-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Stanford Antibody Testing results are out!
- Thread starter Leongsam
- Start date
But it is still <5% of the population. That's too small a number for herd immunity.
The elephant in the room has been the millions around the world that caught the bug and beat it without even getting sick.
3% of the Singapore population is 177,000 individuals who already have antibodies
If you take into account the fact that Singapore's population density is way higher than Santa Clara county the number could well be double that.
177,000 is more than 2 packed football stadiums of people.
Forget contact tracing and forget quarantines. Just go for herd immunity while keeping the old folks safe.
3% of the Singapore population is 177,000 individuals who already have antibodies
If you take into account the fact that Singapore's population density is way higher than Santa Clara county the number could well be double that.
177,000 is more than 2 packed football stadiums of people.
Forget contact tracing and forget quarantines. Just go for herd immunity while keeping the old folks safe.
What I think is that although it is not herd immunity yet it does suggest that lockdowns are pretty futile and it is too late for contact tracing.
And the description of the study implies that the random sample was all healthy individuals and not those who have tested positive. We therefore have to add the percentage who are positive to the this figure as that would be a snapshot of the situation as it stands now.
If I was a PM of a country I would continue the social distancing and hygiene campaigns and get the country back on track but I'm not so what I think does not really matter.
And the description of the study implies that the random sample was all healthy individuals and not those who have tested positive. We therefore have to add the percentage who are positive to the this figure as that would be a snapshot of the situation as it stands now.
If I was a PM of a country I would continue the social distancing and hygiene campaigns and get the country back on track but I'm not so what I think does not really matter.
It is how the media sells it.
I think people are generally getting restless and want to go back to work now.
If the sample is representative of the population, would it then suggest that Herd immunity isn't going to work? Many will die.
No it just means that it is not as infective as thought. And that many still have not got infected.
This data is actually inconsistent with some of the narrative that most already have it etc.
There is no real herd immunity for the influenza either. Lots of people die every flu season even though there is vaccine. We do know it is not very effective hence the deaths but I guess it does help make the flu less serious in some despite the fact that they still catch it.
I think the idea that the world can wipe out this virus is pie-in-the-sky stuff. It will carry on spreading and hopefully carry on mutating into something that is far less lethal and it will then be added to the list of corona viruses that have already been circulating for centuries.
I don't think the narrative has ever been that "most already have it". The purpose of this study was to find out what the true infection mortality rate is and this most certainly reduces it by a factor of 10 at least putting it more in line with a bad flu year overall.
However if you separate the data into "rest home seniors" and those >50 you'll find that based upon current stats the younger ones certainly should not be cowering at home as their chances of dying from Covid-19 are very low.
OK. But the report did say that more were infected and developed antibodies than was initially thought.
Liberals.
A few articles have pointed to the fact that this virus is here to stay. I agree. In time to come, people will just need to develop natural immunity or get vaccinated.
It would help if WHO came out to say they were WRONG and that China data caused them to think the mortality rate was higher than it actually is.
Then leaders can blame WHO and China.
We need someone to blame. The leaders need too. If they say they made stupid decisions on their own then they would commit political suicide. But if they said they made decision based on bad information from BAD ORGANIZATIONS AND CHINA then they can admit they were wrong that way and start to reopen the economy.
Without doubt, WHO under the leadship of that nigger, and China under the CCP, are to be blamed. For a long lasting solution, nigger needs to be removed and CCP needs to replaced by a democratically elected government. Hoot ah!
I don't know the decision to shut down came about in other countries but I know exactly what happened in NZ.
Jacinda initially took her cue from Singapore and NZ continued to operate in the normal manner and tourists were supposed to go into "self isolation" which was a joke from the start. No tourist is going to spend a shit load of money to get here and then sit in a hotel/backpacker lodge for 2 weeks. 99% of them just ignored the order and unlike Singapore there are no major consequences because NZ prides itself on being a "kind" society.
Then the Imperial College study was published and her chief medical officer read it and panicked. His forecast, based on the study, was that 27,000 kiwis could die and the bodies would be lying on the streets unless drastic action was taken.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/he...elling-shows-27600-deaths-146000-hospitalised
The PM got cold feet and changed her mind based upon his advice.
However we all know that the imperial college study was full of assumptions because there was insufficient data at the time to come up with an accurate model.
Contrary to what the liberal media has been saying I saw no real leadership just a series of reactions to inaccurate data. However she's a woman, an unwed mother and she hugs Muslims so in the eyes of the libs she can therefore do no wrong.
At no time did NZ do what Taiwan, Hongkong and S Korea did which was to go head on into battle early in the game.
But your PM got praised for taking swift decisive action.
The problem is the initial data that all the models used was based on China. And Italy.
We should sue Italy as well.
By the liberal media? Of course. I already explained the reason.
Here's what was written back home.
nzherald.co.nz
Mike Hosking on coronavirus: Jacinda Ardern's Government isn't leading, they're being led
By: Mike Hosking
3-4 minutes
COMMENT:
Not a moment too soon. What we got Saturday afternoon was at least a week too slow.
There have been too many stories of people wandering around the world, too many people arriving at Auckland Airport without a question or check. To think we don't have community spread is delusional. It is here, they're simply not testing enough, and/or they don't want to know.
I doubt there is a single New Zealander who would disagree with what the Government did. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said we must go hard, correct. We must go early, too late. The cost of this will be enormous, and that should be being addressed today.
The fact it isn't is yet another example of a Government that has been caught in too many meetings, and doesn't know how to be bold. You don't close your country on Saturday and tell us to wait three days to be told how the economic gaps are to be filled.
A lot of governments have been too slow. But that doesn't excuse it, you can see the result of governments being too slow.
What we all need and want right now is leadership and certainty. We want decisions and answers, we want a sense that adults are actually in charge driven by experience, brain power, insight, and intuition.
Trump learned that lesson last Thursday. His catastrophic bumble of an attempt to the nation led to the biggest single day sharemarket fall in history. By Saturday, when he declared a state of emergency, the market and business got what it needed: confidence.
This is a confidence game. The virus is a health emergency, yes, but the bigger problem, is the economic fallout from a disproportionate reaction. The world has decided to freak out, and we are all going to pay the price for at least half this year, if not the whole year.
Yes it will all work out fine, but how we handle this now impacts tremendously on what sort of shape we are in when we bounce out the other side.
Without making this too political, what has dogged this Government is indecision. They're talkers and procrastinators. This is not a time for any of it.
I just wish there were more of them that had run a country through tough days. Be honest, given the GFC and Christchurch, if Sir John Key was still here, would the decisions have taken this long? Would a March 15 commemoration in Christchurch have still been going ahead Saturday morning when most of us were saying Tuesday last week to bail? Would you feel just a bit more reassured?
The decisions, so far, look and feel like calls they've been reluctant to make, calls they've been dragged into. That's not leading, that's being led.
Let's hope tomorrow is deeply impressive.
Similar threads
