Rants and WTF are you talking about and Coronavirus!

[QUOTE=NiteRiderCal;2596013]1. When used as a treatment. No different. I rather the virus resistant against IVM than, resistant against unknown part of my immune system. That way, I can save my immune system for real vaccine that prevent transmittion.

2. However, we have very few people using IVM compare to vaccine, so it is less likely to become resistant.

3. When used as a prevent, the probability of drug resistant is low.

4. So the best way forward is to let it burn. Without any drug or vaccine, it will do what virus do, become less pathogenic, like a common cold, even for old people with co-morbidity.[/QUOTE]1. Resistant against one subset of antibody lineages of literally billions and billions of different antibodies your body can make. But technically a fair point, as in 0.0000001 is indeed greater than 0.

2. Then promoting IVM use is counteractive to this point.

3. Baseless.

4. In the real world, decent people factor in human cost.

[QUOTE=NiteRiderCal;2596039]Real science think that evolution is a thing. Our scientist at the WHO, FDA, CDC don't believe in such silly thing as evolution.[/QUOTE]Hence why I said medicine in its best form, pure practice of medicine. Scientific / research world is also not immune to bastardization by corruption and ineptidude.

There is a reason why science courses are taught in high school and the first years of university but medicine is taught in later years or graduate level programs. They are called Basic Sciences for a reason. Mere foundations to build on.

[QUOTE=NiteRiderCal;2596006]Dude stop manipulating. Polio RRR is something like 99% after 3 shot. In some area, they recommend the 4th. The different is it last. A real vaccine that can bring the R0 below one.

Where as, the fail gene therapy vaccine RRR is 90 to 94% after 2 shots. It does not last. After 7+ month RRR is basically zero. Allowing the vaccine to select for resistant.[/QUOTE]Don't agree that I'm manipulating, but you ignoring details and attaching pejoratives to something you don't like is definitely manipulation.

If anything, I'm being more critical of covid vaccines to compare them to polio. One is a fecal-oral transmission and another is respiratory droplet. Advantage already for polio vaccine by nature of transmissibility.

Despite this, 1950's Polio vaccine was also just 90% effective after 2 doses and also with waning immunity. Thus 3 and 4 shots were later recommended in addition to optimization of original vaccines and eventual switch over to newer tech vaccines in the 60's, 70's, and 80's.

No data for efficacy after 3 shots for covid so comparison is premature and not based on data. You can revisit your point in a year once nations like Israel will have reached similar 3 shot vaccination rates.

Point is, easy to criticize and make uncertain claims about something that is happening live where the medical and science communities are all still learning.

It's similar to the nutjobs who cited 5% mortality for covid in March 2020. Making strong / definite claims about a process that is still in motion is bad science.

I'll just compile some direct hospital data here. People can reason all they want about vaccines, covid is a cold, death from covid versus with covid, natural immunity is better, blah blah blah. But fact of the matter, and for whatever reason, hospitals are currently atypically filled with patients suffering from covid pathologies and especially in my lower vax rate region of the United States. Data covers 5 hospital systems spanning about 40 hospitals in the American Southeast. Just pure facts and numbers.

[QUOTE=DrPoon;2596063]I agree that medicine is very little science. Take a Ph. D. In math or an engineer and let him learn to solve a medical problem. He could surely do it with more efficiency and efficacy than medical doctors can. However, try to get a medical doctor to solve a multivariable differential equation or to derive a physics formula and he would just basically be retarded. Medical doctors in comparison to engineers. They are no match in intelligence and logical problem solving, and of course engineers are the smartest and most practical in solving problems including medical problems if they have basic information such as anatomy and physiology which can be learned in a few months.

Even lawyers have more logic than most medical doctors and could probable heal people with more efficiency had they had a few months of basic medical training.[/QUOTE]Agree that I actually think that my average research and engineering (real engineers, not the ones who work as optimizers and quality assurance engineers) peers are actually smarter [B]on paper[/B] than my average medical friends.

Disagree about their ability to practice medicine, but the degree depends on the field of medicine.

I started my undergrad at Georgia Tech, a top engineering institution in the world. Some peers have garnered positions as far as leading the development of Solar sails and various other components involved in the recent NASA / JPL Mars mission. Would I trust many of them to be optimal in the clinical environment when they have to manage real human patients, other specialties, and clinical staff while integrating biological disease processes and interventions? Hell no.

Similarly, some of my most "intelligent" medical colleagues are the worst critical care physicians because they operate from a pure ideal practice perspective but are not capable of factoring logistics and human factors. For instance, there is a measurable higher rate of autism spectrum disorder prevalence in surgeons. They are often the most socially inept and unable to be effective in the practice of medicine outside of the operation room. How often non-surgical clinicians have to save their ass in obscene.

If I stayed the course in Biomedical engineering and pursued a career in research and development, would have it been intellectually streamlined, predictable, and comfortable? I have no doubt. Intelligence is measured in many ways, but logical intelligence is easy to train via a repeated, disciplined, algorithmic process. Social intelligence and human navigation is much more difficult for many of the world's best thinkers. Take it from a clinician who was first indoctrinated in the engineering world.

But I can only speak for the American system where the medical education requires a 4 year undergraduate degree in which the overwhelming majority choose a hard science to be followed by 4 more years of formal medical education and another 3-7 years of clinical practice. I understand that in UK Commonwealth, Germany, and the Middle East, medical doctors are only required to complete 5-6 years of formal education to be followed with the American equivalent of a residency program.

I don't think the US's superfluous education requirements is necessary to practice medicine at a basic level. Many Nurse practitioners and Physicians assistants with Masters level education are proving that point. But the bigger point is, in the US, you are selecting from a higher pool of talent but because the quantity medical practitioners required versus research / high end engineering positions available, you will run across many "less intellectually impressive" medical doctors, especially in certain fields of medicine. But at the high end, you will also see some of the most impressive people who can excel across all disciplines.

Your assessment even discounts the value of intelligence held by Doctorates in creative and social science fields.

Basically, I agree but also disagree because I choose to integrate hard science with human skill in my definition of intelligent. And lawyers, pfft. Double pfft.

[QUOTE=ExpatLover;2595993]But this can't be a surprise for you, even before the pandemic the LU were getting worst and worst, the forums are full of reports explaining the price increase, it is the eternal balance between offer and demand like in every business. On top of that, flying from the US knowing that the covid is around and that the FKK are probably one of the most risky place to get sick looks just denying the reality. But fucking seems for you to be the most important thing in life despite so many warnings.[/QUOTE]Ok Mr Fauci, you can mask and stay at home as much as you want and keep your snowflake warnings to yourself!

At Murse.

Ignoring evolution is so shortsightedness. Focusing on just adaptive antibody is shortsightedness.

In my world evolution is fundamental. Humanity think they are smarter than nature, we are not. Vaccine are selecting for resistant variants. The only way to stop evolution is to stop transmittion. When we have a real vaccine (like polio) that stop transmittion, then I will support it and take it myself. Don't try to compare polio with this vax. Just stop it. You are making polio vax look bad. It is not. The only thing I see that stop transmittion right now is IVM.

The more they move the goal post, the more people will loose trust. Oh, it not about preventing infection. It about preventing severity of the disease, BS. They change definition of herd immunity. BS and more BS.

Until then we are making a mistake and are irresponsible. This pandemic will last forever. A forever pandemic have much higher human cost. Vaccine resistant virus cost the live of younger people.

[QUOTE=NiteRiderCal;2596403]At Murse.

Ignoring evolution is so shortsightedness. Focusing on just adaptive antibody is shortsightedness.

In my world evolution is fundamental. Humanity think they are smarter than nature, we are not. Vaccine are selecting for resistant variants. The only way to stop evolution is to stop transmittion. When we have a real vaccine (like polio) that stop transmittion, then I will support it and take it myself. Don't try to compare polio with this vax. Just stop it. You are making polio vax look bad. It is not. The only thing I see that stop transmittion right now is IVM.

The more they move the goal post, the more people will loose trust. Oh, it not about preventing infection. It about preventing severity of the disease, BS. They change definition of herd immunity. BS and more BS.

Until then we are making a mistake and are irresponsible. This pandemic will last forever. A forever pandemic have much higher human cost. Vaccine resistant virus cost the live of younger people.[/QUOTE]You are using the term evolution to justify a scientific background but it is an complete consideration of actual realities. The world is not perfect and realities justify a risk calculation evaluation and your stance is detrimental to the most likely outcome. At the same time, your statements of "let it burn" is incongruent with your inconsistent scientific position, especially in this instance of "cost the li (ves) of younger people" statement.

Phoney baloney, scientific justification which is out of touch with the realities of the actual public health crisis. Using half truths to justify a greater reality is more devious and detrimental than the even absurd conspiracy lottery theories and politically-based positions repeated ad nauseam on this thread.

In my opinion, the most disgraceful position expressed here would be yours first, Pistons second, and HT third. Others are woefully ill-informed but the upper tiers of misinformation are people I suspect to be able to discern better but willingly choose a detrimental path.

[QUOTE=NiteRiderCal;2596403]The only thing I see that stop transmittion right now is IVM..[/QUOTE]Complete utter scientific nonsense. There is nothing that this anti-parasitic drug with some anti-viral properties can do that would [B]reduce[/B] transmission more than an already primed, yet not 100% "leak proof" immune system. Complete nonsense sputtered from a position of either ignorance or intentional misinformation.

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2596445]You are using the term evolution to justify a scientific background but it is an complete consideration of actual realities. The world is not perfect and realities justify a risk calculation evaluation and your stance is detrimental to the most likely outcome. At the same time, your statements of "let it burn" is incongruent with your inconsistent scientific position, especially in this instance of "cost the li (ves) of younger people" statement.

Phoney baloney, scientific justification which is out of touch with the realities of the actual public health crisis. Using half truths to justify a greater reality is more devious and detrimental than the even absurd conspiracy lottery theories and politically-based positions repeated ad nauseam on this thread.

In my opinion, the most disgraceful position expressed here would be yours first, Pistons second, and HT third. Others are woefully ill-informed but the upper tiers of misinformation are people I suspect to be able to discern better but willingly choose a detrimental path.[/QUOTE]TLDR. But you have been agreeing with "let it burn". What changes? Oh I pointed out how you try to manipulate people.

I see no way out of this forever pandemic. People are free to do what they want to do. If you are in the high risk group, there are vaccine and IVM. It is a common cold for young people without co-morbidity. The vaccine will select for variant that will kill young people. That why I think it is better to "let it burn. " We simply can't get our head out of out azz.

But I have no political power and no influence. With what our scientific bureaucrat are doing, we will be in lock down, mask, vaccine forever with a high risk of a variant that kill young people.

What is your reason for wanting to "let it burn?"

[QUOTE=PinballMachine;2596251]Is there disposable glasses for the drinks in the bars att FKK's now considering covid? Otherwise they might be quite a super spreader![/QUOTE]Straws are important also because with a straw your mouth never touches the cup, which ideally should be plastic and disposable.

It's like Ted Nugent and Didier Raoult are writing in this thread.

[QUOTE=NiteRiderCal;2596403]The only thing I see that stop transmittion right now is IVM.[/QUOTE]1. We can create a simulation, and everyone moves into the simulation for lets say 6 months or a year. Scaling this up is probably 2 decades away aven if we can get full immersion within 10 years if everything as fast as it can.

2. Nanorobots can kill off the virus. But we might need nano factories in order to do this well enough. So it might be maybe 2 decades away.

Right now there is no good solution. Only people arguing between the lesser bad solution. Maybe we can give people UBI for 2 or 3 years, even in poor countries, and then have people locked inside for a few months while drones deliver food from warehouses. But we are probably not there yet either.

[QUOTE=PaulInZurich;2596014]How much you want to bet that people with weakened immune system are susceptible to second infections and breakthrough infections.[/QUOTE]I already knew that early last year. Why are you trying to make this into your argument? [URL]mr.Com[/URL]ical Saddam Ali.

[QUOTE=NiteRiderCal;2596464]TLDR. But you have been agreeing with "let it burn". What changes? Oh I pointed out how you try to manipulate people.

I see no way out of this forever pandemic. People are free to do what they want to do. If you are in the high risk group, there are vaccine and IVM. It is a common cold for young people without co-morbidity. The vaccine will select for variant that will kill young people. That why I think it is better to "let it burn. " We simply can't get our head out of out azz.

But I have no political power and no influence. With what our scientific bureaucrat are doing, we will be in lock down, mask, vaccine forever with a high risk of a variant that kill young people.

What is your reason for wanting to "let it burn?"[/QUOTE]Funny, my post was just as long as yours so your TLDR is utter trolling behavior.

Nothing has changed. People have been given provided the opportunity to protect themselves. Human cost have been reasonably considered. Cannot live with pandemic restrictions forever. Let it rip.