Cyprus-Forum.com

[Get Real!]

fatality.PNG

[repulsewarrior]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/na ... video.html

..a drug shows promise.

[Tim Drayton]

John Kirby has done another hour-long interview with epidemiologist Knut Wittkowski, who was head of The Rockefeller University’s Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Design for 20 years (and does not, to the best of my knowledge, believe that the world is ruled by extraterrestrials):

https://williambowles.info/2020/04/30/w ... interview/

[erolz66]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/national/health-science/fauci-sees-hope-in-results-from-remdesivir-drug-trial/2020/04/30/f4afa566-16c9-4ad8-8100-ac85338313f2_video.html

..a drug shows promise.

Paywalled. I assume its referring to remdesivir and yes this is looking promising as a treatment for those with the virus.

[Tim Drayton]

fatality.PNG

A number of serious scientific studies recently conducted based on testing random samples from a representative proportion of the population, such as the one done in Santa Clara County California or Heinsberg in Germany, show that the case fatality ratio is well below one per cent. The majority of people who contract the virus show no symptoms and don't know they've had it. If you only put the number of people who present at hospitals with severe symptoms in the denominator, you will end up with inflated figures of this kind.

[Tim Drayton]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/national/health-science/fauci-sees-hope-in-results-from-remdesivir-drug-trial/2020/04/30/f4afa566-16c9-4ad8-8100-ac85338313f2_video.html

..a drug shows promise.

Paywalled. I assume its referring to remdesivir and yes this is looking promising as a treatment for those with the virus.

As far as I know, nothing has been published and peer reviewed based on these tests, and they appear to show that people are spending the same amount of time in hospital whether they take it or not.

[Tim Drayton]

Indeed, the number of weekly deaths as per the official figures have been well above average for a couple of weeks.
The following chart helps to put things in perspective, showing that similar peaks have occurred in the past:

Your image link is broken. take the s out of https to fix it.

The provisional official figures have shown dramatic rises in the last three weeks not couple, as you say. With slight increase in the week preceding those (week 13). The last week, week 16 is up to the 17 April, so two weeks lag. No one hopes that next weeks figures, week 17 , week ending 24th April they start to decline again but it seems unlikely to me. So yes there have been 'spikes' in the past but you are comparing the past with the middle of something 'unfinished' it seems to me. Oh and your chart only goes up to week 15, total 18,516. We now have week 17 with total 22,351 which is higher than any previous peak in your chart going back to 1993.

Fair point. I accepted the chart at face value. Actually, looking at the figures for 2015 I see a spike of 16,237 for 9 Jan, which does not seem to be reflected in the chart. The point is there have been epidemics before and, sadly, deaths spike during them. Nature is cruel. We are not immortal. We will all inevitably die of something. There is nothing new about such spikes.

Your argument seems to be premised on the dual straw man that anyone who does not buy into the alarmist, exaggerated narrative the media is now devoting its entire resources to pumping out, or questions it to any degree, is denying that people are dying and believes the world is ruled by extraterrestrials.

[erolz66]

John Kirby has done another hour-long interview with epidemiologist Knut Wittkowski, who was head of The Rockefeller University’s Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Design for 20 years (and does not, to the best of my knowledge, believe that the world is ruled by extraterrestrials):

https://williambowles.info/2020/04/30/w ... interview/

Have only been able to watch first 7 minutes or so. I will watch it all when I can.

I accept this guy's credentials. I do not care if he is professor or not. His credentials check out to me (in a way David Icke's do not). I think he has, to significant degree, been attacked unfairly by 'zealots' who have already made up their mind. I just do not think such zealots at either end of the 'made up my mind' spectrum are any different from each other in that regard.

He talks disparagingly about 'scientific consensus'. Such a thing does exist. It is not always right but it is not malign either imo. Then he talks about 'many other people agree with him'. Well clearly not enough that they have yet become the 'consensus' that he starts out sneering at and if there were would he be sneering at that consensus or those that were in the minority opinion? This stuff cuts both ways. He is an expert in the field of Epidemiology but he is not an expert in the field of economics, yet he talks as if his views on what the economic damage is and will be is definite and known and clear. It is not. He claims that the number of deaths is no different from flu peaks that occur every so many years. Well this is not matched in my opinion by the ONS figures. The last reported week on those figures already shows a weekly peak greater than any previous 'flu peak' back to 1993. Also the number of weeks with figures over 15k a week is greater than any previous years 'flu spikes'. Now IF the last week we have data for in the ONS figures is the peak week and IF it drops back to under 15k figures a week within a couple more weeks than that ,then I would say that the virus has been more severe in total peaks and duration of weeks over 15k than previous flu spikes but not massively so. Significantly but not massively. But we do not yet have those figures. It is possible that next weeks will be higher still. SO I find it hard to not question his certainty that 'it is no worse than previous flu spike'. I just do not see that being confirmed by the ONS numbers. They are already the worse spike since 1993 and longer in duration and we do not know what nexts weeks will be.

Now over all I think he is right that numbers seem to be coming down pretty much globally. And economies are restarting pretty much globally. So what's the beef really ?

I ll get back to you when I have watched more than just first 7 minutes

[erolz66]

Fair point. I accepted the chart at face value. Actually, looking at the figures for 2015 I see a spike of 16,237 for 9 Jan, which does not seem to be reflected in the chart. The point is there have been epidemics before and, sadly, deaths spike during them. Nature is cruel. We are not immortal. We will all inevitably die of something. There is nothing new about such spikes.

Your argument seems to be premised on the dual straw man that anyone who does not buy into the alarmist, exaggerated narrative the media is now devoting its entire resources to pumping out, or questions it to any degree, is denying that people are dying and believes the world is ruled by extraterrestrials.

No my argument is, choosing a 'side' and then only looking for things that support that side is not the same thing as looking for truth. I have never argued that the measures taken were NOT an over reaction. I am simply challenging the idea that the definitely are. It is certainty in the face of of so many unknowns that scares me. I do not think you challenge such certainty by just trying to be more certain the other way. Clearly however that is the impression of 'my position'. I have to wonder how much of you getting that impression of my position is down to what I have actually said, rather than a tendency for someone who has chosen a side to then 'binarize' the world in to two polar camps of 'with me' or 'against me'. I am undecided and uncertain on the issue of 'has the measure taken been an over reaction or not'. I am certain that looking at total deaths in the ONS numbers is a better place to look to try and make up my own mind from actual data than ANY single expert opinion. And I am certain anyone who touts David Icke as a source because they are currently saying things that support the side they have chosen is NOT looking for the truth.

[cyprusgrump]

The numbers still don't justify the 'cure'...

This deadly, infectious virus has so far managed...

3.2m infected - call it 4m...

230k dead, call it 300k...

And ~1m recovered...

If they were UK figures you'd be a bit worried but they are World-wide figures... 7bn population...

And I note that the entire population of Sweden has not been infected and killed by it...