Jump to content

Great Barrington Declaration, lets get back to Cruising!!


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

Define "harm from efforts to control".

 

Not possible to even estimate the effects of an unproven and untested drug.

 

What is known is that the current death rate in the US is 2.7% of cases. If mitigation efforts remain at current levels with no vaccine, straight line extrapolation results in a prediction of over 5,000,000 additional deaths before 60% of the population has been infected.

 

Regardless of the definition of "harm from efforts to control", I am unable to conceive of circumstances where the deaths of five million Americans is the lesser evil.

 

"harm from efforts to control". are the unintended consequences of the actions taken to mitigated this virus and the deaths that will cause this number will not be known for years if not decades you can not take trillions of $ out of the economy without consequences.

 

I hope there will be a vaccine and I am following what research is available but I am a enough of a realist to know that this may not happen 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, nomad098 said:

 

"harm from efforts to control". are the unintended consequences of the actions taken to mitigated this virus and the deaths that will cause this number will not be known for years if not decades you can not take trillions of $ out of the economy without consequences.

...

 

One can't take five million people out of the economy without consequences.

 

One cannot overload the health care system for years without consequences. Consider the results, much longer waits for elective surgeries, lower levels of preventative care, less attention paid to continuing care.

 

How about the economic consequences of a sick and grieving workforce?

 

It is absolutely wrong headed to worry about the long term economic costs of mitigation efforts without considering the fact that not attempting mitigation will result in even higher short and long term costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, broberts said:

 

Do I understand correctly, it is your belief that many more than five million dead is a lesser tradgedy?

 

You either misread and failed to answer my post or a trying to deliberately misrepresent my post and avoid my questions.

 

There is no lesser tragedy it's all horrific , The UK government and quite a few other governments, medical establishments and the WHO have all stated that the policies that have implemented around the world have caused and will cause unintended deaths. If broberts is correct that with all the current measures in place and no vaccine the deaths in the US are unthinkable. Our only hope is a vaccine or to find a different way of dealing with the virus.

Edited by nomad098
named wrong person in text
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nomad098 said:

 

That's today's figures but your statement I quoted projected into the future based on the declaration

i was wondering what your projection is based upon my questions? 

 

i personally think the declaration will cause more tragedy in the short term but without an effective vaccine the efforts made now will cause more tragedy in the future.

See Broberts excellent post #47.

 

I'm not a health or medical expert but my sense is that an "effective" and safe vaccine will ultimately be developed.  But the timeline some are recklessly pushing for, or the pie in the sky "It's just going to vanish like a miracle" are the greatest dangers to our societies.

Edited by yogimax
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

One can't take five million people out of the economy without consequences.

 

One cannot overload the health care system for years without consequences. Consider the results, much longer waits for elective surgeries, lower levels of preventative care, less attention paid to continuing care.

 

How about the economic consequences of a sick and grieving workforce?

 

It is absolutely wrong headed to worry about the long term economic costs of mitigation efforts without considering the fact that not attempting mitigation will result in even higher short and long term costs.

 

Once again it was not me who posted the 5 million figure this was based on broberts post that this would be the figure even with all the present measures in place without a vaccine

Edited by nomad098
named wrong person in text
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, nomad098 said:

 

... Our only hope is a vaccine or to find a different way of dealing with the virus.

 

Exactly. Abandoning mask wearing, social distancing, hand washing, and contact minimization is not the way to go. But the GBD suggests an approach that is not physically or economically feasible.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, torpeedo said:

Check this out and see if you think the numbers of deaths actually caused by Covid are accurate.  The Gov of Illinois and his medical expert.

 

https://youtu.be/6SjwUXyP8j4

 

This has been known in the UK for a while. On official briefings there is a statement

"Died for any reason within 28 days of a positive COVID -19 test " 

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

Exactly. Abandoning mask wearing, social distancing, hand washing, and contact minimization is not the way to go. But the GBD suggests an approach that is not physically or economically feasible.

 

Perhaps they should try it in the UK first to see the success rate before we try it in North America.  I would tend to think Sweden would suggest not going this route, as they now regret that they initially tried to strive for herd immunity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

Exactly. Abandoning mask wearing, social distancing, hand washing, and contact minimization is not the way to go. But the GBD suggests an approach that is not physically or economically feasible.

 

I agree that the GBD is very short of details in form of practicalities and posted as much on here. But having listened to Dr. Sunetra Gupta she believes the GBD should be taken as a starting point not an end point and should be adapted by governments to suit their needs. Apparently it was left vague because some wanted to go further some did not want to go as far. Just because they may be experts in their field does not make them wise in the way of the world I suppose.

 

I think we are doing what is stated in GBD to a lesser extent here in the UK. We are told households cannot mix and stay in their own bubbles, yet my boys go to school every day with 200 hundred other kids in their year group, those 198 kids mix with their families, their siblings mix with other kids and so on and so on, similar with the eldest in college and we still have to work with people from other households and so on, so I think if we mapped it out you would probably find my bubble might contain several hundred thousand if not millions of people for routes of infection. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/10/2020 at 11:54 PM, the more ports the better said:

Everyone should read the Great Barrington Declaration.  The declaration is worth a read.  Gives great scientific insight as to the state of COVID lockdowns and repercussions by Harvard, Stanford and Oxford in addition to 25,000 medical professionals and scientists.  Hopefully, we can get back our traveling lives!

 

https://gbdeclaration.org/

People are forgetting that there is no proof based on the behavior of others Corona Viruses that we will have long lasting immunity. So the idea of natural herd immunity is insane. A declaration of nothing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I've suggested before, we should use a bit of the Logan's Run model. (1976 Movie Version) Set Carrousel age at 65.

 

(No I'm not 64, but as it would take a number years to enact the law, I figured I better give myself some leeway.)

 

 

 

When Covid became an issue, I was hoping for herd immunity too. The doctor in the house has corrected me on my hopes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, A&L_Ont said:

 

Perhaps they should try it in the UK first to see the success rate before we try it in North America.  I would tend to think Sweden would suggest not going this route, as they now regret that they initially tried to strive for herd immunity.

 

The Swedish government is still following their plan very similar to GBD and they have apologised unreservedly to their population for the government's failure at the beginning of the outbreak to properly protect those in care homes where most deaths occurred.

 

With a case fatality rate of 0.058 they are doing better than other countries who implemented strict lockdowns.

 

Before anyone says they are a large country with a small population please remember most of Sweden's population lives in concentrated areas with nearly 1/10 of population living in Stockholm.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, nomad098 said:

With a case fatality rate of 0.058 they are doing better than other countries who implemented strict lockdowns.

So that's 5.8%, right?  And the US is at 2.7%?  So, what countries implemented strict lockdowns that Sweden "did better than"?  Or how are you qualifying "did better"?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/10/2020 at 10:55 PM, broberts said:

What the declaration doesn't mention is that to reach herd immunity would likely result in some 2,000,000 deaths in the U.S. alone.

 

What the declaration glosses over is the actual cost of providing real protection for all of the at risk people. Consider that almost 40% of U.S. adults are obese, just one of the many COVID risk factors.

 

What the declaration glosses over is that adults and children with no preconditions can die from the disease. 

 

How many dead people are the signatories willing to accept. Will any of them volunteer?

 

 

It is easy for everyone who is impacted; lost job, modified work/leisure to see this as well worth it.

 

Ask any of the 200K in the US that died, or their fathers/mothers/childrens if it was worth it.

 

Or maybe in two years when we do reach herd immunity with total liberty and freedom the million that are no longer with us and likely 5-10 million close ones was the economy they have, the vacations taken those two years, the large bank account worth it.   

 

Of course the current containment in the US is terrible, we have sacrificed so much and achieved nothing thanks to terrible national, state, and local leadership and terrible citizenship fed be a few led by terrible national and state/local bad examples.  

 

Go look at some countries in the far east and after sacrifice they are reaping the rewards.     

 

It is like two little kids, one who really buckles down and studies instead of plays, the other who complains about what a sacrifice it is to his valuable childhood to have to study, pretends to study, and wonders what happened years later with his pretend sacrifice and whining.

 

 

Edited by chipmaster
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, S.A.M.J.R. said:

So that's 5.8%, right?  And the US is at 2.7%?  So, what countries implemented strict lockdowns that Sweden "did better than"?  Or how are you qualifying "did better"?

 

The US figure is a poor way of working it out for COVID-19 because of the high number of asymptomatic people who will never get a test or who had the virus with no symptoms before testing was widespread and who had the virus with mild symptoms who never had a test because testing was not wide spread.

 

A few ways to calculate it

 

US deaths divided by positive tests as a percentage 2.7% not very accurate with covid-19

US deaths divided by total population as a percentage  0.067% still not accurate but probably closer to the truth

 

Sweden deaths divided by positive tests as a percentage 5.7% not very accurate with covid-19

Sweden deaths divided by total population as a percentage  0.058% still not accurate but probably closer to the truth

 

These are only a snapshot based on yesterday's figures

 

Every death is a devastating loss to someone. The WHO have stated that the actions of governments to control covid-19 in developed nations is having a knock on effect in underdeveloped countries causing deaths.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, nomad098 said:

US deaths divided by positive tests as a percentage 2.7% not very accurate with covid-19

US deaths divided by total population as a percentage  0.067% still not accurate but probably closer to the truth

 

2.7% of cases and 0.067% of population works out to roughly the same number. (This is because they are based on the same number of deaths.)

 

It really doesn't matter if the number of deaths or cases is exact. Two hundred thousand plus deaths is an obscene number that is only going to get worse. The GBD is unworkable and unaffordable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, broberts said:

The GBD is unworkable and unaffordable.

I don't think it is intended to be workable. It is a distraction.

 

Wide-scale shutdowns are like using a hammer to swat a fly. But the opposite - using a feather to swat a fly - is no better.

 

Targeted restrictions seem like a more workable approach. Here in N.H. we are seeing certain golf courses, restaurants, and ice rinks shutting down temporarily in response to outbreaks. But even that feels like we only reacting to the situation and not being proactive in bringing down the number of new cases. So in the meantime...? Certainly no cruising will happen if the herd immunity approach is adopted.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Merion_Mom said:

 

The whole thing is batshit crazy.

 

Just ask Dr. I.P. Freely.

Not just batshit crazy, downright dangerous.  This whole concept of herd immunity will result in the deaths of millions with no guarantees of effectiveness.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, A&L_Ont said:

 

Perhaps they should try it in the UK first to see the success rate before we try it in North America.  I would tend to think Sweden would suggest not going this route, as they now regret that they initially tried to strive for herd immunity.

 

Can you direct me to the official governmental quotes on that please

 

As they have been the only successful country in the western hemisphere in their handling of this virus, this would be a massive shock if your claim was true

Link to post
Share on other sites

The UK has sadly lost 43,000 attributed to this virus

 

We ordinarily see 10,000 deaths from flu, annually - So far, there have been less than 500 recorded this year. This would suggest the 43,000 figures has been bolstered somewhat

 

Our deaths from the virus figures are also based on diagnosis at any time during 28 days irrespective of cause of death - This means that if you go into hospital with heart problems, but catch the virus in there and sadly die - You will be included in the figures

 

The UK's death from covid figures will be drastically short of the published figures because . . . . Politics

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, broberts said:

 

2.7% of cases and 0.067% of population works out to roughly the same number. (This is because they are based on the same number of deaths.)

 

It really doesn't matter if the number of deaths or cases is exact. Two hundred thousand plus deaths is an obscene number that is only going to get worse. The GBD is unworkable and unaffordable.

 

There's a huge difference in the numbers and to say there is not makes me think your deliberately trying to distort the conversation or you simply do not understand what you are talking about

 

2.7% equates to a projected figure of 5 million plus deaths

0.067%  equates to a projected figure of just under 2 million.

 

And both of these figures are based on worst case scenario without a vaccine.

 

Every single death is a grievous loss

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • LauraS locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • SPECIAL EVENT: Q&A with RiverCruising.co.uk
      • Q&A: Cruise Insurance with Steve Dasseos of TripInsuranceStore.com
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...