souls. They are going to inject us with the medicines they want and they’re going to charge us for the diseases they give us.
They are going to control every part of our lives. What we are doing at Children’s Health Defense is using the last instruments of democracy we have left, the Courts, to fight them.
We are in the last battle. We are in the apocalypse. We are fighting for the salvation of humanity. We all knew this was coming, though I never believed it would come in my lifetime. But here it is.’ ~ Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Sponsored by

VGoodiez 420EDC
Back
Top