• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

21,864 Excellent

About tater

  • Rank
    Rocket Surgeon

Profile Information

  • Location Array

Recent Profile Visitors

13,227 profile views
  1. Agreed. Very suspect, but worthy of assessment in the free world using better, trusted data. That's why we need random serological testing ASAP. Look at the cat study, amazing it was published, frankly. Why? Because they have serological testing that they use on cats, but haven't published the same paper for random humans. The PRC has every reason to not show that the numbers they released before are the BS they are. If they tested humans (I'm certain they have, it's just not published), they would have to tell us that the % of people in Wuhan/Hubei that have antibodies might be a large % of the pop, and the number that therefore escaped to infect the world was much, much higher than even current estimates suggest. Still worth considering. Look at the new concensus emerging that this could have in fact come from that lab in Wuhan. Not as a engineered thing, just that the lab was researching bat coronaviruses (known from stuff that lab had put on the web last year, publicizing it), and papers they submitted before this... public stuff that at the time they had no reason to hide—some of which has apparently been disappeared to gaslight people. (note it's not a conspiracy, the likely route out was something like the guy who fed the bats doffed his gear wrong, then got asymptomatically sick.
  2. https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1375 4/5 cases asymptomatic
  3. If the deaths the Chinese report are accurate, and human exposure is identical to cats (15%), then the true fatality rate is... ~0.18%.
  4. Nearly 15% of cats tested in Wuhan had antibodies for SARS-CoV2. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.01.021196v1 No evidence cats were sick, and though they think cat—>cat transmission occurs, they think most were infected by humans (higher response in pet cats of COVID-19 patients). No evidence of transmission from cats to humans, but still. What are the chances 15% of cats in Wuhan are infected, but somehow Wuhan only managed to have ~50k human cases in a pop of 11 million (~0.5% of the population)? If 15% of the humans in Wuhan caught it, that's 1.65M cases. If the fatality rate was 0.66%, that's almost 11k deaths.
  5. https://www.businessinsider.com/bill-gates-factories-7-different-vaccines-to-fight-coronavirus-2020-4
  6. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30243-7/fulltext
  7. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0843-2 Look at the second 2 charts. It mitigates it, but this is likely the sort of data that was well known a few months ago. The usual suspects are sometimes blocked, sometimes not. Note this is simply breathing, not coughing. So as they have said, it protects others, and at some non-zero level. SARS-CoV2 looks like it is caught by the mask far more readily.
  8. That vid ^^^ is quite good. They talk about transmission via air, which is possible based on flu studies (finding virus in the air near people with flu, which is not the same thing as "airborne" like Measles), but the bottom line is that it seems to come down to wash hands, disinfect surfaces (in places where infected people are), and don't touch your face. Studies looking at PPE found that in negative pressure rooms, they didn't find virus on the PPE (except one shoe cover).
  9. Sorry to hear that. This whole COVID thing makes me wish the forum was less kid friendly language wise (and I use that sort of launguage in front of my kids anyway, since words are words, who cares?). %$#! SARS-CoV2! (imagine the most appropriate 4 letter word you prefer)
  10. For the last couple days if you post a tweet it automatically embeds the tweet, whereas in the past you had to explicitly select "Paste as plain text" to get it to link. Happens long enough I am retrained to NOT paste as plain text... and it's back to paste as plain text. One, the message is absurd ("plain text" embedding, after all), two, why would it change back and forth?
  11. https://twitter.com/Buzzard_Stubble/status/1245842034545565702 OK, what? It's now back to having to select "plain text" to link?