Corona thread. No politics please

Discussion in 'Carothers Performance Knives' started by fkctrjt121, Apr 8, 2020.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Insipid Moniker

    Insipid Moniker

    Feb 28, 2011
    Firstly, if you have evidence that they're lying it's incumbent on you to provide it. You're also explicitly bringing politics very firmly into this thread with said point.

    Secondly, yes, that's what a lock down is. You shut down as much travel as possible including all borders.

    Thirdly, yes, a hard lock down generally only needs to last between 2-3 incubation periods of the disease, 30-45 days in the case of Covid.

    We very much have seen the model for containing the spread of Covid and it's the same for literally any other airborne or droplet borne disease. The data overwhelming suggests that a lock down in combination with widespread testing and aggressive contact tracing is precisely what is needed to combat Covid.
    Oyster, CataD, Danke42 and 1 other person like this.
  2. Danke42


    Feb 10, 2015
    You're wrong. I can't really honestly describe the how and why of your wrongness without breaking some of the rules here so I'll just say stay in school.

    All you Swedish folks on here ( I know there's at least 2 of you) don't take any of this as a shot at Sweden. I love you guys, Saab, Sauna, blonde police ladies in bikinis, the S-tank, all good. We're just gonna pretend ABBA is Danish.
  3. CataD

    CataD Gold Member Gold Member

    Oct 2, 2013

    Last edited: Aug 30, 2020
    Oyster, Danke42, Casinostocks and 2 others like this.
  4. bluemax_1

    bluemax_1 Gold Member Gold Member

    Jan 17, 2014
    I understand that the topic of lockdowns has been highly divided along political lines, so I'll just discuss the datapoints.

    In the US, the lockdowns broke the infection curve. The rate of increasing cases was significantly damped by the lockdowns.

    Granted, the US is geographically much larger than some other regions, where US States are more akin to European countries. That meant that there were states and regions of the US that were still relatively unaffected by Covid-19 at the time the lockdowns began.

    The states that were hit hard by the first waves that began before and early in the shutdowns, have managed to keep new cases from spiking too badly during the reopenings. Conversely, some of the states that didn't really see much spread before and during the shutdowns, are seeing the worst spikes now after the reopening.

    Now, there are 2 different perspectives/theories:
    1) one view is that the states that were initially hit hard, have reached some level of herd immunity early, which is why there isn't much spread now
    2) the other view is that the residents in the states that were hit hard, early on, are a lot more wary of the disease and in general have been complying with the mitigation measures more effectively.

    The arguments against position 1 are that
    a) cities like NY still haven't returned to 'normal'. Traffic and transit data show that they're still nowhere near normal volume. This indicates that people are still not congregating/commuting as they did before.

    B) randomized serology testing indicates that even hard hit areas like NYC are only at about 20% infected. There are some hypotheses that 20% may be sufficient to provide herd immunity, in part due to the T-cell cross-reactivity that's been noted, but the American Dynasty fishing trawler case below seems to indicate that T-cell cross-reactivity from the common hCoVs that cause ~15% of common colds, don't provide immunity

    120 of the 122 crew members had serology and rt-PCR tests before and after. Only 3 crew members tested positive for antibodies before the trawler left port. They returned to shore when an outbreak went through the crew.

    On return, 104 crewmembers tested positive for the virus, or had seroconverted. The 3 with antibodies never developed symptoms and tested negative, which is a good sign for immunity, but the 104 getting Covid-19 doesn't bode well for the theory that the common hCoVs can provide immunity due to T-cell cross-reactivity.

    That, combined with the traffic and transit data indicate that areas with people taking more care with precautions are making better headway in mitigating the spread.

    The states that weren't hit hard before the shutdowns, had far fewer people bothering with precautions because the general mentality was, "We shutdown for nothing. There was no spread here", and have since experienced an explosion of cases, in effect, completely negating and wasting the costs and effects of the shutdowns.

    As for Sweden; as Matty pointed out, when you compare them to their neighboring countries with similar population densities and distribution (i.e. you can't simply say, "X country has Y population and Z square miles", for contagion transmission, it's better to look at, "the population of both these countries is mostly centered in cities and towns of similar size and density").

    Sweden has as much as 5x the deaths per 100,000 that their neighbors do. While they didn't shut anything down, when the spread was at its height, people began taking mitigation measures on their own. In the end, their economy suffered just as their neighboring countries did... but with significantly more deaths.

    Yes, it's freedom of choice, but the thing is, when you do it that way, people only really begin choosing to take measures to avoid catching and spreading the disease after it's well underway, which means greater spread, greater strain on the healthcare system, and more deaths.

    The sad part is, if people actually made responsible choices that weren't solely about themselves, and actually took measures to mitigate catching and spreading the disease, most businesses wouldn't have needed to be shutdown by the government.
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2020
  5. TRfromMT

    TRfromMT Gold Member Gold Member Basic Member

    Jan 4, 2016
    @bluemax_1 - once again I appreciate your comments. I've come to trust your posts here immensely.

    So, if you would offer your thoughts about the state of vaccine development. This topic may be more than you want to touch, given the very high level of polarization. Discussing this with my wife and doing some reading, it seems ALL vaccine development happening now is (quite understandably) being fast tracked and either limiting the very crucial trials, or bypassing stages of trial all together. This would make be very leery of taking a vaccine that has simply not been fully vetted. I am not against vaccines, but at this moment I don't think I would get one.

    What are your thoughts on taking a vaccine that has been around for months or a year (less than 10 years, let's say). Are "they" really getting enough trial data to ensure it's safe? Is a few months enough time to see what long term effects may have been introduced?
    Standard78, bluemax_1 and Odog27 like this.
  6. Steven65

    Steven65 Traditional Hog Platinum Member

    Mar 11, 2008
    I would like to say this......

    It is very easy with the benefit of hindsight to look back and say what we should and should not have done.

    Here in South Africa the government went into an immediate hard lockdown which was devastating economically.
    However South Africa has one of the highest HIV and TB rates in the world. Coupled with poor public health and other prevalent co-morbidities we could have been looking at a death rate of biblical proportions. Indeed there were some scientific analysts who predicted a possible 8-10 million deaths in South Africa.
    The government saw this and went into full crisis mode. They were advised by the WHO to lock down immediately and they did.
    Do I blame them for what they did?......No.

    Although with the benefit of hindsight the cure turned out to be worse than the disease, no one knew that back in March. Lockdown was the correct initial reaction.

    However where our government screwed up was when the numbers showed that this thing was nowhere near as bad as first predicted they continued with the lockdown against scientific advice. Stupid.

    At the end of the day common sense and science are where we need to look to counter this thing until the vaccine becomes available.
    When the vaccine is available I plan to be first inline to be inoculated.
    Standard78, bluemax_1 and Odog27 like this.
  7. JustinFournier

    JustinFournier Gold Member Gold Member

    May 7, 2012
    @bluemax_1 I know that post took a lot of time to make and I appreciate you doing it.

    Thank you and thank everyone for sharing info in here.

    I know it sounds odd to think someone seems to be looking for SARS-CoV-2 info on a knife forum. In my case I’m working nearly non stop through this disaster. I’ve taken 3 days off since June and they were all off grid with the kids camping. Since then I’ve worked every day.

    I don’t trust anyone talking at me from the TV. If they said it was raining and when I looked outside it was, I’d consider it a coincidence.

    I don’t have the background or time to wade through all the info myself and over the years I’ve come to find this sub is some of the most diverse but level headed people I’ve had the pleasure to communicate with.
  8. Casinostocks

    Casinostocks Factotum Gold Member

    Mar 20, 2016
    By and large, no one should take any kind of advice and most crucially the kind of advice which relates to one’s health and / or finances, from online posters whether in here, FB groups, etc... Just like it is considered being prudent to view the TV talking heads (a multitude of none experts across the entire political gamut) from a critical lens, it is equally prudent what you do not take as gospel whatever you come across online, even on this sub. That said, our CPK brother BM1 has provided us with great information and source in this thread throughout this pandemic and for this, I would also like to extend my thanks and appreciation.

    Lastly no matter where the info comes from, if you can legitimately verify the source of that info and verify the qualifications of its author and originator to your own satisfaction, no sense in poo-pooing everything just because it is so fashionable these days for the know-little to the know-nothings taking a dump on everything even those which are from highly respected scientists and research laboratories. Case in point, I have seen quite a few very qualified Drs. and experts on an array of partisan TV channels who despite the deft attempts of the program hosts to be baited into the politics of this, the guests just stuck to the current facts and their scientific expertise. My barometer for taking note of someone’s advice whether on TV or in print in addition to their own qualifications, is the strength of that media in its own editorial integrity. For this reason, some of the YT material which I’ve seen posted in here, frankly speaking I have found to be wrong and quite offensive.
  9. vkp78

    vkp78 Gold Member Gold Member

    May 6, 2014
    To the people who support a lockdown and who are still receiving an income(either because you are a "essential worker ", able to work from home, or business is not affected by the lockdown):
    Would you support the government taking away 50% of your income and distributing it to people with no income because of the lockdown?
    If you don't, why not? I mean about the concept in general- if you support a lockdown and still have an income, in addition to the taxes you already pay, are you willing to give up more of your money?
    I am flexible about the 50% or about who should receive the aid (obviously dont mean a millionaire ).
    PeteyTwoPointOne and Odog27 like this.
  10. Lorien

    Lorien KnifeMaker / Craftsman / Service Provider Knifemaker / Craftsman / Service Provider

    Dec 5, 2005
    well, as to business- I have to shut mine down due to covid19's effects, but thankfully not its symptoms.

    Honestly, I'm looking forward to not having to interact with the public. I don't hate people, but I hate the feeling of dread that whomever I'm dealing with is a 'carrier'. It's a terrible feeling to live under a veil of suspicion all the time, that's not my way I tend to be open of respectful of people out there in the world

    And also looking forward to building a new business. Something a little more tuned to what I want out of this life.
    Oyster, Standard78, bluemax_1 and 6 others like this.
  11. Danke42


    Feb 10, 2015
    There's hindsight and then there's experience. It's one thing to Monday morning quarterback stuff like this but its a whole other thing to refuse to account for actual experience.

    The way the wave of this virus has spread gave those in charge an opportunity to watch the responses from other countries and prepare for it's inevitable arrival. Some places made poor choices that resulted in a high death toll. Economic "damage" is temporary and fleeting. Death is permanent.
  12. Danke42


    Feb 10, 2015
    Guiding? I think there's going to be a boom in the next few years of people doing longer trips on the Island or the Southern interior on ebikes.
  13. Siddhant

    Siddhant Gold Member Gold Member

    Jan 25, 2018
    UNICEF has warned that lockdown measures could result in 1.16 million additional child fatalities and 57,000 maternal deaths in just six months.
    JustinFournier, Odog27 and vkp78 like this.
  14. PeteyTwoPointOne

    PeteyTwoPointOne Platinum Member Platinum Member

    Jun 10, 2014
    personal responsibility + a YUUUGGEE dose of consideration for our fellow humans can beat this pathogen...not to mention the bonus upside is that this tandem doesn't cost a dime :)

    what's gotten lost in all the crosstown traffic is that everyone's personal Liberty counts for doodlysquat :poop: in a world where selfishness and inconsideration have reached pandemic proportions greater than CV19 itself :(.

    Think about it...when the chips are truly down, "Others before Self" is what separates us from animals...

    there's a wealth of Liberty in taking measures that protect someone else's grandparents or compromised friends and family-- it's a choice we all have the option to take-- or not.

    A lot of stuff wouldn't have to be locked down or even restricted, if we could all suck it up and be diligent and vigilant to look out for each other as if we were all immediate family.
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2020
    Oyster, vkp78, JustinFournier and 8 others like this.
  15. WValtakis

    WValtakis Hand Engraving, Ti anodizing, and mods Knifemaker / Craftsman / Service Provider

    May 29, 2004 much, I wish more people would see this whole debacle for what it really is...a glaring example of how far we have fallen as a society. Compassion, empathy, caring for the welfare of your fellow man...these used to be viewed as strengths:(
  16. bluemax_1

    bluemax_1 Gold Member Gold Member

    Jan 17, 2014
    This particular subject is like a fingertip sized dab of nitrogen triiodide. It's something to discuss with your personal physician.

    All I'll say about it is that the 2 mRNA vaccine candidates, Pfizer/BionTech's BNT162b2 and Moderna's mRNA-1273 are showing promise with the initial results of their Phase 1 and 2 trials, and are entering Phase 3 trials.
    CataD, JustinFournier, Odog27 and 2 others like this.
  17. bluemax_1

    bluemax_1 Gold Member Gold Member

    Jan 17, 2014
    Following the science/data and making adjustments after reviewing new data would be the most prudent approach. Unfortunately, that isn't what's always done.
  18. bluemax_1

    bluemax_1 Gold Member Gold Member

    Jan 17, 2014
    Absolutely this.

    Consult your own primary care physician when it comes to medical advice/practices.

    My ONLY reasons for posting about this topic are to raise awareness of developments (whether it was my early posts to keep and eye out on it and do a little prepping, or regarding the spread, or medical advancements or more evidence of the disease's effects) and provide more data for people to consider/look into to educate themselves, whether it's for their own personal curiosity about the subject, or to gain a better understanding of it.

    As Justin has mentioned, a lot of people simply don't have the time or understanding to access the info, or understand the implications, and we've seen that people can easily misinterpret the available data, or even purposely skew the interpretation for their own reasons.

    My posts are simply to provide a little more info and food for thought.
  19. bluemax_1

    bluemax_1 Gold Member Gold Member

    Jan 17, 2014
    BTW, just to be clear, as I didn't mention it in my previous post regarding the shutdowns, I was merely presenting more info about the effects of the shutdowns specifically in regards to the spread of the disease.

    Again, I'm not arguing in favor of the shutdowns, I'm just pointing out that it broke the exponential growth rate.

    I'd much rather the majority exercised personal responsibility to mitigate the risk of catching the disease themselves AND importantly, infecting others and perpetuating the spread.

    Another thing I didn't address in my recent posts (I may have mentioned it in a post weeks ago), is the misunderstanding about viral mutation.

    I've seen and heard idea repeatedly, that viruses always mutate to a weaker version. This is an oversimplification the illustrates a lack of understanding of the subject.

    Any pathogen has traits that can be categorized as such:

    - Infectivity: how easily it infects a person who's been exposed

    - Pathogenicity: how readily it causes disease in an infected person (there are pathogens that cause infections, but not disease, i.e. SARS-CoV-2 is the pathogen, Covid-19 is the disease. If everyone infected was completely asymptomatic, the pathogenicity would be low).

    - Virulence: the severity of the disease resulting from infection

    - Fatality: how likely the disease is to result in death

    There are already a few thousand mutations recorded in the SARS-CoV-2 virus from samples from across the world (this is how they confirmed the reinfection cases, by comparing the virus samples from a patient's 1st and 2nd infections to see if it might just be a case of persistent infection, or reinfection from a variant showing enough mutational variance that it's unlikely to have developed within the host/patient).

    The vast majority of these small mutations don't have an effect one way or the other, but one mutation that HAS demonstrated an effect is the D614G mutation I mentioned a while back.

    The D614G mutation altered the spike protein that the virus uses to attach to the ACE2 receptors that the virus targets and uses for replication. This mutation that increased the binding ability of the spike protein gas resulted in an increase in the infectivity, as well as the pathogenicity and virulence.

    This mutations infectivity has increased enough that it is now the dominant circulating strain worldwide (~70% of worldwide submissions to GenBank show this mutation).

    Because the mutation affects the ability of the virus to bind to the ACE2 receptors, it affects how easily a dose of the virus causes infection, AND how easily the virus replicates within the body (hence increasing the pathogenicity and virulence).

    For the virus to 'weaken' worldwide, would require a mutation that both increases the infectivity, while simultaneously decreasing the pathogenicity and virulence, but as mentioned, the spike protein is tied to both how infectious the virus is, and how easily it reproduces within the host which affects the pathogenicity and virulence.

    A mutation that results in a lower binding affinity would be less infective and thus, selection pressure would mean the more infective version would continue to be the dominant circulating version.

    We'd need to see a mutation that somehow both increases the infectivity, yet somehow decreases the virulence and pathogenicity, all within the same sample.

    The hypothesis that a virus mutates to be weaker because it's more easily spread, lacks an understanding of virology AND this particular pathogen.

    Yes, if we're talking about a pathogen with a short incubation and even higher fatality, a variant that has longer incubation and lower fatality/virulence will allow an infected individual to continue spreading it longer and to more people, as they continue exposing contact because they're "just a little under the weather" vs bedridden or dead.

    The thing about the SARS-CoV-2 virus is that it already demonstrates a medium long incubation, coupled with presymptomatic and asymptomatic transmission, meaning there's already ample opportunity for people to continue spreading it when they're infected.

    One other concern is that the greater the spread of the virus, the greater the chance of a more dangerous mutation occurring, whether from natural mutation within a host, or recombinant variants appearing due to confection coinfection (saw my typo quoted in Lorien's reply. Concurrent infection with 2 or more pathogens, not something related to pastries), or another species jump (as evidenced by the fact that this virus has proven to be able to infect cats, dogs, ferrets and other animal species).
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2020
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page