OT Coronavirus: America in chaos, News and Updates. One million Americans dead and counting (1 Viewer)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

What do you think of the new relief bill the Dems are trying to pass?

https://www.businessinsider.com/ame...0kAH1bSjtDFq5e0n2Ggd5fpDJD21bCRszE8MTYjhnd430

I've been in favor of a major emergency relief bill to keep people afloat as long as stay-at-home orders are in effect and businesses are closed. Enough to pay necessities like food, energy bills and rent/mortgage. I also think a relief bill targeted to small businesses would be in order.

Whether this particular bill goes far enough, I don't have the data to determine, but I think it's the right idea. I don't mind it means-testing (relative to cost of living in the person's area), but it does need to be fast and without additions (from either party) that are unrelated to the actual relief.
 
I've been in favor of a major emergency relief bill to keep people afloat as long as stay-at-home orders are in effect and businesses are closed. Enough to pay necessities like food, energy bills and rent/mortgage. I also think a relief bill targeted to small businesses would be in order.

Whether this particular bill goes far enough, I don't have the data to determine, but I think it's the right idea. I don't mind it means-testing (relative to cost of living in the person's area), but it does need to be fast and without additions (from either party) that are unrelated to the actual relief.
Man that price tag would be astronomical. Probably 6 trillion.
 
He wasn't saying that causing a panic is literally the only reason the first amendment can be abridged. He was providing an example of how harm to others isn't protected. Another example is that you can't threaten other people as "protected speech." If you threaten the President's life and you're arrested by the FBI, you can't claim your first amendment rights are being violated. It seems pretty obvious to me that during a pandemic that spreads by people gathering, rights to gather are no longer protected by the Constitution. I really don't see any court, especially the Supreme Court, disallowing the shelter-in-place orders or the bans on gatherings, including in religious institutions.
My attorney just replied this when I asked if he thought our civil liberties are being violated.


no. No one’s civil liberties have been violated.

Privileges may have been suspended or changed due to a state of emergency, but not in a capricious way. You can still travel and go places. You can still buy things. You can still say what you want to say.

I do not think we are at that point yet.
 
My attorney just replied this when I asked if he thought our civil liberties are being violated.


no. No one’s civil liberties have been violated.

Privileges may have been suspended or changed due to a state of emergency, but not in a capricious way. You can still travel and go places. You can still buy things. You can still say what you want to say.

I do not think we are at that point yet.

I mean, duh. Its not even close. Surprised it had to be even asked. Common sense isnt so common i guess.
 
He’s probably one of the best speakers of my lifetime. I would say Reagan was really good as well.

Trump is the wrecking ball I want to destroy the media. The more he attacks them, the more I love him. There’s a lot of collateral damage though, but the end of the media’s stranglehold on public opinion will make this country great again. Both sides will want to work together. The public will use their own minds again.
I'm not politically savvy, but my interpretation is that Trump is doing quite the opposite of "ending the media's stranglehold on public opinion". I think all he's done is create more political divide then any president before him, and a bitter political divide at that. You can't bring people overlook media sources that pander to their political beliefs unless you bring a sense of unity. He's done the opposite.

Just look at how he much of an emphasis he puts on political orientation through his own Tweets. It's an "us vs. them" tactic that then gets played out in the media. When you have an "us vs. them" dynamic, both sides are more likely to seek out media that assuages their own beliefs, and validates themselves as being better than the other side, no matter how factual or non-factual these media sources are. The media panders to this to increase revenue, and the result isn't the media having less of a stranglehold on public opinion, both sides wanting to work together, and people using their own minds... It's the opposite.
 
A person voluntarily secluding to save their life is not a prisoner. Why don't you get off the fucking board and read Anne Frank's diary before you start whining about what a fucking victim you are?
 
A person voluntarily secluding to save their life is not a prisoner. Why don't you get off the fucking board and read Anne Frank's diary before you start whining about what a fucking victim you are?
I gave you the definition of being a prisoner. How about you stop spewing your vitriol at someone you disagree with? I read Anne Frank’s diary. I didn’t see her able to go to the store, have a walk in town, able to do whatever the fuck she wanted.

No, she was a prisoner, living in fear, the fear of dying, being captured. Don’t come at me with that weak shit.
 
They just passed a 2 trillion "stimulus" package for themselves while giving us the scraps.

So they can do this.

We were the peasants in the first one. Lets actually get people money, not scraps.
I would support it, even knowing I wouldn’t get any checks. Just don’t know if it could pass because of a 6 trillion price tag.
 
I'm not politically savvy, but my interpretation is that Trump is doing quite the opposite of "ending the media's stranglehold on public opinion". I think all he's done is create more political divide then any president before him, and a bitter political divide at that. You can't bring people overlook media sources that pander to their political beliefs unless you bring a sense of unity. He's done the opposite.

Just look at how he much of an emphasis he puts on political orientation through his own Tweets. It's an "us vs. them" tactic that then gets played out in the media. When you have an "us vs. them" dynamic, both sides are more likely to seek out media that assuages their own beliefs, and validates themselves as being better than the other side, no matter how factual or non-factual these media sources are. The media panders to this to increase revenue, and the result isn't the media having less of a stranglehold on public opinion, both sides wanting to work together, and people using their own minds... It's the opposite.
The tweets are to bring his voice, regardless if you are to agree to the public. In fact, any celebrity or high profile person can do this. That is making them more obsolete.

You are very much entitled to your opinion. I just see it differently. Jumping on a story without proper vetting has been the media’s new mantra. Look no further than abc misreporting the Kobe helicopter crash as one example. Or one agency reporting the death of everyone involved before the first responder giving the news to the victims’ families.

The media is being under a microscope, which is a great thing.
 
I'd think gathering during a pandemic could loosely fall under the "causing panic" under the assumption its causing potential harm to many others.

There's also the technology aspect to consider. I think in new Mexico where a court ruled against a challenge by a church because they were still allowed virtual gatherings. So their 1st amendment rights to gather werent actually denied.
Sitting by yourself in front of a computer screen isn’t a gathering. I’m not saying it’s wise to have large gatherings right now, but let’s not pretend technology is any sort of substitute for human connection. Bill Gates and other tech dork maniacs may suggest otherwise while they peddle their defective gadgets and software, but they are wrong.
 
Coronavirus vaccine may never be developed, warns expert - but it could burn out

A vaccine for the deadly coronavirus may never be developed, a leading immunologist has warned.

But Professor Ian Frazer, who co-invented the groundbreaking HPV cervical cancer vaccine, also said it was possible that Covid-19 could diminish naturally, becoming less effective on its own.

The Australian told news.com.au that trying to immunise against coronavirus was like trying to immunise against the common cold - difficult to impossible.

He added: “It is tricky, vaccines for upper respiratory tract diseases, because the virus lands on the outside of you."

Prof Frazer, of Queensland University, said 100 teams all over the world were testing for vaccines, but he stressed there was no model of how to attack Covid-19.

1_Vaccine-For-Cervical-Cancer-Developed.jpg


Professor Ian Frazer warned a vaccine for Covid-19 may never be developed (Image: Getty Images)
Immunising against flu was more straightforward, he said.

“Coronavirus doesn’t get into you, it stays on the surface cells in your lungs," he added. "All these flu viruses get into you, so the body can fight and makes T cells.

“This virus doesn’t kill the cells, it makes them sick. At the moment we don’t know how to make a coronavirus vaccine work. That’s why there are 100 vaccines under testing using every conceivable approach.

“We don’t know if any of them will work.”

0_A-scientist-cleans-vaccine-vials-at-the-Clinical-Biomanufacturing-Facility-CBF-in-Oxford.jpg


Immunising against Covid-19 could be "tricky" (Image: via REUTERS)
On a more positive note, Prof Frazer pointed out that a vaccine was never developed for SARS following an outbreak in China in 2003, but it burnt out on its own.

The virus became less effective as it passed from host to host, explained Prof Frazer - something that could feasibly happen with Covid-19 too.

He added: “It may well be the same with this virus. It’s not very effective in making us sick. It may become less effective."

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/coronavirus-vaccine-never-developed-warns-21890093

 
Coronavirus vaccine may never be developed, warns expert - but it could burn out

A vaccine for the deadly coronavirus may never be developed, a leading immunologist has warned.

But Professor Ian Frazer, who co-invented the groundbreaking HPV cervical cancer vaccine, also said it was possible that Covid-19 could diminish naturally, becoming less effective on its own.

The Australian told news.com.au that trying to immunise against coronavirus was like trying to immunise against the common cold - difficult to impossible.

He added: “It is tricky, vaccines for upper respiratory tract diseases, because the virus lands on the outside of you."

Prof Frazer, of Queensland University, said 100 teams all over the world were testing for vaccines, but he stressed there was no model of how to attack Covid-19.

1_Vaccine-For-Cervical-Cancer-Developed.jpg


Professor Ian Frazer warned a vaccine for Covid-19 may never be developed (Image: Getty Images)
Immunising against flu was more straightforward, he said.

“Coronavirus doesn’t get into you, it stays on the surface cells in your lungs," he added. "All these flu viruses get into you, so the body can fight and makes T cells.

“This virus doesn’t kill the cells, it makes them sick. At the moment we don’t know how to make a coronavirus vaccine work. That’s why there are 100 vaccines under testing using every conceivable approach.

“We don’t know if any of them will work.”

0_A-scientist-cleans-vaccine-vials-at-the-Clinical-Biomanufacturing-Facility-CBF-in-Oxford.jpg


Immunising against Covid-19 could be "tricky" (Image: via REUTERS)
On a more positive note, Prof Frazer pointed out that a vaccine was never developed for SARS following an outbreak in China in 2003, but it burnt out on its own.

The virus became less effective as it passed from host to host, explained Prof Frazer - something that could feasibly happen with Covid-19 too.

He added: “It may well be the same with this virus. It’s not very effective in making us sick. It may become less effective."

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/coronavirus-vaccine-never-developed-warns-21890093
It seems it’s very tough to make RNA-viral vaccines.
Coronavirus vaccine may never be developed, warns expert - but it could burn out

A vaccine for the deadly coronavirus may never be developed, a leading immunologist has warned.

But Professor Ian Frazer, who co-invented the groundbreaking HPV cervical cancer vaccine, also said it was possible that Covid-19 could diminish naturally, becoming less effective on its own.

The Australian told news.com.au that trying to immunise against coronavirus was like trying to immunise against the common cold - difficult to impossible.

He added: “It is tricky, vaccines for upper respiratory tract diseases, because the virus lands on the outside of you."

Prof Frazer, of Queensland University, said 100 teams all over the world were testing for vaccines, but he stressed there was no model of how to attack Covid-19.

1_Vaccine-For-Cervical-Cancer-Developed.jpg


Professor Ian Frazer warned a vaccine for Covid-19 may never be developed (Image: Getty Images)
Immunising against flu was more straightforward, he said.

“Coronavirus doesn’t get into you, it stays on the surface cells in your lungs," he added. "All these flu viruses get into you, so the body can fight and makes T cells.

“This virus doesn’t kill the cells, it makes them sick. At the moment we don’t know how to make a coronavirus vaccine work. That’s why there are 100 vaccines under testing using every conceivable approach.

“We don’t know if any of them will work.”

0_A-scientist-cleans-vaccine-vials-at-the-Clinical-Biomanufacturing-Facility-CBF-in-Oxford.jpg


Immunising against Covid-19 could be "tricky" (Image: via REUTERS)
On a more positive note, Prof Frazer pointed out that a vaccine was never developed for SARS following an outbreak in China in 2003, but it burnt out on its own.

The virus became less effective as it passed from host to host, explained Prof Frazer - something that could feasibly happen with Covid-19 too.

He added: “It may well be the same with this virus. It’s not very effective in making us sick. It may become less effective."

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/coronavirus-vaccine-never-developed-warns-21890093
Yeah, it should be a while. That’s why I think the 18 month timeline maybe unrealistic.
 
Sitting by yourself in front of a computer screen isn’t a gathering. I’m not saying it’s wise to have large gatherings right now, but let’s not pretend technology is any sort of substitute for human connection. Bill Gates and other tech dork maniacs may suggest otherwise while they peddle their defective gadgets and software, but they are wrong.

Agree. I think of the virtual screen time more like the connection we have talking on the phone with video. I personally do not constitute that as a gathering.
 
Last edited:
It seems I created a debate with the attorneys in the law firm that represents us. They don’t agree. But here’s the latest argument of pro-shutdown.

“And yet there are laws regulating false speech, and curfews, and business hours. The court issues restraining orders every day.

Why do you think that is?

Oh yeah. If a law abridges one of those freedoms and passes the strict scrutiny test, then the government can put limits on time and place.

The limit put in place is not right now. The place is no public gatherings where social distancing cannot be practiced.

You know better. You went to law school.”
 
One of my kids sent me this article this morning..I cant stand that Levin guy, but the article Interesting but who knows he may be a quack?

Dr. David Katz: Coronavirus vaccine or herd immunity are only ways life can fully return to normal
Dr. David Katz, the founding director of the Yale-Griffin Prevention Research Center in Connecticut, has warned that while social distancing is helping to mitigate the spread of the coronavirus, it is also preventing the development of the "herd immunity" needed by the public to resume their normal lives before a vaccine is developed.

Katz cited the case of some Asian nations who appeared to stop the spread with lockdown-style mitigation strategies, only to see an increase in cases once restrictions were relaxed.

"That's what will happen if you lock everybody away from everybody else and kind of wait until things get better and then let everybody out into the world".

"The virus is still out there," Katz added. "We don't have antibodies. We'll just get it later."

Katz and host Mark Levin discussed the concept of "herd immunity," essentially collective resistance to a virus built up by people moving about, becoming infected, and recovering -- thereby naturally developing antibodies to inhibit further spreading the virus among the population.

As an example of herd immunity, Katz told Levin that if the doctor developed antibodies but Levin did not because he was not part of the "herd," he could not contract the virus from Katz because the doctor doesn't have it.

"f all you do is flatten the curve, you don't prevent deaths or severe cases. You just change the dates. We don't want to do that," said Katz.

Katz said the only two options for staving off coronavirus for the foreseeable future are herd immunity or a vaccine. Scientists say a vaccine could be a year or more away, while President Trump, businessmen, economists and many out-of-work Americans fear the U.S. economy may never recover from an entire year of stagnation and unemployment.

If enough of the population were to develop antibodies and the process repeated itself exponentially, Katz explained, it would create innumerable "dead ends" that stop the virus from spreading.

"It finds it harder to get to a host where it can survive and it dies out," the doctor said of the virus. "That's herd immunity."

"The numbers of us that need to have antibodies vary with the properties of a given contagion," he added. "And we're learning what the properties of this particular contagion are. That also needs to come from data."

Giving another example, Katz told Levin that if he were immune to coronavirus, he would be able to visit his elderly mother without worrying about contracting COVID-19.

"My mother doesn't want to get coronavirus and die [but] she also doesn't want to die of something else before ever again being able to hug her grandchildren because she's still waiting for a vaccine," Katz said. "Herd immunity gives us [a] much more proximal way to get back to life in the world as we knew it."
 
Without question anyone protesting and assembling in these groups should be disqualified from any Covid treatment. Who could argue that? Nobody
 
"f all you do is flatten the curve, you don't prevent deaths or severe cases. You just change the dates. We don't want to do that," said Katz.

No, that's exactly what you want to do. Flattening the curve is how we give the best possible medical care to as many people as possible using the limited personnel and resources that we have.

If we had unlimited medical professionals and equipment then sure, bring it on. But we don't.
 
Coronavirus vaccine may never be developed, warns expert - but it could burn out

A vaccine for the deadly coronavirus may never be developed, a leading immunologist has warned.

But Professor Ian Frazer, who co-invented the groundbreaking HPV cervical cancer vaccine, also said it was possible that Covid-19 could diminish naturally, becoming less effective on its own.

The Australian told news.com.au that trying to immunise against coronavirus was like trying to immunise against the common cold - difficult to impossible.

He added: “It is tricky, vaccines for upper respiratory tract diseases, because the virus lands on the outside of you."

Prof Frazer, of Queensland University, said 100 teams all over the world were testing for vaccines, but he stressed there was no model of how to attack Covid-19.

1_Vaccine-For-Cervical-Cancer-Developed.jpg


Professor Ian Frazer warned a vaccine for Covid-19 may never be developed (Image: Getty Images)
Immunising against flu was more straightforward, he said.

“Coronavirus doesn’t get into you, it stays on the surface cells in your lungs," he added. "All these flu viruses get into you, so the body can fight and makes T cells.

“This virus doesn’t kill the cells, it makes them sick. At the moment we don’t know how to make a coronavirus vaccine work. That’s why there are 100 vaccines under testing using every conceivable approach.

“We don’t know if any of them will work.”

0_A-scientist-cleans-vaccine-vials-at-the-Clinical-Biomanufacturing-Facility-CBF-in-Oxford.jpg


Immunising against Covid-19 could be "tricky" (Image: via REUTERS)
On a more positive note, Prof Frazer pointed out that a vaccine was never developed for SARS following an outbreak in China in 2003, but it burnt out on its own.

The virus became less effective as it passed from host to host, explained Prof Frazer - something that could feasibly happen with Covid-19 too.

He added: “It may well be the same with this virus. It’s not very effective in making us sick. It may become less effective."

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/coronavirus-vaccine-never-developed-warns-21890093

Well, if that's the case then I'll quit wishin and go fishin!
 
No, that's exactly what you want to do. Flattening the curve is how we give the best possible medical care to as many people as possible using the limited personnel and resources that we have.

If we had unlimited medical professionals and equipment then sure, bring it on. But we don't.
I agree its more of a capacity issue, but his point is until a vaccine is available if there even is, the disease isn't going anywhere, were just locking it up because of capacity issues.
My son told me Kaiser is now going to tear down the tents for capacity help.
If heard immunity isn't viable why do so many doctors talk about it as a natural progression for the virus to run its course?
Even the article you just posted talked about a vaccine may not even be possible and the virus may just need to run its course.
In the mean time we cant burn down the house to try and save the house.
 
The tweets are to bring his voice, regardless if you are to agree to the public. In fact, any celebrity or high profile person can do this. That is making them more obsolete.

You are very much entitled to your opinion. I just see it differently. Jumping on a story without proper vetting has been the media’s new mantra. Look no further than abc misreporting the Kobe helicopter crash as one example. Or one agency reporting the death of everyone involved before the first responder giving the news to the victims’ families.

The media is being under a microscope, which is a great thing.
Look no further than Fox News riding the wave of an obvious astroturfing campaign yesterday. Or are we fooled into thinking these spontaneous protests were organic?
 
Last edited:
serious damper on their crotch sniffing and asshole licking though....although some humans have the same issue
Also, what's with eating dog shit? That's got to encourage the spread of Covid19. That's all in addition to the habit being seriously disgusting.
 
Look no further than Fox News riding the wave of an obvious astroturfing campaign yesterday. Or are we fooled into thinking these spontaneous protests were organic?
Never said Fox is not part of the problem. But I’m sure we can agree that their voice is much smaller than MSM. Add up MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, and CBS; who trumps (pardon the pun) the viewership of Fox News.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top