Underground Knowledge — A discussion group discussion

Iain wrote: "I was thinking it has caused precisely the opposite in the sense that countries will have discovered how prone they are and become more protectionist as a result, and no doubt that is further influenced by economic stagnation caused by this...."

Ditto!

p.s. That old Boy is sitting there as if this is a great period in human history! WTF?

What a lot of posts while I was asleep! Re the specific questions thrown at me, the logic is simple. If you wish to eliminate the virus, you must stop it reproducing, and that requires a period for two life cycles where it cannot reproduce . There are only two ways of doing that - vaccinate everyone at the same time once, and the vaccine immunity lasts 1 month, or lockdown totally for 28 days.

The probability of achieving either is near zero because there will always be the uncooperative. We have only ever exterminated one such disease - smallpox. We can do it, but we won't.

One other thing to recall. Leaving aside the claims about it being harmless and the current death toll of half a million being due to decreased resistance with age (and so you find someone old who has not died - so what - what do you think probability means?) then reflect on one further point: Either you will eventually get old or you will not. Not is not really a cheerful alternative, so eventually every few months you will face the hazard of an uinpleasant month before you die, or you live like a hermit. Choose your future :-)

James wrote: "Iain wrote: "I was thinking it has caused precisely the opposite in the sense that countries will have discovered how prone they are and become more protectionist as a result, and no doubt that is ..."

Notice as well mate that chic going on aboot the GDP and that not being good enough and needing new indicators.

Looks like they're looking to reconfigure economics in tandem. Incidentally some are suggesting that was one of the number of reason they bumped aff JFK because he was questioning the validity of the GDP metric and looking to change it.

Ho Hum, hold on to yer hats boys!!!

What a lot of posts while I was asleep! Re the specific questions thrown at me, the logic is simple. If you wish to eliminate the virus, you must stop it reproducing, and that requires a period for two life cycles where it cannot reproduce . There are only two ways of doing that - vaccinate everyone at the same time once, and the vaccine immunity lasts 1 month, or lockdown totally for 28 days.

The probability of achieving either is near zero because there will always be the uncooperative. We have only ever exterminated one such disease - smallpox. We can do it, but we won't.

One other thing to recall. Leaving aside the claims about it being harmless and the current death toll of half a million being due to decreased resistance with age (and so you find someone old who has not died - so what - what do you think probability means?) then reflect on one further point: Either you will eventually get old or you will not. Not is not really a cheerful alternative, so eventually every few months you will face the hazard of an unpleasant month before you die, or you live like a hermit. Choose your future :-)

Iain wrote: "James wrote: "Iain wrote: "I was thinking it has caused precisely the opposite in the sense that countries will have discovered how prone they are and become more protectionist as a result, and no ..."

Apologies for using the phrase chic and only referring to the boys to hold on to their hats. I actually meant everyone including woman, and men not just boys.

I apologize my toxic masculinity overcame me in the moment. To the practicing misandrist, no need for castration it won't happen again.

Ian wrote: "What a lot of posts while I was asleep! Re the specific questions thrown at me, the logic is simple. If you wish to eliminate the virus, you must stop it reproducing, and that requires a period for..."

Ian wrote: "What a lot of posts while I was asleep! Re the specific questions thrown at me, the logic is simple. If you wish to eliminate the virus, you must stop it reproducing, and that requires a period for..."

Actually a good point Ian, if this 'thing' is looming around for too long we might age into the danger zone.

On that note I wonder could this be a pension saving scheme of sorts?

Ultimately then we have the option of vaccination enmasse or tech somehow doing the job . . . .

What a lot of posts while I was asleep!

Being woke and now in a nightmare.

Iain wrote: "Ian wrote: "What a lot of posts while I was asleep! Re the specific questions thrown at me, the logic is simple. If you wish to eliminate the virus, you must stop it reproducing, and that requires ..."

James where you gonna take a flutter here? Mass vac in one go as Ian suggest needed or automation and constricted movement doing the job?

I'll take a flutter on mass vac. And maybe an exotic bet on Billy Boy Gates personally injecting you with a vac as I hear he's a good reader and you haven't been too kind to him of late. Admit it!

Ian wrote: "What a lot of posts while I was asleep! Re the specific questions thrown at me, the logic is simple. If you wish to eliminate the virus, you must stop it reproducing, and that requires a period for..."

"you will face the hazard of an unpleasant month before you die, or you live like a hermit. Choose your future :-)"

Is that not what happens if yer no 'part o tha gang' or a band of clowns anyway Ian?

James wrote: "13 Reasons To Fear The Coming COVID World Order: https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitica...

1. DE-FACTO MARTIAL LAW…
There’s no other way to describe both the ..."

I think we are seriously heading in that direction. Scary thought.

Iain wrote: "Is that not what happens if yer no 'part o tha gang' or a band of clowns anyway Ian?"

Good point. On the other hand, my guess is there is no way out of this virus because any way out requires compliance from everyone and you are not going to get that when the young and some others feel it does not affect them.

Ian wrote: "Iain wrote: "Is that not what happens if yer no 'part o tha gang' or a band of clowns anyway Ian?"

Good point. On the other hand, my guess is there is no way out of this virus because any way out ..."

Right. Does that also include the Ivory Tower(who are old but in a better position) mob using the plight and concerns of 'future generations' as an artifice for their own desires?

Iain, doesn't matter how you try to seclude yourself. Someone bhas to get groceries, etc.

Ian wrote: "Iain, doesn't matter how you try to seclude yourself. Someone bhas to get groceries, etc."

And obviously compounded when other externalizations impede on that, eh?

Sometimes unjustly so. Jeez it's sounding so like Hollywood drama . . . .

Iain wrote: "Ian wrote: "Iain, doesn't matter how you try to seclude yourself. Someone bhas to get groceries, etc."

And obviously compounded when other externalizations impede on that, eh?

Sometimes unjustly..."

A Hollywood drama with big mouth groupies might I add . . . .

Almost worth a dystopian novel :-)

Ian wrote: "Almost worth a dystopian novel :-)"

Until someone gets the book thrown at them for it . . . .

Ian wrote: "One other thing to recall. Leaving aside the claims about it being harmless and the current death toll of half a million being due to decreased resistance with age (and so you find someone old who has not died - so what - what do you think probability means?) then reflect on one further point: Either you will eventually get old or you will not. Not is not really a cheerful alternative, so eventually every few months you will face the hazard of an uinpleasant month before you die, or you live like a hermit. Choose your future :-) ..."

Ah, the old trick of exaggerating the arguments of those you do not agree with into the facial, thereby making it seem as if only you are the logical one. That's a very clever debating tactic that can help you win many an argument...But unfortunately this is the Underground and we don't let such things slide here, Ian! :)

So... Nobody I have seen has said the virus is "harmless" as you state.

There's a flip side to the second part of your argument...

Either you or many you know could end up in extreme poverty now or in the near future. Not is not really a cheerful stat but various international bodies have reported that around 1 billion additional people are estimated to slip into extreme poverty SPECIFICALLY DUE TO THE RONA MEASURES, so imagine dying in some hellhole due to extreme measures implemented for a virus with a 99.74% recovery rate? Choose your future :-)

Game on!

Iain wrote: "And maybe an exotic bet on Billy Boy Gates personally injecting you with a vac as I hear he's a good reader and you haven't been too kind to him of late. ..."

hahaha!

Ellena wrote: "I think we are seriously heading in that direction. Scary thought...."

I'm glad you see the massive dangers to democracy right now, Ellena.

So many issues at play (besides the virus) from privacy to medical freedoms to human rights violations to risking capitalism.

Hopefully later in this thread we won't be typing...HELLO USSR 2.0!

Ian wrote: "my guess is there is no way out of this virus because any way out requires compliance from everyone and you are not going to get that when the young and some others feel it does not affect them ..."

Unless you ever research actual fatality rates vs the 55% deathtoll in this novel you're co-writing with Iain...

In saying this "RONA BEWARE" is a great title and the author team of Ian and Iain has a real ring to it!

Oh dear, James, not the dreaded 99.74% recovery rate. With over 500,000 deaths that suggests about 200 million cases. Really? Then additionally, there should be corresponding lost productivity and some flooded hospitals.

I agree the economic effects of a shutdown can be heavy, BUT if everyone did it properly, that would take out a month of production and then the virus is gone. Are you so sure the world could not tolerate the loss of one month?

James wrote: "Ian wrote: "my guess is there is no way out of this virus because any way out requires compliance from everyone and you are not going to get that when the young and some others feel it does not aff..."

Ian is not co-writing with me. My point is the temporary incapacitation it can have. It's real.

Have you had it James? Maybe have a go mate and tell me if you can function relatively normally when suffering.

The incessint coughing, your lungs feeling like somebody poured nitrogen down them, unable to taste and hitting fevers and feeling lethargic ASF.

But you might be right in saying that there is more dangerous things out there, like say slanderers, thieves, users, expedients, brownnosers, overly ambitious clowns that stand on peoples heads to get on, opportunists,panderers to Hollywood, business magnates and the rich and those who prostrate themselves in order to get on at the detriment of others.

Some of that is defo worse than a virus. In fact they are a virus unto themselves. So you are right in that regard.

Debby wrote: "Irene, I have wondered the same, I have never known anyone who had Covid-19. Even my son the nurse hadn't, they had one patient in the dedicated isolation ward, who eventually tested negative after..."
I just want to add that by coincidence, this question came up on Facebook last night! An Englishwoman asked it, in a Facebbok game usually used to ask questions like "what is your favourite chocolate?"
It's a big difference seeing this on computer, on my tablet there are no reply/etc buttons.

Ian wrote: "Debby, it is true that anything that is not used properly is not going to work properly, so some form of teaching, and maybe redesign of masks may be desired.

As for whether a vaccine is possible,..."
Very bad news in terms of our future freedom! Only when the vaccine's developed will we free, people in a position to know are telling me.

Ian wrote: "Iain wrote: "Ian wrote: "Iain, I really don't know how/where it originated. The evidence is strongly in favour of it originating in a bat, but how it made the transference to humans is an open ques..."
You said returnees are trying their best to re-introduce it. Bollices, to be polite. When media personalities are fantasising in sickening detail how to murder one of the returnees (yes,I di put in a Broadcasting Standards complaint) an allegation like that is unhelpful.

Iain wrote: "Or were you referring to the Armageddon story you and Iain are co-writing here? If so, I'm enjoying this story? Are you going for a novel or a short story publication? Or how about a Netflix blockb..."
Oddly, I started my own sf/time travel story about this nightmare back in March. So far I haven't got out of 2095, where my characters are discussing what info they've found in archives & family diaries about this time. In 2095 the NZ population is 1 million, b/cos the virus negatively impacts fertility, something no one noticed until the 2060s.

Ian wrote: "Oh dear, James, not the dreaded 99.74% recovery rate. With over 500,000 deaths that suggests about 200 million cases. Really? Then additionally, there should be corresponding lost productivity and ..."

Yup. Britain alone is estimated to have 8-10M already have been infected (according to London's Imperial College, a statement which I linked to earlier in this thread, you may recall)

The CDC (who I assume have a LOT more experience at the science of managing infectious diseases, correct me if I am wrong) estimate a 0.26% fatality rate

So take 100% and minus 0.26% = 99.74% recovery rate

But like I said, it's cool you are co-writing this fictional novel where mega fatality rates are constantly being referenced. If you ever want to come back to reality and science however, I suggest you attempt debunk or challenge the scientific authorities I am leading you toward...CDC, London's Imperial College, Stanford University etc - Stanford may trigger you even more however, as there best estimate (which I also linked in this thread earlier) is a fatality rate of only 0.10-0.20%

Ian wrote: "I agree the economic effects of a shutdown can be heavy, BUT if everyone did it properly, that would take out a month of production and then the virus is gone. ..."

Finally acknowledging SOMETHING beyond the medical aspect! Hallelujah!

This is progress :)

Iain wrote: "My point is the temporary incapacitation it can have. It's real...."

That comment would make total sense if I had said or alluded to it being not real - never said or implied anything of the sort (I am listing fatality rates, albeit low, of a REAL virus that I'm posting about with you guys).

I am saying it's an overreaction to a real virus...An overreaction that may have catastrophic consequences globally...

Debby wrote: "Very bad news in terms of our future freedom! Only when the vaccine's developed will we free, people in a position to know are telling me...."

Yes it appears a firm decision has been made, Debby...no freedom until they force vaccine or "cure" on us, instead of allow our immune systems to work have they have with millions of viruses throughout history as Sweden, Taiwan and other outliers are doing = and this Aussie politician I recorded in this 20 second clip seems to confirm that.

"Until we have a vaccine or a cure...life will not be normal." How will this end? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eCtz...

That's why I'm asking...What if there is no vaccine that works? What if there is no cure? What will happen eventually? How long can the world (including vulnerable poorer nations) endure Coronavirus measures like nation-wide lockdowns, regional quarantines, self-isolation of numerous citizens and other restrictions?

James wrote: "Iain wrote: "COVID 19 - The Great Reset

https://www.pscp.tv/w/1ynKOqXBXkAJR"

Iain this WEF old boy mentions this 2020 is a "decarbonization of society" and that will "save us from an environmenta..."
Meh, that did occur to me to wonder. Climate change hysterics are very influential and started praising the lockdown for bringing back birds to suburban gardens in mid-April.
Hilariously, it was just that the luvvies working from home were at home to see the birds for the first time ever! I am retired and could have told them the birds are always there, I hear them all day (can't see them but hear them)

Debby wrote: "Climate change hysterics are very influential and started praising the lockdown for bringing back birds to suburban gardens in mid-April...."

People are trying to push various agendas in the name of this virus. Opportunists.

And there have been many worrying comments from the top like "Well it's a shame these lockdowns, but boy isn't the envorinment in better health with lower carbon emissions!"

James, there are estimates. People estimate anything. Unless the basis of the estimate is given, and the details of how it was obtained, they are worthless.

The current official figures are for those tested positive for the virus: 573,288 dead from 13,113, 181 cases, and because it usually takes a couple of weeks to die, the ratio of deaths will probably increase. Now, maybe the figures are in error, but they are test result. Give the basis for your estimates, and explain how, if your estimates are correct, there are187 million cases nobody has taken any notice of?

First, before I forget, just saw a news item about declining fertility! My story's coming true? No! www.rnz.co.nz/news

Ellena yes! It is terrifying.

Ian J Miller, exactly right! I live alone, can't order groceries online, no computer and a 6 week wait for delivery. So even if I wanted to comply with solitary confinement house arrest, I couldn't

Ian J Miller, One month, lolwut? Our Prime Monster, La Meretrice as I call her, imposed 6 weeks lockdown, putting the non-compliant in prison, & asking her "team of 5 million" to snitch on the non-compliant. Did she intend for the elderly living alone to starve to death? A 92 year old broke rules, went out, having out-lived her family, she needed to buy food. I am young enough to have been allowed out to buy food, which for my sanity, I did every day. So your one month assumes a perfect world, where everyone has a computer, WiFi at home, plenty of money, & supermarkets don't take 6 weeks to deliver.

Six weeks was not excessively greater than four weeks, and from memory. the first week or so was not completely carried out. As I recall, it only took about four or five days after there being no further case that it was let up. I agree there has to be a method to get food etc. and 6 weeks delivery for supermarkets seems really strange. Here you could get it in a couple of days at worst.

I was told 6 weeks by a woman I know who was obedient, total confinement with her husband, in the end the Salvation army fed them. My son who's vulnerable with an immune system disease, and his wife resorted to one of the My Food Bag rip-off companies, but they have computers up the wazoo (he works in IT). Part of my point is that the lockdown could not possibly have been total, I know the media were non-compliant, one complete idiot Jesse Mulligan gave the game away, giggling about having his buddies coming to the studio (after having lied about being at home). Various homosexual spokesmen spoke about how they knew others were carrying on making anonymous dates, please stop (I don't know if they did). So a total confinement isn't possible without troops dragging us all off to prison.

Just when I thought it couldn't possibly get any worse - see link below:-
Is the Coronavirus test a likely candidate for direct brain access?
https://youtu.be/bV2jjjw6t1A

James wrote: "Debby wrote: "Climate change hysterics are very influential and started praising the lockdown for bringing back birds to suburban gardens in mid-April...."

People are trying to push various agenda..."

To paraphrase George Carlin: "the planet is fine. It's the people that aren't. Some only care about bicycle paths . . . ."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHgJK...

Anni wrote: "Just when I thought it couldn't possibly get any worse - see link below:-
Is the Coronavirus test a likely candidate for direct brain access?
https://youtu.be/bV2jjjw6t1A"

Comment: "Given how much people like Elon Musk has been talking about linking humans to AI, I wouldn't be surprised if coronavirus is indeed just a test phase."

Implanting intricate microchips via a cotton swab? Wow that would be something else.

Serious question: Is Elon Musk an actual alien>? Or some sorta hybrid alien robot?

It's a valid question and remember Musk put out a very suspicious Tweet not long ago saying: "there's no intelligent life out there".

Thinking about it, he's throwing the dogs of the trail here. Musk works for ALIENS folks. He admits it. He taunts us with his new aliens powers. He lords it over us with his intergalactic charm. He props up mini despots and works against our humanity on a daily basis. Confirmed.

On another note: could Russell Crowe be the infamous Pateint-0?

I don't think he has the time for it to be honest or tolerance.

And how he got it from that fruit bat I'll never know. But quite frankly that his business and no one elses.

Iain wrote: "Anni wrote: "Just when I thought it couldn't possibly get any worse - see link below:-
Is the Coronavirus test a likely candidate for direct brain access?
https://youtu.be/bV2jjjw6t1A"

Comment: "G..."

Musk is what Lawrence Fishbourne was in The Signal? It's certainly plausible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwgfe...

Anni wrote: "Just when I thought it couldn't possibly get any worse - see link below:-
Is the Coronavirus test a likely candidate for direct brain access?
https://youtu.be/bV2jjjw6t1A"

Anni you can never count out anything but considering the amount of test cases I highly doubt it causes extensive neurological or brain damage.

Why it has to be done in such a way is curious?

But overall medical establishment would be sued into the ground and with good reason . . . .

Anni wrote: "Just when I thought it couldn't possibly get any worse - see link below:-
Is the Coronavirus test a likely candidate for direct brain access?
https://youtu.be/bV2jjjw6t1A"

What I would say to Adrian is just isolate for 2 weeks and you'll come out 'Brand Spanking New' like Rocky did(albeit his eyes got destroyed in the process.)

See:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thhYv...

Iain wrote: "Anni wrote: "Just when I thought it couldn't possibly get any worse - see link below:-
Is the Coronavirus test a likely candidate for direct brain access?
https://youtu.be/bV2jjjw6t1A"

What I woul..."

We can fight COVID and we can fight robotic Musks and nurse Ratchets taking away our humanity too.

If Rocky can do it naturally we all can. The fights there for the taking. It's all of our to win. You choose . . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_9Fy...

Ian wrote: "James, there are estimates. People estimate anything. Unless the basis of the estimate is given, and the details of how it was obtained, they are worthless...."

Ian, there's a reason medical journals like The New England Journal of Medicine and The Lancet, as well as the aforementioned Stanford and CDC studies, are repeatedly mentioning in studies and news items the IFR (Infection Fatality Rate) and not the CFR (Case Fatality Rate) as you are either knowingly or unknowingly doing.

The IFR does use estimates (like many things in medicine), but it is the ONLY thing that matters as it also includes all those who never got tested, those who never knew they had the virus, etc etc. That's why the London Imperial College estimates 8M Brits have already had the virus and of that 44,000 or so have died (that rate there is the IFR). Whereas when you look at the CFR (which no medical bodies bother with as it's basically irrelevant) ONLY 250,000 Brits are registered as having the virus.

Now of course, as you state, estimates are only estimates. But in the year 2020 medical science is advanced enough to estimate with very strong accuracy. So I think you repeatedly saying "I pay ZERO attention to estimates" is disingenuous of you as it's kinda disrespecting medical scientists. Given the amount of testing to date (various testing including antibody studies) they are definitely in the ballpark. We can all be rest assured this will be nowhere near the Spanish Flu (which had a whopping IFR of 3.5%!) and basically we are arguing now over decimal points with our current virus. e.g. Will the IFR be 0.2% or 0.3% or 0.5% (those level figures). Medical science will be proved here to be completely useless, and might've even been replaced by voodoo science, if somehow the final IFR ends up anywhere near the Spanish Flu or the percentages you have been posting.


Infection fatality rate
The term infection fatality rate (IFR) also applies to infectious disease outbreaks, and represents the proportion of deaths among all the infected individuals. It is closely related to the CFR, but attempts to additionally account for all asymptomatic and undiagnosed infections.[7] The IFR differs from the CFR in that it aims to estimate the fatality rate in all those with infection: the detected disease (cases) and those with an undetected disease (asymptomatic and not tested group).[8] (Individuals who are infected, but always remain asymptomatic, are said to have "inapparent" — or silent, or subclinical — infections.) The IFR will always be lower than the CFR as long as all deaths are accurately attributed to either the infected or the non-infected class.


CFR IS NOT IFR https://www.northsidesun.com/news-bre...

One source of great confusion has been the case fatality rate (CFR) versus the infection fatality rate (IFR.) These are two very different numbers.

An infection is when the flu virus gets into the body and the body produces antibodies to fight it off. Usually the infection is mild or even asymptomatic. No medical attention is required.

A case is when someone gets sick enough to be hospitalized or diagnosed affirmatively by a physician in a medical environment.

One source of COVID-19 fear has been mistaking the CFR for the IFR. Let’s take the flu for instance, the CFR for the flu is about three percent, three out of 100, about the same as COVID-19. But the flu’s IFR is one-tenth of one percent (one out of 1,000.)

In other words, if you get sick enough to see a doctor or be hospitalized, the flu will be fatal for three out of 100 of those people, the same as COVID-19. But if you just catch the flu, it is only fatal for one out of 1,000 infected.

We have studied the flu enough to know the difference between the CFR and the IFR of the flu. But because COVID-19 is less studied, we have less understanding of its characteristics. We know its CFR is three percent, similar to the flu’s CFR, but we don’t know COVID-19’s IFR.

In the last few weeks, research is giving us insight into the IFR of COVID-19. It is looking very much like the IFR of the flu. That’s because for every COVID-19 infection that leads to illness, there are many, many more infections that are asymptomatic or mild.

Ian wrote: "James, there are estimates. People estimate anything. Unless the basis of the estimate is given, and the details of how it was obtained, they are worthless..."

Ian, there's a reason medical journals like The New England Journal of Medicine and The Lancet, as well as the aforementioned Stanford and CDC studies, are repeatedly mentioning in studies and news items the IFR (Infection Fatality Rate) and not the CFR (Case Fatality Rate) as you are either knowingly or unknowingly doing.

The IFR does use estimates (like many things in medicine), but it is the ONLY thing that matters as it also includes all those who never got tested, those who never knew they had the virus, etc etc. That's why the London Imperial College estimates 8M Brits have already had the virus and of that 44,000 or so have died (that rate there is the IFR). Whereas when you look at the CFR (which no medical bodies bother with as it's basically irrelevant) ONLY 250,000 Brits are registered as having the virus.

Now of course, as you state, estimates are only estimates. But in the year 2020 medical science is advanced enough to estimate with very strong accuracy. So I think you repeatedly saying "I pay ZERO attention to estimates" is disingenuous of you as it's kinda disrespecting medical scientists. Given the amount of testing to date (various testing including antibody studies) they are definitely in the ballpark. We can all be rest assured this will be nowhere near the Spanish Flu (which had a whopping IFR of 3.5%!) and basically we are arguing now over decimal points with our current virus. e.g. Will the IFR be 0.2% or 0.3% or 0.5% (those level figures). Medical science will be proved here to be completely useless, and might've even been replaced by voodoo science, if somehow the final IFR ends up anywhere near the Spanish Flu or the percentages you have been posting.


Infection fatality rate
The term infection fatality rate (IFR) also applies to infectious disease outbreaks, and represents the proportion of deaths among all the infected individuals. It is closely related to the CFR, but attempts to additionally account for all asymptomatic and undiagnosed infections.[7] The IFR differs from the CFR in that it aims to estimate the fatality rate in all those with infection: the detected disease (cases) and those with an undetected disease (asymptomatic and not tested group).[8] (Individuals who are infected, but always remain asymptomatic, are said to have "inapparent" — or silent, or subclinical — infections.) The IFR will always be lower than the CFR as long as all deaths are accurately attributed to either the infected or the non-infected class.


CFR IS NOT IFR https://www.northsidesun.com/news-bre...

One source of great confusion has been the case fatality rate (CFR) versus the infection fatality rate (IFR.) These are two very different numbers.

An infection is when the flu virus gets into the body and the body produces antibodies to fight it off. Usually the infection is mild or even asymptomatic. No medical attention is required.

A case is when someone gets sick enough to be hospitalized or diagnosed affirmatively by a physician in a medical environment.

One source of COVID-19 fear has been mistaking the CFR for the IFR. Let’s take the flu for instance, the CFR for the flu is about three percent, three out of 100, about the same as COVID-19. But the flu’s IFR is one-tenth of one percent (one out of 1,000.)

In other words, if you get sick enough to see a doctor or be hospitalized, the flu will be fatal for three out of 100 of those people, the same as COVID-19. But if you just catch the flu, it is only fatal for one out of 1,000 infected.

We have studied the flu enough to know the difference between the CFR and the IFR of the flu. But because COVID-19 is less studied, we have less understanding of its characteristics. We know its CFR is three percent, similar to the flu’s CFR, but we don’t know COVID-19’s IFR.

In the last few weeks, research is giving us insight into the IFR of COVID-19. It is looking very much like the IFR of the flu. That’s because for every COVID-19 infection that leads to illness, there are many, many more infections that are asymptomatic or mild.

James wrote: "Debby wrote: "Climate change hysterics are very influential and started praising the lockdown for bringing back birds to suburban gardens in mid-April...."

People are trying to push various agenda..."

James, they're pushing the decarbinisation agenda on the back of this, but they're doing so on the basis that the economies demand it now due to the wreck COVID has caused . . . .

That might entail The West foster less efficient green tech that can;t cover base capacity or other demands adequately while The East picks up the slack and steams ahead using fossil fuels.

ITER and that is way off.

An imbalance will arise from this path.

But if they want to start on that path the Guardian could also help lower carbon emissions by firing some of its columnists.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia...