Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Coronavirus (COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2) outbreak discussion

Will the "Corona Virus" turn into a worldwide epidemic or fizzle out?

  • Yes

    Votes: 37 49.3%
  • No

    Votes: 9 12.0%
  • Bigger than SARS, but not worldwide epidemic (Black Death/bubonic plague)

    Votes: 25 33.3%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 4 5.3%

  • Total voters
    75
possibly two rampant diseases, Sars-Cov2 and Dunning-Kruger

Doctor google sez
Dunning-Kruger effect, in psychology, a cognitive bias whereby people with limited knowledge or competence in a given intellectual or social domain greatly overestimate their own knowledge or competence in that domain relative to objective criteria or to the performance of their peers or of people in general.

haha .."or of people in general" !!
https://www.britannica.com/science/Dunning-Kruger-effect
doesn't this cover both sides. Or do we have specialists in our midst?
 
Your obsession with what the media report is interesting.
People who protest for the right to infect others in a pandemic shows a level of hypocrisy which beggars belief.
As to what what was written on placards, what actually made sense?
View attachment 129290

I scanned a lot of media coverage and it mostly showed people who have no idea what covid has done to other countries which tool a lax approach to its containment.
More importantly it showed that they have no respect for laws.
I think media coverage of this type of rubbish doesn't allow the legitimate concerns to be aired. The fact that now people are entrenched on either side of the debate just boggles the mind.

Vaccination is the way forward. But imo valid questions still remain.
 
More importantly it showed that they have no respect for laws.
Absolutely, same as those spray painting graffiti slogans, at parliament house the other week.:rolleyes:
By the way, it isn't an obsession, it's an observation.
An obsession is what you have, where you think one sector of the media is more biased than the other, I think all the media is biased. :xyxthumbs
 
Last edited:
possibly two rampant diseases, Sars-Cov2 and Dunning-Kruger

Doctor google sez
Dunning-Kruger effect, in psychology, a cognitive bias whereby people with limited knowledge or competence in a given intellectual or social domain greatly overestimate their own knowledge or competence in that domain relative to objective criteria or to the performance of their peers or of people in general.

haha .."or of people in general" !!
https://www.britannica.com/science/Dunning-Kruger-effect
Yeah it's actually quite simple really:

You need to have a relatively high level of intellect in order to be able to actually accurately assess your own intellect. Ergo, no stupid person is actually capable of knowing how intelligent (or not) they are.
 
Stupidity and intelligence are not always the equivalent.
There are some remarkably intelligent people who have said and done some very stupid things.
Just a couple come to mind .
Bill Clinton having an affair with an intern then lying about it under oath.
Gladys having an affair with a corrupt fellow politician and thinking it would not get out.
Tony Abbott giving a gong to Prince Phillip.
Mark Latham joining Pauline Hanson's party.
Just about anything that Kevin Rudd has said or done since he got the flick from the PM Job.
And one thats very topical.
Andrew Wakefield, a Doctor and researcher who had already had a number of papers published in the Lancet, falsified a lot of the data in a paper that the Lancet published that said there was link between Autism and the Rubella/mumps/measles vaccination. not only he, but a lot of others paid a high price for that piece of stupidity.
I could go on, but you get the drift.
Mick
 
possibly two rampant diseases, Sars-Cov2 and Dunning-Kruger

Doctor google sez
Dunning-Kruger effect, in psychology, a cognitive bias whereby people with limited knowledge or competence in a given intellectual or social domain greatly overestimate their own knowledge or competence in that domain relative to objective criteria or to the performance of their peers or of people in general.

haha .."or of people in general" !!
https://www.britannica.com/science/Dunning-Kruger-effect
There is a corollary to this premise.
The so called bias blind spot.
This is where the media finds itself now.
The ABC , Kevin Rudd, Malcolm Turnbull , and plenty of thers see the Murdoch press as being totally biased.
On the other hand, The Murdoch press sees the ABC, Fairfax, Channel nine, and just about everyone else as biased.
From Pubmed
The so-called bias blind spot arises when people report that thinking biases are more prevalent in others than in themselves. Bias turns out to be relatively easy to recognize in the behaviors of others, but often difficult to detect in one's own judgments. Most previous research on the bias blind spot has focused on bias in the social domain. In 2 studies, we found replicable bias blind spots with respect to many of the classic cognitive biases studied in the heuristics and biases literature (e.g., Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). Further, we found that none of these bias blind spots were attenuated by measures of cognitive sophistication such as cognitive ability or thinking dispositions related to bias. If anything, a larger bias blind spot was associated with higher cognitive ability. Additional analyses indicated that being free of the bias blind spot does not help a person avoid the actual classic cognitive biases. We discuss these findings in terms of a generic dual-process theory of cognition.
Mick
 
doesn't this cover both sides. Or do we have specialists in our midst?
It covers both sides, but those aware of their lack of knowledge on a particular subject should be self aware enough to defer to experts in the area. In relation to covid, these would be disease control organisations like the CDC or other health experts, not social influencers or the like and in particular not random articles found on social media from dubious sources.
 
There is a corollary to this premise.
The so called bias blind spot.
This is where the media finds itself now.
The ABC , Kevin Rudd, Malcolm Turnbull , and plenty of thers see the Murdoch press as being totally biased.
On the other hand, The Murdoch press sees the ABC, Fairfax, Channel nine, and just about everyone else as biased.
From Pubmed

Mick
more like Murdoch will change his views to harvest the most money , the others seems to live in dreamland and sometimes avoid tripping over their egos .

Murdoch supports climate change , vaccines , Trump because that was where the most eyeballs are/were ( and money to be made )

he turned solid publications into advertorials and infomercials

if you don't understand that you should sell your NWS and FOX shares
 
60 million Americans will watch any channel that mentions Trump positively 3 times a day the rest have to fight over the others who actually bother to turn on the TV ( or can even afford to own one )
 
It covers both sides, but those aware of their lack of knowledge on a particular subject should be self aware enough to defer to experts in the area. In relation to covid, these would be disease control organisations like the CDC or other health experts, not social influencers or the like and in particular not random articles found on social media from dubious sources.

And should be aware of vested interests trying to influence government decisions, the business community for example who put the pressure on Gladys not to go hard and early and let the virus get away.
 
And should be aware of vested interests trying to influence government decisions, the business community for example who put the pressure on Gladys not to go hard and early and let the virus get away.

Yes, I agree. One always needs to be skeptical and it is true that often official statements are influenced by special interests. But I suppose the best one can do is be aware of those special interests and make comparisons with the statements from other organisations or the same organisations in other countries that may not be subject to the same pressure from those same special interests. With COVID there is widespread agreement across diverse countries with different political systems as to what is the best course of action. Results from following those courses of actions have tended to produce the same positive results. One can never be 100% sure, but that would give me confidence that those courses of actions are correct.
 
‘Customers may experience some delays’ amid spike in Australia Post volume


Yeah, I've been gaming this system:

When buying stuff, I'm trying to avoid retailers located in locked down areas. Also go for express mail (meaning it gets airmailed) and thus leapfrogs the lockdowns completely.
 
Stupidity and intelligence are not always the equivalent.
There are some remarkably intelligent people who have said and done some very stupid things.
Just a couple come to mind .
Bill Clinton having an affair with an intern then lying about it under oath.
Gladys having an affair with a corrupt fellow politician and thinking it would not get out.
Tony Abbott giving a gong to Prince Phillip.
Mark Latham joining Pauline Hanson's party.
Just about anything that Kevin Rudd has said or done since he got the flick from the PM Job.
And one thats very topical.
Andrew Wakefield, a Doctor and researcher who had already had a number of papers published in the Lancet, falsified a lot of the data in a paper that the Lancet published that said there was link between Autism and the Rubella/mumps/measles vaccination. not only he, but a lot of others paid a high price for that piece of stupidity.
I could go on, but you get the drift.
Mick
Intellect and wisdom are not the same thing.

"Smarts" and good decision making are not the same thing.


There are many different types/ways of being smart (and dumb).
 
More on Ivermectin...

The FDA Is Begging You Not to Take Horse Dewormer for Covid-19​



And it is crap like that which encourages the conspiracy theory, Ivermectin won a Nobel prize

<<In 2015, the Nobel Committee for Physiology or Medicine, in its only award for treatments of infectious diseases since six decades prior, honored the discovery of ivermectin (IVM), a multifaceted drug deployed against some of the world’s most devastating tropical diseases.>>


I agree that it needs testing (Properly) for Covid But to belittle a drug which has saved thousands of lives in the real world shows just what the agenda has been since day one.

To repurpose a drug which is known to be safe is a Far more sensible thing to do than inject millions of people with something that has buggar all phase 3 testing
 
not to mention the FDA has approved several substances they have slapped a black label on years later

and i don't just mean Thalidomide , they have approved several clangers after that
 
It covers both sides, but those aware of their lack of knowledge on a particular subject should be self aware enough to defer to experts in the area. In relation to covid, these would be disease control organisations like the CDC or other health experts, not social influencers or the like and in particular not random articles found on social media from dubious sources.
I agree to a point. But let's take joules video (not a personal attack on you either, I enjoy your posts).
First off the anti vaxxer was an idiot. However questioning the lipid nanoparticles is a valid concern.
The scientists dismissed the inflammation
( she was correct to do so, as it isn't how inflammation works) yet LNP does in fact cause inflammation. She basically reinforces the attitude of "everything is alright" when there is such a brief rebuttal.

There's a huge amount of back and forth. Yet it's hard for anyone to give relevant information on safety of the mrna vaccine. It seems difficult to find at the least. All we get is bickering or sleight of hand.

I'm not against the technology either. It will change how we fight a lot of diseases. But it's very early stages and we seemed to just jab and accept.


And should be aware of vested interests trying to influence government decisions, the business community for example who put the pressure on Gladys not to go hard and early and let the virus get away.
It's going to be interesting to see if nsw gets back to normal first. Surely nsw must be on a fast track to hit 70%. What happens to the other states then?

Nsw would still likely have huge amounts of infected so borders will remain. Other states that were complacent with vaccination will have to lockdown every time.
 
I cannot help but think that the "powers that be" are not getting data from OS or they choose to ignore it. I also find it weird that although two doses cannot kill the virus let's try three !

Today our CMO said we should follow Israel's example.............. their current 7 day average is 21 deaths per day

<<Despite being the most vaccinated nation on the planet, Israel’s cases have begun to skyrocket again after travellers brought the Delta strain back home from overseas. The nation of 9.2 million, boasting a 78 per cent double vaccination rate, registered over 6,500 cases this week.>>

 
I agree that it needs testing (Properly) for Covid But to belittle a drug which has saved thousands of lives in the real world shows just what the agenda has been since day one.

I think you have completely missed the point of the article. It is 100% correct in saying that it is approved as a horse dewormer, but it is not (at least not yet) approved as a treatment for COVID-19. The fact that Fox is throwing doubt on approved vaccines, but suggesting this unapproved treatment is a disgrace and has the FDA worried because of the increased hospitalisations.

Do you think they should say nothing.

Ivermectin is not been belittled as a drug, it is just not approved for the treatment of COVID. Maybe soon and with appropriate dose levels determined following trials. But promoting in at this stage is plain wrong.

Ivermectin: why a potential COVID treatment isn’t recommended for use​


Why isn’t it recommended?

While some other studies did appear to show benefits of ivermectin, many did not. These were summarised by the National Institutes of Health, showing severe limitations arising from small sample sizes and problems with study design.

Both the National Institutes of Health and the European Medicines Agency judged, on the basis of these studies, that there is currently insufficient evidence to support the use of ivermectin in treatment of COVID-19.

More studies are underway. A large, multicentre trial began in February to determine the effectiveness of ivermectin as well as metformin (an anti-diabetes medication) and fluvoxamine (an antidepressant) in preventing COVID-19 disease progression.

It would therefore be premature to conclude absolutely that ivermectin has no place in COVID-19 treatment. On the basis of current evidence, however, its use cannot be recommended.


 
Top