High End Munich 2021 - 9th - 12th September 2021

[Priaptor]

I believe people should get vaccinated, however, I also believe in freedom of choice regarding the same. 

 

To give some clarity to the concept of "Herd Immunity" I will again post the "OBJECTIVE" method for calculating it. 

 

Rt = Ro x ((1-i) x (1-p)) where Ro (the so called R Naught) is the inherent infectivity of the virus, i=% of the population immune, p=mitigation effectivity.

 

Now Ro initially was estimated to be 2.4 by the UK and EU data, newer data shows it to be closer to 5.5 when including newer strains with real Ro somewhere in between.  Ro are the number of people who will contract disease when exposed to infected individual .  Ro for measles is between 12-18, the common flu is between 2-3 on average.

 

As to p, good luck figuring that one out. While we have been told "social distancing" and wearing any kind of masks are effective, it is much more complex than what has been claimed. While we have all read the studies posted about effectivity of masks "of any kind" using a so called sieve effect to limit spread of virus particles in the lab, the sad truth is that most lay people wearing masks will also more likely #1 use masks that really have a low efficacy and #2 more importantly, are more likely to touch the mask/face/nose/eyes to make adjustments, scratch, etc. when wearing them as compared to healthcare workers who are properly trained wearing properly fitted KN95 & more likely N95 masks where the p factor is much more effective than in the general population and why COVID became quickly diminished among healthcare workers early on.  Remember, no group was more exposed than healthcare workers and no group came under control quicker than healthcare workers so "p" is real. 

 

Some out there will advocate that you can't open up until Rt is less than 1. Do the math. I am not one of them, but that is my opinion based on the facts, risks and ability for each individual to mitigate their own risks appropriately. 

 

I present the facts so that people can have a more objective approach to how they may decide to move forward. Clearly the elderly are at more risk, those with pre-existing conditions (particularly obesity) yet there are those wildcards of so called younger people with no risk factors developing full blown nasty pneumonias and worse, but the good news is, more therapeutics are available. 

 

Few are discussing Israel, because the lockdown proponents don't want you to know. On March 15th, 50% of Israeli's were fully vaccinated and 60% has at least their first dose while the most vulnerable over 70, 90% were fully vaccinated and 96% had received at least one dose. How did that effect spread? On 1/27/2021 Israel had it's largest recorded infections at 12,000 and by 3/15/2021 that rate was down 10x to 2000. Yesterday, Israel recorded just 80 infections. The point being, even just 50% of the population immune, will have dramatic effect in the spread if you do the math. 

 

This is just an FYI for each to make their own decisions. 

[Priaptor]

7 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

What's your source of this data and what's the increased risk?

The "sieve effect" has been well studied regarding effectivity of different masks in the lab by more studies than you can imagine. I have read at least 10 studies regarding this; probably more and are easily found by a search. Even those masks with larger sieve than the size of the viral particle will have some effect in diminishing dispersion of the virus; it is the same principle as the Rt.  Remember, this is within a lab, not in the real world. N95, properly fitted will be most effective; most people couldn't stand more than 20 minutes with a properly fitted N95, LOL.  My wife and I flew out to Montana with 2 changes last summer with properly fitted N95 and it was literally a nightmare. One of the reasons "shields" are so effective is it actually prevents the individual from touching those parts of their face that easily spread the virus.

 

Again, these were laboratory studies and NOT real world studies.

 

Proper mitigation strategies as in the healthcare environment, such as hospitals, reveal just how good mitigation can be, even when social distancing is impossible, with the most apt to spread, i.e. those infected. 

[Priaptor]

20 minutes ago, seeteeyou said:

I don't like any kinda mongering, therefore not sure if that were meant to be a hurdle to overcome?

 

 

Researchers are investigating if a COVID-19 with multiple mutations found in India is more deadly and resistant to existing vaccines

https://www.businessinsider.com/covid-triple-mutant-in-india-could-be-much-more-deadly-2021-4

 

India sees another spike of 3.52 lakh COVID-19 cases, 2,800 deaths as states, UTs face oxygen shortage

https://english.jagran.com/india/india-sees-another-spike-of-3-52-lakh-covid-19-cases-2800-deaths-as-states-uts-face-oxygen-shortage-10026092

 

India's Covid-19 deaths will rise sharply till mid-May: US study

https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/indias-virus-deaths-will-rise-sharply-till-mid-may-us-study

 

Rich Indians Flee by Private Jet as Virus Infections Spiral

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-26/wealthy-indians-flee-by-private-jet-as-virus-infections-spiral

https://web.archive.org/web/20210426142052/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-26/wealthy-indians-flee-by-private-jet-as-virus-infections-spiral

 

Maybe it's already too late for containment?

The latest and best information regarding variants is from Dr. Erica Ollmann Saphire, PhD, professor at the La Jolla Institute for Immunology. I don't have her links but her scientific data and projections of all variants as they have presented is by far the best I have heard. I recommend people try to find her data, their research, their current recommendations regarding variants and effectivity of current vaccines and where they are headed. This is nothing like the FLU variations and is a much easier task to tackle than what most of us are hearing. 

[Priaptor]

8 minutes ago, DuckToller said:

Here's a note from Bruno Putzeys personal blog about R
- I found it quite interesting ...

Covid Policy in 500 Words

The R number says how many new people get infected, on average, by one infected person. An R of 2 means the first case infects two people, those two go on to infect four and so on.

 

The R number is made up of two components. One is how easily the virus is transmitted. The other is how many people we meet, and how careful we are to avoid transmission.

 

The first component is only determined by the nature of the virus. The new variants are more easily transmitted, so under the same conditions the new variants have a higher R number.

 

The second component is only determined by our behaviour. The more careful we are, the lower the R number. Face masks, social distancing and vaccines all help push R down.

 

Crucially, the R number is not dependent on how many infections there are. If the virus is the same and people’s behaviour is the same, 100 cases become 200 cases in the same time that 1000 cases become 2000 cases.

 

It is tempting to set the rules on an ad hoc basis depending on infection numbers: slacken the rules (let R grow above 1) when few people are infected and tighten them when a certain panic level is reached. But now you see that even if you set the “pain threshold” very high, that will not result in more relaxed rules on average.

 

This explains why countries whose governments were loath to set restrictions (e.g., the UK) end up being locked down just as often as countries where the government was more careful (e.g., Denmark). The only difference is how many people are sick and dying.

 

But what about countries like New Zealand and Taiwan? They’re virtually Covid free! Well, that’s the twist in the tale. The trick is to smack down on the infection (keep R well below 1 long enough) until so few people are infected that you can handle them individually. Then it’s enough to shut down a village rather than the whole country. A single case in New Zealand is news.

 

Remember that the R number doesn’t depend on the number of cases. The R number for Covid-19 in New Zealand is very large – there are almost no restrictions in place. It’s just that zero times a large number is still zero.

 

By contrast, countries that try to “manage” a large number of infections are simply giving the virus time and space to evolve. When more people are sick, more virus particles are replicating and mutating. It is no wonder that countries like the UK have proven the perfect breeding ground for new variants that require ever stricter measures, and new vaccines, to combat.

 

This way, Covid-19 and its offspring will be with us for generations. Meanwhile, we can always choose to get rid of it completely. All it takes is the political courage to keep restrictions in place until there are no known cases left, and then to remain watchful for new cases.

- I was chatting with my Danish twin brother who is quite active in the whole Covid statistics thing. I mentioned to him that various governments simply seem to have a mental "ideal infection rate" and that the totality of their policy is to try regulating the system towards that target. And since they all respond forcefully but late, the system oscillates. Yes, he replied, but the silly thing is that the growth is exponential, so all they're doing is regulating R to 1 while the actual infection rate doesn't figure. And, he continued, you sound somewhat surprised so we have to assume that few people will grasp this intuitively. Touché. So I took it as a challenge to turn that observation into something that non-mathematicians can follow.

 

http://brunoputzeys.be/r4.php?item=35

Sorry DT this diatribe of Putzey is filled with mistakes. People really should understand just what they post about. 

[Priaptor]

1 minute ago, DuckToller said:

 

There may be a dispute between mathematics and medicine (and opiniated politicians), and I am not the one to have the final answer about that.
You - otoh - seem to be several steps closer to that point . Feel free to elaborate ....

LMAO. Your retort speaks for itself. Do your own research. Not worth elaborating. 

[Priaptor]

26 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

If I say yours is filled with mistakes, then you’re both even. 

No because my original post is facts without mistakes. 

 

I guess you guys just like NET copy and paste stuff. To each his/her/their own. 

 

Personally, I am with those like yourself weighing the risks and benefits of going to an enclosed show, having to wear a mask with the risks of being traveling abroad, vaccinated or not, claiming its not worth it. I am also in favor of people weighing the true risks and making an educated decision for themselves and loved ones using real data. But that is me.