ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 3116 of 3903
« First < 2116261630163066310631123113311431153116 31173118311931203126316632163616 > Last »
Nzoner's Game Room>***NON-POLITICAL COVID-19 Discussion Thread***
JakeF 10:28 PM 02-26-2020
A couple of reminders...

Originally Posted by Bwana:
Once again, don't come in this thread with some kind of political agenda, or you will be shown the door. If you want to go that route, there is a thread about this in DC.
Originally Posted by Dartgod:
People, there is a lot of good information in this thread, let's try to keep the petty bickering to a minimum.

We all have varying opinions about the impact of this, the numbers, etc. We will all never agree with each other. But we can all keep it civil.

Thanks!

Click here for the original OP:

Spoiler!

[Reply]
O.city 08:40 AM 11-14-2020
While that’s bad

I’m not sure we haven’t been at that number of daily infections before. Sadly.
[Reply]
RunKC 08:44 AM 11-14-2020
Originally Posted by TLO:
December.
My wife works in healthcare. Her job deals with elder care expansion. She was told that December doesn’t seem likely for her their facilities. Likely January.

Hopefully that means all these bigger more affected cities are getting it next month.
[Reply]
petegz28 08:49 AM 11-14-2020
Originally Posted by O.city:
While that’s bad

I’m not sure we haven’t been at that number of daily infections before. Sadly.
I agree and as I stated earlier, I am confident that at least some places are reporting people as being positive even though they have never been tested. They are simply making an assumption via contact tracing that if you were exposed you are positive.
[Reply]
O.city 08:56 AM 11-14-2020
Originally Posted by petegz28:
I agree and as I stated earlier, I am confident that at least some places are reporting people as being positive even though they have never been tested. They are simply making an assumption via contact tracing that if you were exposed you are positive.
Assumed positive is different than reported or atleast was the last I read
[Reply]
BigRedChief 08:59 AM 11-14-2020
Originally Posted by petegz28:
He champions adding people that have never been tested to the positives list then the very next post points out how large the list of positives are.

:-)
Are you denying that there are more cases now? more hospitalizations? more deaths? than say a month ago? Keeping your head in the sand doesn't change the reality happening in the USA. Everywhere.

I post something positive to you and your family. Then later posted a simple fact on how many Americans tests positive today. I'm not seeing something hypocritical here.
[Reply]
BigRedChief 09:04 AM 11-14-2020
Originally Posted by O.city:
Assumed positive is different than reported or atleast was the last I read
No kidding. Big difference. Just because you were in the room where a + Covid patient was and you remain asymptomatic why should you marked with a possible covid person? I know for medical reasons we need to track patients with Covid for the benefit of all. But, if these lists are turned around and used by insurance companies to deny care, that should be against the law.
[Reply]
petegz28 09:05 AM 11-14-2020
Originally Posted by O.city:
Assumed positive is different than reported or atleast was the last I read
Yeah well what I have been told is assumed positive is going in the positive column.
[Reply]
petegz28 09:07 AM 11-14-2020
Originally Posted by BigRedChief:
Are you denying that there are more cases now? more hospitalizations? more deaths? than say a month ago? Keeping your head in the sand doesn't change the reality happening in the USA. Everywhere.

I post something positive to you and your family. Then later posted how many Americans tests positive today.I'm not seeing something hypocritical here.
That's not what I said at all. I said you were okay with adding people who never tested to the list of positives then you were talking about how large the list of positives has become. Think about it a little more.
[Reply]
MahomesMagic 09:11 AM 11-14-2020
What did the CHARM recruits have to do? The study explains, and, as you will see, they faced an even more strict regime that has existed in civilian life in most places.

All recruits wore double-layered cloth masks at all times indoors and outdoors, except when sleeping or eating; practiced social distancing of at least 6 feet; were not allowed to leave campus; did not have access to personal electronics and other items that might contribute to surface transmission; and routinely washed their hands. They slept in double-occupancy rooms with sinks, ate in shared dining facilities, and used shared bathrooms. All recruits cleaned their rooms daily, sanitized bathrooms after each use with bleach wipes, and ate preplated meals in a dining hall that was cleaned with bleach after each platoon had eaten. Most instruction and exercises were conducted outdoors. All movement of recruits was supervised, and unidirectional flow was implemented, with designated building entry and exit points to minimize contact among persons. All recruits, regardless of participation in the study, underwent daily temperature and symptom screening. Six instructors who were assigned to each platoon worked in 8-hour shifts and enforced the quarantine measures. If recruits reported any signs or symptoms consistent with Covid-19, they reported to sick call, underwent rapid qPCR testing for SARS-CoV-2, and were placed in isolation pending the results of testing.

Instructors were also restricted to campus, were required to wear masks, were provided with preplated meals, and underwent daily temperature checks and symptom screening. Instructors who were assigned to a platoon in which a positive case was diagnosed underwent rapid qPCR testing for SARS-CoV-2, and, if the result was positive, the instructor was removed from duty. Recruits and instructors were prohibited from interacting with campus support staff, such as janitorial and food-service personnel. After each class completed quarantine, a deep bleach cleaning of surfaces was performed in the bathrooms, showers, bedrooms, and hallways in the dormitories, and the dormitory remained unoccupied for at least 72 hours before reoccupancy.


No national news story that I have found highlighted the most important finding of all: extreme quarantine among military recruits did nothing to stop the virus, compared with a non-quarantine group.

The study is important because of the social structure of control here. It’s one thing to observe no effects from national lockdowns. There are countless variables here that could be invoked as cautionary notes: demographics, population density, preexisting immunities, degree of compliance, and so on. But with this Marine study, you have a near homogeneous group based on age, health, and densities of living. And even here, you see confirmed what so many other studies have shown: lockdowns are pointlessly destructive. They do not manage the disease.
https://www.aier.org/article/even-a-...study-reveals/
[Reply]
O.city 09:16 AM 11-14-2020
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Yeah well what I have been told is assumed positive is going in the positive column.
We know the highest rate of infections are happening in households. It’s a pretty reasonable assumption all things considered

Last I saw they weren’t on the positive count but that may have changed
[Reply]
petegz28 09:21 AM 11-14-2020
Originally Posted by O.city:
We know the highest rate of infections are happening in households. It’s a pretty reasonable assumption all things considered

Last I saw they weren’t on the positive count but that may have changed
But it is just that, an assumption. You can't assume someone got Covid. I think it varies on who places them there. I just know I never see any "assumed positive" columns on any of these sites.

One person that I believe was put down as positive was not in my household.

So either report them and * the list saying this includes assumed positives or leave them off. Either way if this is happening it is artificially inflating the number of cases.
[Reply]
Donger 09:35 AM 11-14-2020
Originally Posted by petegz28:
CDC: Masks protect the wearer

WHO: 85% of cases are people who wore masks all the time


:-)
https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/16/polit...ent/index.html
[Reply]
R Clark 10:02 AM 11-14-2020
Originally Posted by Donger:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/16/polit...ent/index.html
Leave it to you to post that
[Reply]
Donger 10:26 AM 11-14-2020
Originally Posted by R Clark:
Leave it to you to post that
You're welcome?
[Reply]
petegz28 10:33 AM 11-14-2020
Originally Posted by R Clark:
Leave it to you to post that
Yeah I don't know what Trump has to do with any of it but the report from the CDC is the report from the CDC. I have seen a lot of "media" try to split hairs on the whole thing and that's right up Donger's alley.

So while the report says "that doesn't mean they were wearing them properly", it also doesn't say they weren't.

Originally Posted by :
Nearly three-quarters of people interviewed in a non-peer-reviewed study conducted by the CDC said that they had worn a mask or cloth face covering while in public in the weeks leading up to their COVID-19 diagnosis. The report concluded that although people were wearing masks, that does not mean they were wearing them properly, and that "masks cannot be effectively worn while eating and drinking, whereas shopping and numerous other indoor activities do not preclude mask use."

[Reply]
Page 3116 of 3903
« First < 2116261630163066310631123113311431153116 31173118311931203126316632163616 > Last »
Up