Herd immunity...What a joke! Tell that to the families of the bodies I helped transport today. From what i have personally witnessed this crap will be with us for another year...And we will all be on food stamps!
Printable View
Herd immunity...What a joke! Tell that to the families of the bodies I helped transport today. From what i have personally witnessed this crap will be with us for another year...And we will all be on food stamps!
herd immunity - noun - the resistance to the spread of a contagious disease within a population that results if a sufficiently high proportion of individuals are immune to the disease, especially through vaccination.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowbell
Are you just willfully being wrong or do you actually not know elementary level vocabulary words? If the latter, why are you posting like you know with absolute fact? If the former, I'm reporting for trolling, making MSU fans look bad, and going off-topic.
To be fair, the definition you posted and how Liverpool defined herd immunity are not the same thing at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by dantheman4248
Herd immunity is simply a populations resistance to a disease. Herd immunity can be gained through natural selection, developed immunity, or vaccinations for a majority of the population.
Good examples of each:
Natural selection: A large portion of sub-saharan africa's population have developed genetic mutations over the past 300 years that make them partially resistant to malaria. This often presents as sickle-cell anemia or thalassemia in the population but actually impacts the shape of red blood cells which, in turn, impacts the microorganisms ability to "attach" to the red blood cell. These genetics mutations are, of course, as a result of wide-spread infection and death allowing the gene causing this abnormality to be passed on.
Developed Immunity: 1918 flu pandemic. Those that survived that were later immune to H1N1. There are numerous other small-scale examples but it really goes hand-in-hand with natural selection. Both natural selection and developed herd immunity is always accompanied with a higher death toll.
Vaccine based herd immunity: Polio. Measles. etc. that list goes on and on. Vaccine based herd immunity usually requires about 95% of the population to take the vaccine.
Pretty sure shingles is from teh virus that causes chicken pox? So everybody that has had chickenpox is at risk of shingles when they get older (or really at any time, but typically it happens to older people).Quote:
Originally Posted by chef dixon
You are a government man. You will not see food stamps.Quote:
Originally Posted by 99jc
If you have sickle cell you will not get Malaria. If you have sickle cell traits you will not get Malaria. That is how they became immune to Malaria. But if they have sickle cell they die anyways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgology
How many less tests were done in Florida due to storm? I wanna get excited about their drop in cases, but not sure on number of tests. Deaths going down is good regardless.
Evolutions a bitch isn't it? Damned if you do. Damned if you don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Lambert
Thank you for acknowledging this. Reading comprehension is in short supply on this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
Quote:
Originally Posted by 99jc
Well, what would the alternative be?
Getting to the point that the virus burns itself out is going to be painful, but trying to lock down is going to be painful, and it's not a sure thing that we will make a difference. Maybe we'll get a vaccine 1Q of 2021, maybe we want. Maybe we'll get a vaccine but find out that significant impacts on community transmission kick in at 30%, in which case we inflicted a lot of unnecessary pain for nothing. Maybe we won't get a vaccine and awe'll find out tramission doesn't slow significantly until we get 70% of the populatin infected, in which case we were just screwed regardless, but we probably picked the more painful method.
Something tragic has happened and a lot of people are going to die. Certainly not as bad as it could be, but it's really bad. Just because it's really bad doesn't mean that we can make it better by locking down. WE were probably 17ed the moment China decided they wanted to try to hide it rather than locking down and preventing spread beyond China. But even if China had been open and forthcoming, I'm not sure they realistically could have contained the spread to within China.
It could have been contained much more if they had been truthful about it and it's transmission rates...or the fact that it was transmittable...recall they originally told everyone it couldn't be transmitted from human to human while hiding numerous cases.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnson85
It is, but it's also in the herpes virus family.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnson85
Arizona reporting lowest new case total since June 15th. Deaths today are 14 after only 18 yesterday.
Isn't there an old theory about the spread of viruses moving along latitude lines?
New cases in Mississippi have been declining over the past few days. Very good news and I hope the trend continues.
Some information on studies involving kids.
https://www.vox.com/21352597/covid-1...on-new-studies
Strange anecdotal case. My young nephew (under 6 months old) recently tested positive. His mom took him because he was showing symptoms of a cold (mild fever, runny nose, sneeze). Now, this kiddo was born back in March right in the teeth of the pandemic fear sweeping the nation. He's been kept at home since the beginning of this. Literally, hasn't left home since he was brought home from the hospital.
As such...only 5 people have come into contact with him. His parents and their parents. No one else has been allowed to the house and they all wear masks and wash hands constantly. Of course, once he tested positive all of them had to be tested. Here's the twist...none of them tested positive. Everyone is scratching their heads over how this little guy got it.
The logical thing is that one of the 5 had it but was asymptomatic, passed it on to him, but was no longer + by the time they were tested.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgology
They might want to get him tested again to make sure it was correct. Now my bother had it and was in ICU. They traced it back to the Doctors office where he caught it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgology
Don't forget Sundays and Mondays are always slow reporting days.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dolphus Raymond
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgology
It would have made a difference early on, which certainly could have reduced deaths in New York and Italy and other places it hit early, but at the end of the day, I'm not sure they could have prevented a respiratory virus like this from spreading. Of course it could have made it much less economically painful to hold off until a vaccine is available, but I'm not sure the resources get thrown towards a vaccine the same way if it didn't explode to begin with. Maybe we also don't have the panic though so we don't throw a bunch of economic damage from our response on top of the economic damage from the virus.
Very true.Quote:
Originally Posted by hacker
7 day average is down over 200 from last Monday.
And nationally, 7 day average is falling substantially. The graph should update about 9 pm tonight and it looks like it will drop a good bit again. Hope so.
Jacklambert, how long did it take your brother to recover? This is really a strange virus. I had a cousin catch COVID and then his wife caught it. One recovered with no problem at home, while the other ended up in the hospital for a week (Not in the ICU, however.)
gonna need you to break down the differences there because... you and especially cowbell are wrong until you can show me how you manipulated context clues to make his statement not mean similar to what I posted.Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
Exact same thing happened with my wife. We had been self quarantining for weeks. Could have only gotten it from the mail or groceries.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgology
One of them could've had and been asymptomatic and given it him. Could've passed by the time they were tested. They should have an antibody test.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgology
I was just looking into our (MS) testing stats bc I hear we're leading the country in posi %, and I noticed this...
https://i.postimg.cc/SQfCJpnn/E807-F...6-E00408-D.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/mDvP58p1/32-C12...-DD4-E6-A1.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/B6K6H2ZS/62-E40...67-A0-E4-F.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/GtnpQ99k/97-BBF...EA90-DE909.jpg
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/...es/mississippi
Now this was just clicking random dates, so I'm not sure how many days like this there are. Think 3655 positives in 3655 total tests can skew positive %?
That's why 7 day averages are useful. Some days tests are not updated on the MSDH website. They're dumped later. The negatives will be included in 7 day average, so no, I don't think it's skewed.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
According to when you look at the 7-day avg. Right now, we're at 23.3%, but no negatives reported the last 2 days.Quote:
Originally Posted by hacker
And the previous 5 days contain extra negatives from the previous dump. 10k tests reported last Wednesday, but we average about 6-7k a day. It averages out.Quote:
Originally Posted by msstate7
No, that's you that is wrong. Your definition does not require that a person be immune for life for there to be some level of herd immunity as Liverpool claimed. Liverpool is defining herd immunity to be basically something that's never achieved. We have a pretty good measles vaccine and most people would say we have herd immunity, but we still occasionally have outbreaks (mostly because of morons, but some of those outbreaks presumably include people whose vaccine just did not give them immunity for one reason or another). There is a level where it's fair to say the resistance is so low that it's a misnomer to call it herd "immunity."Quote:
Originally Posted by dantheman4248
I think that would be a fair criticism of the definition you used with respect to something like the flu. Yes, we have resistance to the spread of the typical flu because of some cross immunity and vaccination, but we're still going to have 5-7% of the population get it most years. I think it's fair to say that's not any type of immunity, even if there is a resistance to spread.
Why do you think the negatives are reported later than the positives? Are you seeing that somewhere or are you just assuming they are eventually reported?Quote:
Originally Posted by hacker
Because looking at historical data, usually the day after no tests are reported, twice as many tests are reported. Then the following days it regresses to the mean.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnson85
I get that there are days that have dumps of prior tests. But why do you think they include just the negatives from days where positives were already reported? It doesn't seem far fetched to me that that would happen. I could see labs reporting positives as they come up, and then doing a weekly dump of the rest. But I wouldn't just assume that happens. Has MDS said that's what happening? Or do you see something in the data to suggest it?Quote:
Originally Posted by hacker
There have been more than a few private clinics that were not reporting negative tests. That was remedied last week or two weeks ago I believe.
It just seems the most plausible explanation given that most weeks look something like this:Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnson85
Monday: 0 tests reported
Tuesday: 10000 tests reported
Wednesday-Sunday: 5000 tests reported
Maybe so, but our neighboring states have wild fluctuations in test numbers, but they report total tests each day they report cases.Quote:
Originally Posted by hacker
https://i.postimg.cc/5251y8v7/C95-CE...B51299-F34.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/W1Vz5Nwy/CC9274...18933957-E.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/j5DSDLRD/A71063...C1-FB37-A9.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/8C9VnwVC/78-A93...F475-CD933.jpg
Here comes Spain... over 5000 new cases today for first time since April 24th. 26 new deaths is most since June 5th.