1042 replies to this topic

[Florin]

That is probably true about the reason the mask mandate was implemented in Costa Rica, but like many other states and countries, the spread continued and got worse after the mandate. In Costa Rica's case, they continue to have a high rate of spread even months after the mandate went into effect.

But:
 

There's no compliance data, and the weak link of Costa Rica's (and perhaps a lot of other countries') mask mandate is that indoor dining is still allowed. If masks aren't worn in high-risk situations, the virus will spread a lot faster.

[Florin]

I don't think I feel negative effects, except when I wear the N95 mask too long.
 
I don't think there are problems with short term use, but I am a little worried about kids wearing them for 8 hours a day (in school/elsewhere), and perhaps months or years of their lives, depending upon the local jurisdiction.

 
Respirators do seem to reduce oxygen intake, increase carbon dioxide, and may cause symptoms such as dizziness and lightheadedness, but if worn for short periods like an hour, probably won't cause symptoms for most people. I've only felt negative effects when wearing a respirator if I exerted myself. Otherwise, I've been able to wear even a P100 for more than 2 hours without experiencing any symptoms.

 

Anyway, if everyone used respirators, the pandemic would be mostly over in a few weeks, and any short-term discomfort would be worth it.
 
Lots of kids in Asia wear surgical masks during the flu season with no issues as far as I know. Respirators would be a different story, but OTOH, they could be worn for one-hour periods and only a few weeks.
 
https://www.consumer...95/make-a-mask/

Edited by Florin, 23 October 2020 - 10:12 PM.

[Hebbeh]

I've worked jobs at various times in my lifetime that required wearing a respirator for long periods up to 8+ hours and have worn double N95's at times in the past when dealing with contaminants that you really want to keep out of your lungs and I've never experienced or heard anybody complain about lack of oxygen or excess carbon dioxide or lightheadedness or dizziness.

 

I find these made up excuses as grasping at straws to justify a bizarre refusal to do their part in helping control the spread of this pandemic.

 

And quite frankly, how would any imagined minor lack of oxygen or supposed excess carbon dioxide be any different than exercise or hard work that leaves you winded but improves your health and fitness.  In fact, high level athletes have training protocols training under various hypoxic conditions and that is why the US Olympic Training Center is where I live above 6,000 feet and most visitors need to acclimate to.  Hypoxia isn't dangerous or detrimental as it forces your metabolism to adjust and become more efficient.

 

Masks can improve your health in more ways than one.

[Florin]

Yeah, I largely agree with all of that. But it may take some time for people that aren't accustomed to respirators to acclimate, especially if they're moving around a lot while using them. More rest and break periods might be necessary.

Edited by Florin, 24 October 2020 - 12:54 AM.

[Hip]

We should follow Ethiopia's example: they have just introduced 2 year prison sentences for people caught in public not wearing a mask. 

[Mind]

We should follow Ethiopia's example: they have just introduced 2 year prison sentences for people caught in public not wearing a mask. 

 

I am terrified by this obvious tyranny and trampling of human autonomy and individual rights.

 

There are people who don't want to wear masks. I am fine with that. They are in control of their life and if they want to take a risk, I have no problem with that.

[Hip]

I am terrified by this obvious tyranny and trampling of human autonomy and individual rights.

 

It's fine if you want to risk you own life and health, but not wearing a mask can lead to the death or ill-health (eg long COIVD) of others. 

 

In all spheres of life, when a person's actions can lead to the death or injury of others, we have legislation in place that criminalizes such actions. For example, if you drive recklessly at excessive speed and then kill a pedestrian, you will be prosecuted.

 

Even if you drive recklessly or at at excessive speed and do not cause any harm, you can still be fined or prosecuted, simply because your actions have the potential to harm someone.

 

In circumstances where one's actions can harm others, there are laws put in place.

 

Why should it be any different with masks? Or holding large parties with hundreds of people, when this is currently illegal.

 

 

 

I am impressed by the human goodness of the Asian nations. Not much India or Pakistan, but places like China, Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, Japan, Vietnam, who have amazingly low levels of coronavirus deaths, because they all cooperate with the rules that the government puts in place. 

 

These Asian nation are experiencing less economic impact from the pandemic, because they have controlled the virus so successfully. These Asian nations are not going to come out of the pandemic with $trillions in debt, whereas we in the West are going to be faced with a debt burden, because we are too rebellious to follow rules which ultimately are in our own interests. 

Edited by Hip, 24 October 2020 - 01:27 PM.

[Mind]

 

 

It's fine if you want to risk you own life and health, but not wearing a mask can lead to the death or ill-health (eg long COIVD) of others. 

 

Other people can wear a mask or stay home and they will be fine. Problem solved.

[Florin]

Other people can wear a mask or stay home and they will be fine. Problem solved.

 

Respirators would mostly solve the problem if they were widely available. There would still be the issue of hospital overload if not enough people wore them, however.

 

Since cloth masks aren't nearly as good as respirators, they don't solve the problem if lots of people don't wear them. If everyone wearing masks provides an 80% risk reduction in transmission but if someone without a mask cuts that to 40%, that's a big problem. And in many circumstances such as grocery shopping and working, staying home isn't an option.

Edited by Florin, 24 October 2020 - 05:59 PM.

[Hip]

Other people can wear a mask or stay home and they will be fine. Problem solved.

 

Unfortunately that's not the way it works. Surgical masks are far more effective at stopping an infected person from spreading the virus to others, than they are at stopping the wearer from getting the virus.

 

This is because masks block the ejection of large particles of saliva from the mouth — particles which would normally land on surfaces all around you, or which would land on other people's faces, like their eyes or mouth. 

 

So in order for a person not to get infected, he relies on others wearing their masks.

 

Thus those who care for the welfare of others will wear a mask (remember Christianity?). Those who only care for themselves will not see the point in a mask.

[Danail Bulgaria]

Obviously I care for the welfare of others I wear a mask with the filter I think is the best, and I wear a face shield. I tripple care for the welfare of others Only that I am not infected ...

[Daniel Cooper]

We should follow Ethiopia's example: they have just introduced 2 year prison sentences for people caught in public not wearing a mask. 

 

So what's the limiting principle in this position?

 

If we should have 2 year imprisonment for not wearing a mask during this pandemic, why shouldn't we have a mandatory requirement during flu season and a similar sentence for failing to wear one?

 

After all, dead is dead.  Certainly flu doesn't kill as many people, but in the US it's about 30k in an average year, 60k in a bad year, and over 100k is well within the range of possibility.

 

Is it the number of dead that invokes your 2 year sentence? If so, what is that number and what is your line of reasoning to arrive at it?

 

Should we also have mandatory prison sentences if you refuse to take the vaccine when it comes out? This vaccine very likely isn't going to offer a high level of protection. You hear rates of effectiveness of 40 to 60 percent being discussed. So it's entirely possible that you might take the vaccine, and still get covid from someone that did not, and you might die. There will undoubtedly be some cases where exactly that scenario plays out.  Shall we therefore also put people refusing the vaccine in prison?

 

What other new and exciting reasons for putting people in prison would you like to see occur?

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 25 October 2020 - 02:22 PM.

[Mind]

Unfortunately that's not the way it works. Surgical masks are far more effective at stopping an infected person from spreading the virus to others, than they are at stopping the wearer from getting the virus.

 

This is because masks block the ejection of large particles of saliva from the mouth — particles which would normally land on surfaces all around you, or which would land on other people's faces, like their eyes or mouth. 

 

So in order for a person not to get infected, he relies on others wearing their masks.

 

Thus those who care for the welfare of others will wear a mask (remember Christianity?). Those who only care for themselves will not see the point in a mask.

 

So up until 8 months ago, the entirety of humanity were cold-blooded uncaring murderers? Because they moved and breathed freely throughout their life. After all, it has been known for centuries that we pass viruses around to each other. Everyone one of us has passed on a virus that has went on to kill someone at some point in our life. Up until 8 months ago it was called "being human". Now it is murder??

 

Bizarre.

[Hip]

After all, dead is dead.  Certainly flu doesn't kill as many people, but in the US it's about 30k in an average year, 60k in a bad year, and over 100k is well within the range of possibility.
 
Is it the number of dead that invokes your 2 year sentence? If so, what is that number and what is your line of reasoning to arrive at it?

 

The coronavirus pandemic has several characteristics that make it different from seasonal flu, one of which is that coronavirus can explode exponentially if not brought under control. This exponential growth not only causes lots of death, and lots of long COVID (the latter may be a fate actually worse than death), but also takes up many hospital beds, which means patients with other health conditions cannot be treated in hospital (which then has its own ill-health consequences).

 

Pandemic control measures are as much about protecting the hospital system and the health services, as they are about saving life. This need to protect the health care system has been stated many, many times in the news; surely you must be aware of that?

 

 

 

As for a two year sentence for not wearing a mask: every country lies somewhere on the scale of co-operative and communitarian at one end, to a self-centered attitude of every-man-for-himself at the other end.

 

In a more communitarian country, you would not have to impose such stiff penalties for not following the rules, because people in communitarian countries naturally like to co-operative and follow rules which result in benefits to others and to the community.

 

In every-man-for-himself countries, people tend do what's good for them personally, but are less interested in what's good for others. So in these countries, stiff penalties are required to get compliance with the rules.

 

 

 

This article explains how the most communitarian countries have done well in the pandemic. The article also states that:

 

The least communitarian countries — the United States leading the parade, with the United Kingdom marching right along with it — have done very poorly in managing the pandemic. They turned mitigating measures such as wearing masks into a contest between the government and the masses, many of which have strong libertarian sentiments, instead of considering them a mark of being a good fellow, caring about others, and the common good.

 

 

 

Edited by Hip, 25 October 2020 - 04:59 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

The coronavirus pandemic has several characteristics that make it different from seasonal flu, one of which is that coronavirus can explode exponentially if not brought under control. This exponential growth not only causes lots of death, and lots of long COVID (the latter may be a fate actually worse than death), but also takes up many hospital beds, which means patients with other health conditions cannot be treated in hospital (which then has its own ill-health consequences).

 

Pandemic control measures are as much about protecting the hospital system and the health services, as they are about saving life.

 

 

 

As for a two year sentence for not wearing a mask: every country lies somewhere on the scale of co-operative and communitarian at one end, to a self-centered attitude of every-man-for-himself at the other end.

 

In a more communitarian country, you would not have to impose such stiff penalties for not following the rules, because people in communitarian countries naturally like to co-operative and follow rules which result in benefits to others and to the community.

 

In every-man-for-himself countries, people tend do what's good for them personally, but are less interested in what's good for others. So in these countries, stiff penalties are required to get compliance with the rules.

 

 

 

This article explains how the most communitarian countries have done well in the pandemic. The article also states that:

 

 

 

 

 

 

You avoided answering my question.  Both the flu and covid are highly contagious respiratory viruses largely spread through the exhalation of viral particles.  Both can be deadly.  Covid can may kill half a percent of those infected, the flu probably from a tenth to a third of that depending on the particular strain. 

 

So at what infection fatality rate or R0 should we start putting people in prison, because basically that's the difference between these two infectious diseases that matter. And how do you arrive at these numbers?

 

Also, I note that you avoided entirely my question about putting people in prison for refusing to take whatever vaccine is eventually released.

 

This question is particularly germane because both masks and vaccines are strategies to prevent the spread of the same covid virus, and when it's all said and done, they're probably going to be about as effective as each other.  They're talking about these vaccines being 40 - 60% effective, which seems to be the range of effectiveness that is touted for masks.

 

So, if not wearing a mask should get you a two year prison sentence, why shouldn't refusing to take the vaccine?  Or should people just be held down and forcibly injected?
 

And you may lament the lack of "communitarian ethos" in various countries, but you seem prepared to use force to compel your communitarian goals.  After all, nobody goes to prison voluntarily.  Why is it that those who seek a communitarin society always seem so willing to use force to achieve their goal?  Will using these methods really instill a "we're all in this together" ethos in society?

 

BTW - having been to China I can tell you that you will find no more of an "every man for himself" ethos in the world. Why do you think that people that are involved in car accidents there are so routinely left on the side of the road as the other party speeds off?

[Hip]

You avoided answering my question.  Both the flu and covid are highly contagious respiratory viruses largely spread through the exhalation of viral particles.  Both can be deadly.  Covid can may kill half a percent of those infected, the flu probably from a tenth to a third of that depending on the particular strain. 
 
So at what infection fatality rate or R0 should we start putting people in prison, because basically that's the difference between these two infectious diseases that matter. And how do you arrive at these numbers?

 
Nearly every activity has some risk of death or injury. We as a society accept the risks of a certain amount of death or injury if the benefits of the activity outweigh the issues caused by the loss of life.
 
For example, in the US, around 50 thousand people die each year on the roads. Now nobody is going to start banning or restricting vehicle usage, because transport is fundamental to so many aspects of modern life. So we put up with those deaths. 
 
 
When it comes to seasonal flu deaths, the same equation applies: we could reduce those deaths by lockdown practices, but would the economic price be too high? At present, seasonal flu is down by an amazing 98%, as a result of lockdowns. So lockdown certainly works. 

 

I don't know the answer, but I suspect after the coronavirus pandemic is over, we may look with fresh eyes about what we can sensibly do to reduce seasonal flue deaths, without being too disruptive to society.




 

Also, I note that you avoided entirely my question about putting people in prison for refusing to take whatever vaccine is eventually released.
 
This question is particularly germane because both masks and vaccines are strategies to prevent the spread of the same covid virus, and when it's all said and done, they're probably going to be about as effective as each other.  They're talking about these vaccines being 40 - 60% effective, which seems to be the range of effectiveness that is touted for masks.
 
So, if not wearing a mask should get you a two year prison sentence, why shouldn't refusing to take the vaccine?  Or should people just be held down and forcibly injected?

 

Vaccination is a little different to mask wearing. There are most likely very slight risks to getting a vaccination, whereas there are no risks to wearing a mask (unless you have asthma, etc). 

 

So I do not think vaccination should be mandatory. But it's clear that those who refuse a vaccination are passing the burden of the slight risk to others. 

 

If most people get vaccinated, it halts or greatly reduces the prevalence of that pathogen in the community. So even if you are not vaccinated, you benefit. But the vaccine refuser gets those benefits for free: they get the benefit, but without paying the price of the slight risk from having the vaccine.

 

So I think people should be allowed to refuse vaccination, but they should be made to pay in some other way. For example, they might be subject to increased taxation for one year. I don't think it is fair to let vaccine refusers to force others to take the risks for them. 

 

I don't think vaccine refusers should be able to pass the risk to others without there being some penalty.

 

 

 

 

And you may lament the lack of "communitarian ethos" in various countries, but you seem prepared to use force to compel your communitarian goals.  After all, nobody goes to prison voluntarily.  Why is it that those who seek a communitarin society always seem so willing to use force to achieve their goal?  Will using these methods really instill a "we're all in this together" ethos in society?
 
BTW - having been to China I can tell you that you will find no more of an "every man for himself" ethos in the world. Why do you think that people that are involved in car accidents there are so routinely left on the side of the road as the other party speeds off?

 

The US has one of the highest per capita prison populations in the world, because the US is prepared to punish people who do not follow its rules. So even a liberal / libertarian nation like the US uses force to control the populace.

 

 

I don't say communitarian values are better or worse than liberal/libertarian individualistic values. Each have their own virtues. One quality of individualistic values is creativity: we see that the more individualistic West tends to be more creative in technology and science than the communitarian countries. When everyone tends to think similarly because of a communitarian ethos, it's harder to engage in the lateral thinking that underpins creativity. China for example has always had more difficulty in coming up with original technological ideas, and I suspect it's their communitarian values which are to blame.

 

So not holding communitarian values as better than liberal individualistic values.

 

But I do think that the liberal West should be more flexible in its ethos: in times like this, people in the West should realize that we all need to pull together in dealing with coronavirus.  

 

 

Edited by Hip, 25 October 2020 - 06:09 PM.

[Hip]

So up until 8 months ago, the entirety of humanity were cold-blooded uncaring murderers? Because they moved and breathed freely throughout their life. After all, it has been known for centuries that we pass viruses around to each other. Everyone one of us has passed on a virus that has went on to kill someone at some point in our life. Up until 8 months ago it was called "being human". Now it is murder??

 

Humanity historically has often been ignorant of its harmful behaviors and practices, until they are brought to light by empirical evidence and clear thinking.

 

Most people, and even many medical professionals, are not aware of the link between infectious pathogens and chronic diseases. This link is something not on most people's radar. And most people probably would not even want to know about this link, because it only raises anxiety, and there's actually not much they can do about it.

 

 

 

For example, mononucleosis is known as the kissing disease, as the Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) which causes mono is typically picked up by teenagers or those in their 20s when they kiss one of their first girlfriends or boyfriends. The virus is spread quite easy by saliva from deep kissing. 

 

But EBV is also the virus which many researchers believe likely causes multiple sclerosis. So that that first romantic, exciting kiss you had as a young person may decades later be the cause of your early death and unpleasant protracted chronic illness.

 

You can understand why most people would not even want to know about the link between socially transmitted pathogens and disease: such knowledge might make you too fearful to live your life.

[Florin]

Wearing a mask supposedly saves about $3k for every person that wears one. So, it's only fair that the penalty for not wearing one is the same, $3k.

 

https://www.cbsnews....ing-save-money/

[Daniel Cooper]

Wearing a mask supposedly saves about $3k for every person that wears one. So, it's only fair that the penalty for not wearing one is the same, $3k.

 

https://www.cbsnews....ing-save-money/

 

Maybe.  I'd have to read the study.

 

But, consider this - they are now telling us that the R0 for covid is about 5.7.  And they're also telling us that masks are perhaps 60% effective.  A 60% reduction in R0 only gets us down to 3.4, well above the R0 < 1 needed to eradicate the virus even if everyone wore one. 

 

This is born out I think if you look at the areas of the country where mask wearing has a high compliance level. In my area, just going about in public I see mask compliance that has to be well in excess of 90%.  I almost never see anyone not wearing a mask.  In fact, I did see one person not masked the other day and it struck me how long it had been since I had seen someone in public not masked up.  Hell, I see people alone in their cars and walking down the sidewalk hundreds of feet from another human being wearing a mask.

 

And yet, at best this high compliance of mask wearing has flattened out the rate of new infections. It certainly hasn't declined.  So that is in agreement with masking not getting R0 below 1.

 

One could always say that "well, the masks people are wearing aren't good enough, they should wear better masks". I suppose that's true, but until you have a mask that filters out every viral particle you can always claim that as a defense.  The fact is, in my area of high mask compliance it practically has not caused the number of new cases to go down.

 

If this is so, then all masks do is slow the rate of transmission. That can be a good thing. We don't want to overwhelm the hospitals and if an effective vaccine is not too far off then we may be saving some people that will be protected once a vaccine is available.  But if the vaccine isn't going to be that effective or it's going to be another couple of years, at some point practically everyone is going to get the virus.  If that is the case, I very much doubt that masks will end up saving $3k for everyone that wears one.

 

I don't think this is as cut and dry as many would like us to think.

[Florin]

Whether it's $3k or $300, the point is that the maskless should pay for the damage they're causing whatever the "correct" price will turn out to be. And if it turns out that masks are useless or harmful, the maskless would be paid back with interest. Even anti-maskers should be able to back this proposal. Let them put their money where their mouth is.

 

I'll take the Asian experience with masks and the other evidence I pointed out over anecdotes any day.

 

We do have respirators that filter out everything but the only reason that they're not widely used and available can be blamed on a massive amount of human stupidity. Unless this changes, we're just going to repeat the same arguments over and over again.

Edited by Florin, 25 October 2020 - 11:14 PM.

[Hip]

We do have respirators that filter out everything but the only reason that they're not widely used and available can be blamed on a massive amount of human stupidity. Unless this changes, we're just going to repeat the same arguments over and over again.

 

Indeed. If an advanced race of aliens came to Earth, to decide whether humanity had evolved enough intelligence to warrant them contacting us, and they saw the way we are handling the pandemic, their answer would be a resounding "no, not yet intelligent enough".

 

Although the aliens might write in their report about Earth that "while the Europeans and Americans appear to be rather stupid races, the Asians are showing intellectual promise, and we recommend that if contact is made with humans in future, it should be the Asians we approach, and not the squabbling Caucasians, who could not organize a piss up in a brewery".

Edited by Hip, 25 October 2020 - 11:17 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

People have been trotting out that trope since we started talking about aliens.  "Why if aliens came down and saw humanity, they'd decide there was no intelligent life on this planet".

 

This has historically been a way to elevate the person making the statement.  "Humanity is a bunch of dolts and morons, but by noticing this I have signaled that I am uniquely superior to these riff raff".

 

 

 

[Hip]

This has historically been a way to elevate the person making the statement.  "Humanity is a bunch of dolts and morons, but by noticing this I have signaled that I am uniquely superior to these riff raff".

 

Well I can't claim to know what psychological motivations have prompted others to use that cliche, but I can tell you that in my case, I use it because I feel almost depressed by the inept way the pandemic has been handled. It's nice to be able to look up to authorities as repositories of intelligence and wisdom, but I can't say I can look up to any government in the West, in terms of the way they have dealt with coronavirus. I have been impressed with governments in places like Taiwan though.

[Daniel Cooper]

Well I can't claim to know what psychological motivations have prompted others to use that cliche, but I can tell you that in my case, I use it because I feel almost depressed by the inept way the pandemic has been handled. It's nice to be able to look up to authorities as repositories of intelligence and wisdom, but I can't say I can look up to any government in the West, in terms of the way they have dealt with coronavirus. I have been impressed with governments in places like Taiwan though.

 

You state that the pandemic has been handled ineptly, but you don't know that.  Everyone holds up the paragon of a few Asian countries and says - "See, they wear masks.  If we wore masks then we would have the same low rates of infection".  But that's not established.

 

You will find many areas in the US and many areas in your country were people are highly compliant with mask wearing.  But, we just haven't seen the rates of infection decline that dramatically.  Florin will say - "Well, these masks aren't as effective as they could be".  And he's right.  You can always make a better mask.  But, the masks being worn in my area and in the West in general are the same masks that are being worn in Asia.  They are not wearing N95 masks either. They are wearing disposable surgical/procedure masks or cloth masks just like we're wearing here.  And I'm telling you - in my area mask compliance is very high.  I almost never see anyone not wearing a mask.  And no large crowds are allowed and most of the children are doing school from home.  I don't even think the Asians are doing that.

 

So, if we're wearing the masks (and we are) and the rates of infection are at best holding steady - at some point you need to consider if there's not something else going on in Asia.  And god only knows what it might be. But it is not unusual to have different populations to have different innate susceptibility or immunity. History is replete with examples of this. There are also significant dietary differences and probably a half dozen things that no one has thought about.

 

So I think you're just wrong headed to say - "We in the West are stupid because the Asians are not getting covid. We must not be wearing our masks enough".  That is not an established fact.

 

It's a shame that these masks have become an issue of dogma and we can't look at them dispassionately.

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 26 October 2020 - 04:43 AM.

[Hip]

You state that the pandemic has been handled ineptly, but you don't know that.  Everyone holds up the paragon of a few Asian countries and says - "See, they wear masks.  If we wore masks then we would have the same low rates of infection".  But that's not established.

 

Yes I do know that, because I have read a few articles on the way different countries have handled the pandemic. And I have read articles on the pandemic advanced warning and response infrastructure in place in different countries. 

 

As you may know, Donald Trump closed down the US pandemic advanced warning surveillance system, so no institution in the US was even looking out for any incipient pandemics around the world (I am not anti-Trump by the way; nor I am I pro-Trump). This is a bit like turning off your incoming ballistic missile radar warning system, in order to save a bit of money.

 

Whereas Taiwan has one of the best pandemic advanced warning systems in the world. Not only does Taiwan have a dedicated institution constantly surveying the globe for any signs of any embryonic potential pandemic appearing in any country, but Taiwan already has all the necessary pandemic control procedures and legislative frameworks in place, so when the pandemic advanced warning unit raise the alarm of a possible pandemic, this kicks off a whole cascade of orchestrated pre-planned actions in the Taiwanese government, police, army, hospitals, etc, designed to intelligently respond to a pandemic.

 

 

The Trump moans that China silenced the doctor (Dr Li Wenliang) who initially sounded the alarm about this new deadly virus in China, and because of that, the US lost valuable time in terms of getting ready for the pandemic. Well certainly the Chinese should not have silenced this guy. But it is bullshit to claim that this doctor's message did not get out because of the silencing.

 

The Taiwanese pandemic advanced warning team were paying full attention to Dr Li Wenliang, listening to what he was saying. Even though this doctor was later silence by the local authorities in China, Taiwan still got the full message, and their pandemic unit went on high alert because of Dr Li Wenliang. 

 

Taiwan's early response to the pandemic included opening 60 new factory production lines to make enough makes for everyone in the country (population of 24 million), even before the pandemic arrived in Taiwan. This was just their advanced planning. And hundreds of other preparations were made; masks are only one of 100s of techniques Taiwan used to control the pandemic. All intelligently orchestrated by their pandemic response infrastructure. This is why even now, Taiwan has had on 7 coronavirus deaths.

 

You see, that is an intelligent response to a pandemic. It makes me proud to me human. And there are similar success stories in other East Asian countries. Whereas the West's response makes me embarrassed to be part of the human species. 

[Daniel Cooper]

The US was aware of the pandemic when everyone else in the world was aware of it, i.e. when the Chinese told the WHO about it at the end of last year.  So the "US pandemic advanced warning surveillance system" had exactly zero to do with the US's or anyone else's response. Taiwan found out about the pandemic at the same time as everyone else - i.e. when the Chinese informed the WHO.

 

Now, the Chinese were certainly aware of the virus for months before they announced it.  But curiously they seem to get little blame in this mess.

 

 

 

[Hip]

The US was aware of the pandemic when everyone else in the world was aware of it, i.e. when the Chinese told the WHO about it at the end of last year.  So the "US pandemic advanced warning surveillance system" had exactly zero to do with the US's or anyone else's response. Taiwan found out about the pandemic at the same time as everyone else - i.e. when the Chinese informed the WHO.  

 

But the US did almost nothing to prepare for the pandemic, in spite of the advanced warning. In the West, we saw all hell had broken loose in Wuhan, but we did next to nothing to prepare for the possibility that the Wuhan outbreak would not be contained. 

 

Only months later did the same coronavirus outbreaks hit the West. So we had plenty of advanced warning. But we did nothing. In the UK, in the midst of the massive outbreak in Wuhan, scientists were saying that there is little risk to Britain. What a mistake that was. 

 

As soon as I saw what was happening in Wuhan, I bought myself some N95 respiratory masks. The masks were very cheap then, because the general public in the West did not even conceive that the virus might spread globally, so there was no demand. But why didn't government officials realize that masks would become a very important item?

 

In the first few months of the pandemic in the West, there was a dire shortage of respirator masks, and this led to the death of many doctors and medical personnel. Because unlike in Taiwan, nobody in the West was planning ahead. 

 

This mask shortage then led to scientists blatantly lying to the public, telling the public that masks do little to help (which is false), in order to stop the public buying up all the masks, so that the limited supply of masks could be reserved for medics.

 

If we had acted promptly, we would have opened up new factory production lines in advance, as Taiwan did, to ensure there were enough masks for everyone. 

 

 

NASA is planning to put humans back on the moon in 2024, but when it comes to making sufficient paper masks and respirators for everyone, that seems beyond the technological capabilities of Western countries. Surely you must appreciate the irony in that.

Edited by Hip, 26 October 2020 - 04:11 PM.

[Hip]

Now, the Chinese were certainly aware of the virus for months before they announced it.  But curiously they seem to get little blame in this mess.

 

That's a Donald Trump approach: blaming China in order to divert attention away from his administration's dreadful handling of coronavirus.

 

Sure China is a fault for not alerting the world earlier. 

 

But it's quite clear that even if China had alerted the world earlier, this would have made little difference to the West's response, because even when the West saw what was happening in Wuhan — when it was blatantly obvious that a seriously nasty new virus had arrived on the scene — the West still did nothing to prepare for the possibility the virus would spread globally.

 

The West saw Wuhan, but like Nero, the West fiddled while Rome burned.

Edited by Hip, 26 October 2020 - 04:33 PM.

[Mind]

Humanity historically has often been ignorant of its harmful behaviors and practices, until they are brought to light by empirical evidence and clear thinking.

 

Most people, and even many medical professionals, are not aware of the link between infectious pathogens and chronic diseases. This link is something not on most people's radar. And most people probably would not even want to know about this link, because it only raises anxiety, and there's actually not much they can do about it.

 

 

 

For example, mononucleosis is known as the kissing disease, as the Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) which causes mono is typically picked up by teenagers or those in their 20s when they kiss one of their first girlfriends or boyfriends. The virus is spread quite easy by saliva from deep kissing. 

 

But EBV is also the virus which many researchers believe likely causes multiple sclerosis. So that that first romantic, exciting kiss you had as a young person may decades later be the cause of your early death and unpleasant protracted chronic illness.

 

You can understand why most people would not even want to know about the link between socially transmitted pathogens and disease: such knowledge might make you too fearful to live your life.

 

That is why I am focused on the development treatments for viral diseases....including immune system rejuvenation.

 

Punishment, prison, lockdowns? Run, hide, be scared!! This is not a positive future. Treatments for viral diseases and infections are the positive way forward that everyone should support, but apparently not everyone does. I am saddened that so many people are on the "wear masks forever" bandwagon - to the detriment of real positive solutions. What a depressing future.

[Hip]

That is why I am focused on the development treatments for viral diseases....including immune system rejuvenation.

 

Well here at least we can agree! 

 

Medical science is able to handle most bacteria infections, thanks to the discovery of antibiotics. But medicine struggles with viruses. Viruses are harder to tackle. But I think viruses are linked to more chronic diseases than bacteria are, so in terms of reducing healthspan, lifespan, and reducing quality of life, viruses are major culprits.