This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

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
Jump to new
bellenuit said:
I have noticed since I first became aware of your presence on these forums that you have a habit of labelling others stupid.
Click to expand...
Some people here say things without evidence or without making a great deal of sense.
I actually agreed with much of your post and at no time suggested you were stupid. My first point addressed the logic of conspiracy theorists. You and anyone are welcome to question anything, but if something does not make sense, and you have no supporting evidence, then the question blows back. Your example echoed my sense.
You spent a lot of effort on what I presented by way of a few facts, but not one of your points contradicted what I said.
Please do not read into things which I do not claim.
 
Interesting article, indicating the virus hasn't mutated and a measles or chicken pox style vaccine that lasts a long time will be developed.
Sounds as though it is an extremely stable little virus.

https://www.theage.com.au/world/nor...-sign-for-future-vaccine-20200325-p54dn5.html
From the article:
The new coronavirus has proofreading machinery, however, and that reduces the "error rate" and the pace of mutation. The new coronavirus looks pretty much the same everywhere it has appeared, the scientists say, and there is no evidence that some strains are deadlier than others.
There are only about four to 10 genetic differences between the strains that have infected people in the US and the original virus that spread in Wuhan, he said.

"That's a relatively small number of mutations for having passed through a large number of people," Thielen said. "At this point the mutation rate of the virus would suggest that the vaccine developed for SARS-CoV-2 would be a single vaccine, rather than a new vaccine every year like the flu vaccine."
It would be more like the measles or chickenpox vaccines, he said - something that would likely confer immunity for a long time.

"I would expect a vaccine for coronavirus would have a similar profile to those vaccines. It's great news," Thielen said.
 
rederob said:
You spent a lot of effort on what I presented by way of a few facts, but not one of your points contradicted what I said.
Please do not read into things which I do not claim.
Click to expand...

Actually every one of my facts contradicted what you said about my post. I was not responding to your chronology of events that happened in the early stages of the outbreak, that is why I did not address them and did not try to refute them. I assume they were largely correct as you tend to do good research. I was responding to your claim that my post was factually false, by providing the evidence that it was based on. This is what I was responding to:

.
 
rederob said:
Some people here say things without evidence
Click to expand...

Who would have thought that people on an internet forum would venture so far as to say things without evidence...mate, that is completely outrageous and how dare people express their own opinions and thoughts without rigorous fact checking. Quick let's scream outrage and organise a royal commission into BS on forums
 
I followed this from day one.
I certainly have not read, watched or listened to everything.
Please read these as there is a divergence between media commentary and the level of cooperation between the WHO and China.
Perhaps China could have notified the WHO earlier than they did, but remember that when they did, they were clear that they were dealing with something "unknown," acted quickly to determine exactly what it was, and shared this information with the world immediately it became known.
Your post inferred that China had kept this matter "quiet" for a long time, and I had hoped my earlier reply showed that their actions at the "official" level were actually timely.
 
I find it interesting that the media has been screaming for a full shutdown for about a week, yet the borders have only been closed for a day, wouldn't it make sense to get people home and allow them to get their house in order before shutting down?
I personally think the staged approach that is happening, is controlling the chaos that will obviously happen when a complete shutdown is called, there will be people who just flick the bird and disregard any instruction as has already been shown.
If you have people trying to drive home to Perth, say from North Queensland, the last thing you want is the police fining them for just trying to get home.
When the shutdown is called, the police will have to be given the power to detain and fine people for public disobedience, the last thing you want is muppet's being mixed with people trying to do the right thing and get home.
An orderly and timely wind down, seems the logical way, to have any chance of a successful outcome IMO.
As always just my opinion, which no doubt everyone has.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-25/australia-needs-coronavirus-lockdown-now-expert-says/12088348
 
rederob said:
Your post inferred that China had kept this matter "quiet" for a long time,
Click to expand...

No, it did not. I made no comment what so ever regarding the speed of China's response.

What I commented on was why China ostracised other countries for imposing an international travel ban on China when China themselves were imposing extremely strict limitations on their own citizens' movements. What was their motivation for doing this, when it went against everything they themselves thought necessary to stem the spread of the virus.

And related to that is whether the WHO general director was in any way wittingly or unwittingly supporting China's stance on that issue. I have given the links above, but a few issues stand out.

1. The WHO general director, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, was seen by many as completely over the top in his praise for Xi and the actions of the CPP.

2. Xi and the CPP spoke out strongly against bans on international travel.

3. WHO decided against declaring a PHEIC, which meant there would be no calls for restrictions on travel in and out of China.

4. Xi and the CPP used the WHO declarations on international travel in their ostracisms of other countries imposing a ban.

5. The bans greatly slowed down the spread of the virus world wide, but complete isolation of China would have been better. Most early cases outside of China related directly to people travelling from China.
 
Last edited:
Another example of Australians respect for authority. It will be interesting when a full shutdown is called IMO.
https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw...-t-deter-sydney-swimmers-20200325-p54dul.html
From the article:
A fence spanning the length of Bronte Beach wasn't enough to deter everyone from the water, with handfuls of beachgoers still spotted on Wednesday morning.

The extreme measures come after viral photos of Bondi Beach last weekend amplified concerns that Australians were not taking social distancing laws seriously enough.
In response, Waverley Council temporarily closed Bondi, Bronte and Tamarama beaches - but some would not be deterred from their morning swim despite health warnings and physical barriers presented to them.

A Sydney photographer said he was on the end of a barrage of abuse from a swimmer at Bronte after taking photos of the man and others ignoring warnings to stay off the beach.
 
There is currently a lawsuit against China for hiding information about the outbreak. Should be interesting.
 
OMG it seems we get a balanced report.
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/...hich-had-advice-rejected-20200325-p54dud.html
From the article:
The chair of an academic advisory group which had its recommended strategy to curb COVID-19 rejected by the federal government says there is no perfect solution to the pandemic and those in power should be trusted to make hard decisions during the unprecedented crisis.

A 22-member team from the Group of Eight universities called for a rapid, sweeping and costly lockdown to pave the way for a national recovery once the crisis abates, having been convened following a request from Chief Medical Officer Brendan Murphy.
The government has been criticised for resisting the more hardline lockdown and on Tuesday Professor Murphy said the Group of Eight advice was "very seriously considered" but noted the conclusions were not unanimous and the government wanted measures that would be sustainable long-term. He said "harder measures" might be required if community transmission increased.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison said the country was facing both health and economic crises and cautioned against rushing into hardline measures because of the potentially "great toll on people's lives, not just their livelihoods".
Shitij Kapur, dean of medicine at the University of Melbourne, praised the government for seeking a range of expert opinions and said advice on "very complex, unprecedented circumstances is not black and white", which was why the group he chaired had canvassed a diversity of views on how to escalate social distancing measures.

Loading
"We have to all humbly recognise that we don't know the perfect answer and people who have to reduce all the advice into an actionable decision have a very tough task to do," he told The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.

"I feel that our job is to give them the evidence and then we have to trust them to make the right decision."
He said it was easy to offer advice as an academic but those in power had to weigh up a complex mix of medical, scientific, economic and social factors. He also noted the situation was evolving "dramatically" and had changed even as the expert group developed their recommendations from late last week until Sunday.


Professor Kapur said people could not be complacent and he was comfortable with a much stronger lockdown but it should also be recognised that Australia was showing low infection rates, high testing rates, low fatality rates and still relatively few cases from local community transition.

"We should in no way be complacent but I don't think we should throw stones at a system that has managed to achieve these statistics," he said.

The Government will be criticised or applauded for the way this is handled, with hindsight after it is over, way too many are armchair experts ATM.
The problem with the armchair experts, they have no responsibility or accountability for the overall outcome, only their own.
Kudos to Professor Kapur, for having the courage to say it as it is, rather than pander to outside pressure.
Just my opinion.
 
moXJO said:
There is currently a lawsuit against China
Click to expand...
I think all the China stuff can be divided into two categories really:

1. Where the virus came from, was it man-made or natural, actions of Chinese authorities and so on.

2. A broader concern, separate to the virus but made very obvious by it, that Australia is too dependent on other countries of which China just happens to be the most obvious but not the only one.

Only point 1 I'm unsure but on point 2 it's blindingly obvious to anyone paying attention.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

All trading needs to cease for 14 days prior to Monday open in Sydney
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
11K
divs4ever
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...