Arielle Popstar Posted May 20, 2021 Author Share Posted May 20, 2021 1 minute ago, Phil Deakins said: You didn't understand what I said, but I thought it was very clear. I said that contact tracing helps to bring the spread of the virus down. I didn't say anything more than that concerning contact tracing. But since you bring it up, yes, if contact tracing advises you that you have been in contact with someone who has the virus, then YES, you should self-isolate for the prescribed duration. It's not about you. It's about protecting others. You can pick up the virus, and spread it, even though you wear a mask all the time. If, having been informed that you should self-isolate, you choose not to, then YOU are helping to keep this thing going. With a bit of luck, you won't have actually picked the virus up, but you might have. Being an 'essential worker' doesn't make any difference unless your government says you are exempt from self-isolating because of it. The phrase 'essential worker' covers a lot of jobs, such as shop staff, so it doesn't carry any weight in this bit of the discussion. So what's the data for people who are contacted actually winding up with Covid from that specific interaction? Since you are stating in no uncertain terms that contact tracing helps bring the spread of the virus down, I assume you have more then just some handwaving and wishful thinking to back it up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan Amore Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 Which only works, as you've mentioned numerous times, if people have access to the proper masks and only interact with people in a well ventilated area. And perhaps strip naked when you get home and immediately wash your clothing and anything you've come in contact with as that other person without an N95 mask may have spewed aerosol droplets onto you therefore putting you and anyone else you come in contact with at risk. If I had been in known contact with someone who tested positive, I would self quarantine. I certainly wouldn't want to be responsible for someone else being infected and possibly dying and I certainly wouldn't need anyone to tell me to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luna Bliss Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 Just now, Arielle Popstar said: Since you are stating in no uncertain terms that contact tracing helps bring the spread of the virus down, I assume you have more then just some handwaving and wishful thinking to back it up. https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/02/11/1018010/uk-exposure-notification-contact-tracing-app-succes/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan Amore Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 Common sense trumps any data. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luna Bliss Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 1 hour ago, Phil Deakins said: contact tracing app The contact tracing app looks pretty cool: https://www.wired.co.uk/article/nhs-covid-19-tracking-app-contact-tracing And then, as I posted to Arielle, it appears to have helped: https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/02/11/1018010/uk-exposure-notification-contact-tracing-app-succes/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 (edited) @Arielle Popstar I refer you to Luna's posts following your question to me Edited May 20, 2021 by Phil Deakins 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luna Bliss Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 1 hour ago, FairreLilette said: 1 hour ago, Phil Deakins said: Then again, people are self-isolating when told to by the contact tracing app. So it is definitely helping to lower the spread of covid-19. If you believe so, we agree to disagree. People would have to stay home from their job and this is not a good thing. Closing borders to leisure and non-essential travel would be much better as people and families and businesses surviving and jobs should come first. Contact tracing is evolving (best methods and tailored to cultural differences in various countries), but the idea is to financially support people who need to isolate (and this support has occurred in some countries). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 (edited) I use the NHS app. I haven't been told that I've been in contact with anyone who has the virus, but I have the app running all the time. Edited May 20, 2021 by Phil Deakins 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luna Bliss Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 Good paper on the effectiveness of contact tracing: https://www.sahmri.org/m/uploads/2020/09/02/covid-19-evidence-update-how-do-we-maximise-the-effectiveness-of-contact-tracing.pdf Key findings: •Nearly all studies that have assessed effectiveness (observational and modelling) indicate that contact tracing, in combination with other strategies(e.g. testing, isolation, social distancing),is associated with better control of COVID-19. •Contact tracing has the most benefit when secondary cases are identified and isolated before they become infectious. •A systematic review concluded that contact tracing effectiveness is maximised when the time from symptom development to isolation occurs within 2-3 days and 80% of close contacts are quarantined[4]. •Contact tracing is less effective when there are delays to testing and obtaining results, when the case numbers surge beyond the capacity of the tracing system, and when most contacts cannot be traced. •Delays of 4+ days or less than 60% of contacts successfully quarantined may not meaningfully control transmission[4]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theresa Tennyson Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 12 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said: So what's the data for people who are contacted actually winding up with Covid from that specific interaction? Since you are stating in no uncertain terms that contact tracing helps bring the spread of the virus down, I assume you have more then just some handwaving and wishful thinking to back it up. Like a website called "ContactTracingC19.com" run by people who state that they're super, super qualified but don't actually say who they ARE because they are afraid of the ebil forces who will track them down for revealing the Truth? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luna Bliss Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 From the CDC...details regarding contact tracing: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/daily-life-coping/contact-tracing.html Contact tracing slows the spread of COVID-19 Contact tracing helps protect you, your family, and your community by: Letting people know they may have been exposed to COVID-19 and should monitor their health for signs and symptoms of COVID-19. Helping people who may have been exposed to COVID-19 get tested. Asking people to self-isolate if they have COVID-19 or self-quarantine if they are a close contact. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luna Bliss Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 Biden looks to boost contact tracing: https://khn.org/news/article/as-pandemic-surged-contact-tracing-struggled-biden-looks-to-boost-it/ I wonder how it will evolve here and in other countries. I like the digital aspects of communication on important health matters...I received a text message after getting my 1st shot vaccination and will likely get a 2nd shot reminder.. I wouldn't like to be monitored wherever I go (if that would even be part of the plan in the U.S.), but then if it prevented thousands from dying would I be willing to give up some privacy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arielle Popstar Posted May 20, 2021 Author Share Posted May 20, 2021 Well here is the qualifications for being contact traced: Contact tracing will be conducted for close contacts (any individual within 6 feet of an infected person for a total of 15 minutes or more) of laboratory-confirmed or probable COVID-19 patients. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/contact-tracing/contact-tracing-plan/contact-tracing.html Within 6 feet for 15 minutes of a lab confirmed covid carrier is not within health guidelines anyway. So contact tracing is for ones who broke the rules already. Must be cruising for a warning badge. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luna Bliss Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 15 hours ago, Madelaine McMasters said: At 1:20, Dr. Bailey claims that germ theory is hyped up and lays blame at the feet of Louis Pasteur for misdirecting a century of science. She says:"It wasn't until 1995 that much of his research was exposed as fraudulent. We quote medical historian Gerald Geison as saying 'The conclusion is unavoidable: Pasteur deliberately deceived the public, including especially those scientists most familiar with his published work.' Unfortunately, the damage was done and generations of medical professionals have been trained with a skewed understanding of the role of microbes." Though Geisel (quoted in purple above) found Pasteur to have stolen ideas and taken potentially unethical risks with a patient, he ultimately took no issue with Pasteur's ultimate body of work. Here's Geison, from a lecture he gave at the American Association for the Advancement of Science prior to publishing the book from which Bailey quotes... "He (Pasteur) fully deserves his reputation as one of the greatest scientists who ever lived. He was by no means always humble, selfless, ethically superior . . . Quite the opposite." https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691633978/the-private-science-of-louis-pasteurhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_L._Geisonhttps://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/wellness/1993/02/23/louis-pasteur-and-questions-of-fraud/196b2287-f63f-4bac-874e-c33b122d6f61/ Not content with just that mischaracterization, Dr. Bailey doubles down. At 2:06, she introduces Dr. Stefan Lanka, a virologist who denies measles (and viruses in general) exist. In 2011, Lanka claimed that measles are psychosomatic exacerbations of otherwise benign skin conditions and offered $100,000 to anyone who showed a research paper proving the measles virus actually exists. A physician in training, David Bardens, produced six papers offering the requested proof. One of them, written in 1954 by Nobel laureate John Enders is quoted by Dr. Bailey as refutation rather than proof, though the caveat offered by Enders about his own findings is hardly damaging to his thesis, which has been roundly supported by continued research since then. When Lanka refused to pay, Bardens took him to court and was initially victorious. The case was eventually dismissed when a higher German court ruled that Lanka's "bet" was actually an award, and that he was the only person who could determine if the criteria had been met . One of the judges in the case opined that, had Bardens provided 600 papers proving the existence of the measles virus, Lanka would still be allowed to deny payment. Dr. Bailey quotes Lanka in the video as saying... "It is now part of German jurisdiction that the publication of the central method of virology from June 1, 1954 in which the unintentional and unnoticed killing of cells in the laboratory was published as proof of the existence of disease-causing viruses no longer constitutes proof of the existence of a virus from the year 2016". That's not true. The courts simply said that Lanka can make up any payout rules he likes, and he did. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/mar/13/measles-sceptic-must-pay-doctor-100000https://www.deutsche-apotheker-zeitung.de/news/artikel/2017/01/20/bundesgerichtshof-haelt-sich-aus-masernstreit-heraus/ The German language link above can be translated by pasting the URL into Google Translate. Bailey then points us to Lanka's Project Immanuel website where Lanka explains that, because genetic sequences are scanned from fragments of DNA/RNA and sometimes contain gaps, they don't prove the existence of viruses. By that reasoning, humans are also in doubt... https://www.statnews.com/2017/06/20/human-genome-not-fully-sequenced/ In his refutation of viruses, Dr. Lanka claims nobody's ever isolated, completely sequenced, and imaged one. Here's a complete sequencing of Covid-19 isolated from a Nepalese student at Wuhan University of Technology:https://mra.asm.org/content/9/11/e00169-20 Here's a picture of Covid-19:https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/novel-coronavirus-sarscov2-images Anti-vaxxers, including Dr. Bailey, have expressed incredulity that vaccines are designed to target pathogens identified by snippets of genetic information who's function isn't understood. We don't need to know what the identifying snippets do, only that they are reliable identifiers of the pathogen. It is important to locate and understand the mechanism by which viruses gain access to human cells. This knowledge can guide therapies to reduce infection rate and symptoms. It's also important to identify and understand which portion of a virus might be used to inform the immune system's response via vaccination. That's the routine work of immunology. If you don't believe in infectious diseases, you're faced with prospect that we're being infected with beliefs. I'm pretty sure that actually happens, but isn't a good argument for the absence of viruses. At 5:30, Bailey begins her attack on big pharma (which I'm happy to join at times) by misrepresenting the evidence once again. She claims that drugs are the third leading cause of death in the US and Europe. I have some knowledge here, as I spent several years researching and consulting on medical error reduction in both hospital and home settings. We've all heard horror stories of someone misplacing a decimal in the administration of an IV, taking the wrong medication, taking medications in deadly combinations with other drugs or foods (you might be surprised by how many medications collide with grapefruit juice), or forgetting to take their medications. Medical errors really are the third largest cause of death. https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/media/releases/study_suggests_medical_errors_now_third_leading_cause_of_death_in_the_us If you think medicines are bad, pilots are responsible for 80% of all plane crashes.https://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/qtr_2_07/article_03_2.html Dr. Bailey batted zero-for-three in the first six minutes of her video. Thank you for bringing her to my attention, Arielle. She's a lovely reminder that we should not judge a book by its cover, particularly when the book is hawking her own book, "Virus Mania". I'm fascinated by her facial expression every time she mentions it. What is your opinion regarding this woman? Do you think she really believes what she says? I'm not sure which is worse...that she could be such an incompetent Dr. and unable to parse simple studies and information, or that she is fine with power abuse and going against the oath to do no harm as long as she can make a buck from her book and feel the power surge of being a maverick. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 15 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said: I wouldn't like to be monitored wherever I go As I understand it, that's not not how it works. I have the app running on my mobile phone. If I come close to someone else who also has it running on their phone, then a contact is made between the two apps. It doesn't track you. It just 'listens' for other apps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luna Bliss Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 Just now, Phil Deakins said: 18 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said: I wouldn't like to be monitored wherever I go As I understand it, that's not not how it works. I have the app running on my mobile phone. If I come close to someone else who also has it running on their phone, then a contact is made between the two apps. It doesn't track you. It just 'listens' for other apps. Yes, I know that to be true with the UK app. I've just been reading about how contact tracing works in some other countries, and wondering how it will eventually evolve.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arielle Popstar Posted May 20, 2021 Author Share Posted May 20, 2021 2 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said: As I understand it, that's not not how it works. I have the app running on my mobile phone. If I come close to someone else who also has it running on their phone, then a contact is made between the two apps. It doesn't track you. It just 'listens' for other apps. Does it tell you if the nearby person has Covid? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sassy Kenin Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 42 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said: Common sense trumps any data. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said: Does it tell you if the nearby person has Covid? No. The apps report back to HQ. They don't inform the people with the apps. Then, if necessary, a person at HQ phones the person who needs to self-isolate. That's here in the UK. Edited May 20, 2021 by Phil Deakins 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arielle Popstar Posted May 20, 2021 Author Share Posted May 20, 2021 31 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said: Like a website called "ContactTracingC19.com" run by people who state that they're super, super qualified but don't actually say who they ARE because they are afraid of the ebil forces who will track them down for revealing the Truth? Science when it is any good, can stand on its own and not have to rely on the reputation of its author or the one funding it. Those who look for who is the author or where it is published, are automatically biasing their viewpoint of a paper and becomes an unreliable critic. So maybe try reading the paper for what it says, and not make its validity dependent on its creator or where it is published. 1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arielle Popstar Posted May 20, 2021 Author Share Posted May 20, 2021 7 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said: No. The apps report back to HQ. They don't inform the people with the apps. Then, if necessary, a person at HQ phones the person who needs to self-isolate. That's here in the UK. Bet someone makes a contact tracing app for Covid infected dating! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan Amore Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 (edited) We best all behave since it appears someone who likes getting these threads shut down has arrived. Usually when a pic of Trump is posted, the lock isn't far behind. Contact tracing works only to the extent that people get tested and are open and honest. Therein lies the problem IMO. Edited May 20, 2021 by Rowan Amore 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luna Bliss Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 15 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said: 56 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said: Like a website called "ContactTracingC19.com" run by people who state that they're super, super qualified but don't actually say who they ARE because they are afraid of the ebil forces who will track them down for revealing the Truth? Science when it is any good, can stand on its own and not have to rely on the reputation of its author or the one funding it. Those who look for who is the author or where it is published, are automatically biasing their viewpoint of a paper and becomes an unreliable critic. So maybe try reading the paper for what it says, and not make its validity dependent on its creator or where it is published. Hmmm...shall I research Scientific matters by going to actual Scientific studies done by degreed Scientists, or shall I go to a website run by Covidiots without any formal training in the Sciences first? It's hard to decide. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arielle Popstar Posted May 20, 2021 Author Share Posted May 20, 2021 Just now, Luna Bliss said: Hmmm...shall I research Scientific matters by going to actual Scientific studies done by degreed Scientists, or shall I go to a website run by Covidiots without any formal training in the Sciences first? It's hard to decide. Since the website authors are anonymous, how would you have any idea of their qualifications? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theresa Tennyson Posted May 20, 2021 Share Posted May 20, 2021 16 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said: Science when it is any good, can stand on its own and not have to rely on the reputation of its author or the one funding it. Those who look for who is the author or where it is published, are automatically biasing their viewpoint of a paper and becomes an unreliable critic. So maybe try reading the paper for what it says, and not make its validity dependent on its creator or where it is published. There's a difference between "science" and a "paper." Science is consistent and repeatable. Any given paper may or may not mean anything, depending how the research was done and if the paper is an accurate reflection of that. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/08/researcher-center-epic-fraud-remains-enigma-those-who-exposed-him 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.