Scientists reckon eliminating COVID-19 will be easier than polio, harder than smallpox – just buckle in for a wait In what is good news to everyone except possibly the most introverted masochists out there, boffins have decided that it is possible to rid the earth of COVID. In fact, it's probably easier to do than polio, but harder than smallpox, said researchers in the online journal BMJ Global Health. The team of New Zealand public …
Perhaps the researchers would like to spend a little time figuring out how to 'democratise', de-politicise and remove the greed factor that males the likes of Pfizer and others hold poorer, developing countries to ransom.
Other flaws that need addressing are consistent population management practices, education/information and removal of class privilege regarding masks/distancing and assembly numbers.
The haphazard management of the entire pandemic gives so much fuel to the dissenters and anti vaxxers that it is a joke.
Some honest reporting from governments would go a long way too.
While you can blame the companies for profiteering, that is what they are supposed to do. The real problem is misaligned incentives. This is why they prefer developing and selling niche treatments for cancers, heart disease, etc. than probably more vital (depends who you ask) vaccines and antibacterial treatments.
Buy health insurance from companies that develop vaccines.
At present we have pharma trying to extract the the maximum profit from drugs and health insurance fanning the fire so your choices are cripplingly expensive insurance, cripplingly expensive medical treatment or crippling diseases.
This has to be turned around so that the companies trying to profit from treatments have to balance that against the cost of insurance payouts for sick leave. I say companies for a reason: a monopoly or cartel is just as bad as what we have now.
Health insurance companies are rarely involved in the development of medicines. The key is in the name. It doesn't matter because the main point is that it is government policy that sets priorities and incentives and that is was needs changing. Though stopping the pharma lobby from dictating it will certainly remain a problem!
> While you can blame the companies for profiteering, that is what they are supposed to do.
Worth pointing out that AstraZeneca are explicitly selling their vaccine at Cost price.
To be clear: they intend to not make a profit from it.
They are doing some price differentiation between rich and poor countries so the rich subsidise the poor, but that's the extent of their variation from Cost Price.
This example is slightly off topic, but still illustrates the issue of servicing shareholders/owners at the expense of providing a service
In another sector that effects all/most of the lower income brackets here in the UK, the supermarket group Asda was bought on heavily leveraged terms, and the buy has prior form of disposing of real-estate/leasing it back - the same fate may happen imminently to Morrisons.
In the end we end up paying higher prices for our groceries (and elderly care)
Nope that was swine flu, we dodged a bullet with swine flu due to a massive effort to kill the pigs, to make a good vaccine (they did) and to get it to people who needed it, they did.
The effort was so successful you still get idiots saying swine flu was nothing. I had it, it literally knocked me flat didn’t have enough energy to sit in a chair. I’m a hyper fit lifelong distance runner who bounces off the walls with pent up energy if I don’t or can’t run often enough.
"Experience is a dear teacher but you seem to be one of those who will learn by no other."
Indeed. That's exactly how I have lived my life. About 30 years ago, I fired my oncologist to pursue healing in a different way. One of the best decisions I ever made that likely added years to my life. So yes, I trust my instincts because they have never misled me! :)
mostly harmless for 99.5% of the population. What's the big deal ?
For a start that's not true, information about the long term effects is slowly coming out and it's not good.
Secondly if it is only 99.5% who are seriously affected (which it isn't) that's 35 million people.
Are you such a sociopath to say 35 million sick or dead people is not important?
99.5% of the UK would mean "only" 330,000 deaths.
There have been 131,000 deaths in the UK. Even if there were ZERO cases from now on, that would mean that 40% of the UK population have already had covid.
I presume you stormed the old television center too?
By the way, the "95.5%" figure you mention is actually the percentage of covid deaths that are unvaccinated people.
"It's the same with this Covid : mostly harmless for 99.5% of the population. What's the big deal ?"
Let's frame that 99.5% non-fatality rate in a way that's easier to understand for the idiots out there. That's a 1 in 200 chance of death. 1 in 200 is about the same probability of throwing three doubles in a row in monopoly, and going to jail. Or put it another way, if flying had a similar risk ratio, they'd throw one or two people off every fully-loaded 747 in mid-air.
Of course, fatality isn't the only risk with Covid-19. It's estimated that between 10% and 20% of people contracting it who survive are left with chronic symptoms that continue for months. Possibly for some of them for years (we don't yet have enough data to know the average likely duration of long Covid).
So people who don't think Covid-19 is a very serious illness are at best ill-informed.
"It's the same with this Covid : mostly harmless for 99.5% of the population. What's the big deal ?"
Last recorded number for UK population: 66.65 million (2019)
0.5% of 66.65 million = 3.333 million it's not "mostly harmless" for.
Then again, you pulled that 99.5% out of your arse, so it's definitely wrong and the potential problem is almost certainly vastly worse than your arse pulled number suggests.
"It's the same with this Covid : mostly harmless for 99.5% of the population. What's the big deal ?"
Let's compare COVID and Polio shall we?
If you are infected with Polio, then there is a 70% chance you will be completely asymptomatic. For the majority of those who do develop symptoms, most will have nothing more than gastrointestinal symptoms and a general feeling of illness. Just 0.5% of those infected will do on to develop the flaccid paralysis we always associate with Polio. Of the 0.5% paralysed between 5 and 10% of those will die due to their diaphragm and intercostals being paralysed. This can be mitigated by artificial ventilation, this was the Iron Lung we see so many historical photos of.
For those who don't die, the recovery can take some considerable time and for others, they may be left with permanent weakness as a result of the infection.
There are parallels here, we are talking about 99.5% of those infected being relatively unharmed by the disease with 0.5% dying of COVID or being paralysed by Polio. Polio has a lower mortality rate, based on 0.5% being paralysed and between 5 and 10% of those dying, the overall death rates from Polio are between 0.025 and 0.05%, that is COVID had a mortality of around 1 in 200 while Polio has mortality of between 1 in 2000 and 1 in 4000.
Perhaps we need to go back to the pictures of what 1 in 200 people infected being on a ventilator looks like? Then you might see what the "big deal" is.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/may/26/last-iron-lung-paul-alexander-polio-coronavirus
"Perhaps the researchers would like to spend a little time figuring out how to 'democratise', de-politicise and remove the greed factor that males the likes of Pfizer and others hold poorer, developing countries to ransom."
Why? That greed is the one thing that developed the vaccine. Also the AZ vaccine was being sold at cost although with the hassle they took from the EU have said they probably wont do it again.
"The haphazard management of the entire pandemic gives so much fuel to the dissenters and anti vaxxers that it is a joke."
That is very true. The failure to (correctly) react by the Chinese and the failure of the WHO to label a pandemic for fear of upsetting the Chinese started the ball rolling but dont mask/mask inconsistencies and political goal scoring over the source of the virus and lab funding erodes the trust needed to get people to act.
"Some honest reporting from governments would go a long way too."
I think various governments have had their success and failure as none of them knew what to do. The autopsy of what worked and what didnt will be interesting.
Oh yes. Very good analysis. It was all China and Doctor WHO'S fault. Definitely. And without pinpointing the reason for the outbreak we were completely helpless and powerless to act in a timely manner. Better to weigh up all the conspiracy theories before taking any concrete action. Taiwan was foolish to even try: Linking their border controls and healthcare system to target quarantines etc through big data analysis? Ludicrous. The fools.
How Taiwan held off Covid-19, until it didn't - Vox YouTube
@AC
"Oh yes. Very good analysis. It was all China and Doctor WHO'S fault."
Just to check, you dont think China allowed this to become a pandemic when they covered up infections and prosecuted those who spoke out about the virus before it managed to spread and become a pandemic? As the origin and actively attacking those trying to act China also refused to cooperate with the WHO. You dont think that gives them a large share of the blame?
And the WHO played down the danger as it was trying not to upset the Chinese, you dont think thats a problem?
"And without pinpointing the reason for the outbreak we were completely helpless and powerless to act in a timely manner."
Which is increasingly looking like the lab which is not allowed to be investigated. Something considered a fringe theory while Trump was saying it but became a serious possibility/probability now the presidential race is over. Pinpointing being easier if people are allowed to investigate which the Chinese have made very difficult.
"Taiwan was foolish to even try: Linking their border controls and healthcare system to target quarantines etc through big data analysis?"
Why? Who said that? They tried something in an unprecedented situation. How successful it is will surely be determined at some point in the future.
You sure you dont wanna put your name to your comments? Worth a laugh.
- "Something considered a fringe theory while Trump was saying it but became a serious possibility/probability now the presidential race is over. "
So RedPilled. [Insert Pepe meme here]
- "You sure you dont wanna put your name to your comments?"
Nah. Just call me AC. Why, you need to dox?
@AC
"So RedPilled."
Eh what? I am in the UK so if thats a US term I have no idea what you are on about. It is a fact though that a lab leak was considered a fringe theory while Trump was in power but then became plausible under Biden.
"Nah. Just call me AC. Why, you need to dox?"
Which AC of the many people who post AC? Dox? Is that what you are doing to me coward?
- "It is a fact though that a lab leak was considered a fringe theory while Trump was in power"
Enough with your MAGA gaslighting already. The leak was always a possibility. It was the other bits that people rightly poured cold water on:
The actual story Trump was peddling
And again the origin didn't matter. It was the response to the situation we need to look at. And the response was lacking across the globe. (Apart from Taiwan.)
I have found across many platforms that the lab leak fanbois know precious little about SARS-CoVs but all love to bash the Chinese. Said fanbois in the USA are also Trump fanbois and racists, just like the Tangerine Nightmare itself. They probably vote for DeSantis et al as well.
@AC
"Enough with your MAGA gaslighting already. The leak was always a possibility."
https://spectatorworld.com/topic/media-u-turn-lab-leak-coronavirus-theory/
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/557783-lindsey-graham-dismissal-of-wuhan-lab-leak-theory-cost-trump-2020-election
https://inews.co.uk/news/world/biden-does-u-turn-over-covid-origins-as-report-points-to-wuhan-lab-accident-1023521
I will stop adding more links to that for now. Unless you want more.
"And again the origin didn't matter. It was the response to the situation we need to look at."
On one hand I cant believe you wrote the origin doesnt matter. On the other we both agree its down to the response but the failure to respond was in China. Where they refused to cooperate and covered up the infection. Even after it spread refusing to cooperate even for looking for the supposed animal host transmitting to human from bat. This could have ended in Wuhan. This could have been curbed very quickly even if it was just spreading from Wuhan.
- "I will stop adding more links to that for now. Unless you want more."
Sure thing. Go for it. Knock yourself out, buddy!
Here's a UK one for you that's not from a site with emphasis on the political slant such as The Hill and your "Daily Mail" and "Spectator":
Divisive COVID ‘lab leak’ debate prompts dire warnings from researchers - Nature
@AC
"Here's a UK one for you that's not from a site with emphasis on the political slant such as The Hill and your "Daily Mail" and "Spectator":"
Basically the article you link seems to be pointing out that China dont like being questioned or accused even when they are caught out covering up the pandemic. Simply China failed in a cover up of the outbreak and the lab leak possibility was dismissed for political reasons and brought back once the US election was over. Your article doesnt seem to disagree. So whats your problem?
@AC
"Just wondering how you got so pilled/radicalized to arrive at your Covid world view."
In what way? Assuming your the same AC you have accused me of being red pilled and radicalised etc while trying to shift the blame from the source of the infection who have frustrated efforts to deal with it and allowed it to become a global pandemic while accepting but disliking that it could have come from the lab conducting such experiments.
Seems maybe your just short of someone to argue with in your life. Or maybe you need a snickers
- "Basically the article you link seems to be pointing out that China dont like being questioned or accused even when they are caught out covering up the pandemic."
- "Or maybe you need a snickers"
Is snickers an English slur?
If that's all your RedPilled head could understand from that article then there's no point going any further. You have great day. Try not to get lost down your rabbit hole.
@AC
"Is snickers an English slur?"
It was an amusing advert- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsQBrbJ9T3M
"If that's all your RedPilled head could understand from that article"
Then point out something in that article you think I missed. Please, so I have a clue what your problem is. And while you do so feel free to read-
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/08/12/covid-may-have-begun-chinese-scientist-collecting-bat-samples/
"It is a fact though that a lab leak was considered a fringe theory while Trump was in power but then became plausible under Biden". Fun Fact. Fringe theories are always plausible. Biden, being a person with a properly functioning brain, and not prone to racism and bullying, knew the fringe theory had to be addressed. He also knew it had been and still was being looked into, as you would know if you cared to investigate. However, it is still a fringe theory. Tell us, how long did it take to identify the vectors in SARS-CoV-1? The outbreak was in 2002 and it took 14 years to identify the source.
@gandalfcn
"Fun Fact. Fringe theories are always plausible"
So credit to Trump and others who instead of dismissing the idea and rubbishing it as his political opponents did insisted on investigation of the origins even if it was the lab.
"Biden, being a person with a properly functioning brain"
He forgot he was vaccinated thanks to Trump.
"knew the fringe theory had to be addressed"
Actually not so fringe and yet only considered fringe to fight a political campaign.
"Tell us, how long did it take to identify the vectors in SARS-CoV-1? The outbreak was in 2002 and it took 14 years to identify the source."
Probably easier if China allowed the WHO to help. Maybe if China didnt block attempts to find out where it came from. Perhaps if China didnt cover up the infection in the first place.
"Tell us, how long did it take to identify the vectors in SARS-CoV-1? The outbreak was in 2002 and it took 14 years to identify the source."
Probably easier if China allowed the WHO to help. Maybe if China didnt block attempts to find out where it came from. Perhaps if China didnt cover up the infection in the first place.
Are getting confused by the similarly named SARS-CoV-1 and SARS-CoV-19?
> They tried something in an unprecedented situation.
And even identified a drug protocol which reduces deaths by two-thirds. Published it on 4th March 2020 iirc. 3 drugs, used in early stage (only).
Lunatic political gamesters have blocked its use in most Western countries, but Switzerland are using it. Dig up a graph of their (CH's) Case Fatality Rate and note 2 things:
A. the death rate's absolute value is bizarrely low ; and
B. a surreal spike in the middle where the death rate triples for 2 weeks then goes back to their low normal. What happened? The political mouth-frothers found out they were using the Taiwan protocol and scweamed and scweamed and scweamed and forced the Govt to ban it. Many unnecessary deaths later, the govt manned up and UNbanned it.
Pure science: event study. But unethical.
Most of India is using it; their CFR is _over_stated, but less than half of Australia's. We spend A$7,500/yr per person on healthcare, they spend US$73...
There's also another drug protocol came out about this time last year, even more effective: 86% reduction. Same political nuts are fighting it too. But Uttar Pradesh is using it with outstanding results, Goa used it to hammer Delta, and so did Mexico City. Indonesia _was_ using it until June when WHO forced them to stop. Have a look at a graph of their daily deaths and see if you can spot June 2021 without looking at the X-axis...
Is that you again Donald? Why aren't you throwing hissy fits about Fort Detrick?
"WHO played down the danger " No that was you Donald. "“I wanted to always play it down,” Trump told author Bob Woodward on March 19, days after he declared a national emergency. “I still like playing it down, because I don’t want to create a panic.”"
>>Why? Who said that? They tried something in an unprecedented situation.
It wasn't unprecedented though, was it. After the 2003 SARS outbreak, where Taiwan was hung out to dry by the rest if the world, they put the necessary planning in place to deal with any future epidemic/pandemic on their own.
"There are of course limits to viral evolution, so we can expect the virus to eventually reach peak fitness, and new vaccines can be formulated," wrote the researchers.
You might like to reconsider and accept to expect there are so such limits to its constant evolution for increased viral infection/virtual affectation.
One of GCHQ's AWESome Tools .... Advanced IntelAIgent Private Intellectual Property Applications .... Campaigning in Novel NEUKlearer HyperRadioProACTive ITerated Fields for Future Endeavours ....... JOINT AIdVentures ‽ .
And that question to C and M and Q and where and when there is a Will, there are countless other Majestic Ways to Lead Greater IntelAIgent Games Play Too.
40% of the known cold viruses are coronaviruses whose trajectory to being just cold viruses would have looked a lot like Covid except in smaller less mobile populations but remembering that cold viruses killed a lot of the Tierra del Fuegans when they met the West.
00ps! That first sentence should of course read ......You might like to reconsider and accept to expect there are no such limits to its constant evolution for increased viral infection/virtual affectation. ....... just in case you were persuaded to imagine it otherwise.
I mean, it still doesn't make sense, but care to translate the rest of it too? ... JDPower666
In my defence, JDPower666, I would venture that it still doesn't make sense to you. However, currently at the time of this posting, four out of thirteen would appear to understand and approve it rather than think to offer a pretty useless silent anonymous non-informative downvote.
I thank you for exercising the simple courtesy of asking a question about something you may have no or very little knowledge of, or may not care for at all, if one thinks one has more than just an inkling of what is revealed, ......... although to honestly be in that latter category has one identified as really belonging to the first category for one certainly has failed spectacularly to grasp the significance of the opportunity presented.
As for the rest of it, translation is rarely provided and then only if ever required on a strictly need to know basis.Some things are too dangerous to know if one doesn't fully realise the catastrophic impact of the release of certain core nuggets of information and knowledge regarding future intelligence supply from/for Advanced IntelAIgent Providers, thus is it securely zealously guarded and extremely well protected against escape and exfiltration, abuse and misuse.
It is the sort of stuff which is talked more fully about in the quiet circles of shady dark spaces and deep shadowy places and around the round tables in clubs which provide for those things which are fundamentally missing in life but be now ready to be uncovered and/or invented, discovered and/or recovered and provided by the likes of these sorts of specialist outfitters ...... and presently, in such a phorm, much more identifiable as Ethereal Heavy than Elite Centric, but IT and AI are an Agile Moveable Feast easily made Wonderfully Attractive to many an Addictive Beast and Rabid Rogue Daemon.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
