46 minutes ago, LTuser said:

So why then are we seeing MORE folk seeming to catch it, the past 2 + months, than in the preecding 6??

As discussed, I'm a bone fide expert on everything (as I'm on the internet).

We've got multiple things going on. First, the global north has moved on into winter and 'holiday season'. This means that people are spending more time in doors (as it is cold & dark outside), and want to visit their loved ones (because TRADITION! and in some parts not having been able to see them for a good chunk of the year). This also means we're in prime respiratory illness season, so the usual gamut of colds/flus are circulating. This can help COVID spread, as even with the public health campaigns some people will still dismiss symptoms as 'just' being a cold, not self-isolate, and thereby potentially spread the virus further.

Second, depending on where you live, schools have reopened for in-person teaching across the board. This means that you've got children and teenagers moving to and from those places, meeting with large numbers of their schoolmates, and then going home again each day. Add in the winter factor as well, and even with precautions being taken this will ramp up the spread.

Third, depending on where you live, government job protection schemes or stimulus efforts have been scaled back or removed/blocked; this means that those most vulnerable to economic disruption are effectively forced 'back' into potentially unsafe work environments or run the risk of destitution. Oddly enough, there's a strong correlation between being economically vulnerable and having life-limiting medical conditions of the kind which often are co-morbid with COVID (being poor = poor lifestyle & diet = poor health outcomes).

Fourth (and finallyish), you've got political 'leaders' actively pushing back against measures to try and limit the spread, and their supporters who refuse to take even the simplest of steps to mitigate the risks. If anything, this slice of the population has become even more stubborn as the year has progressed, even as the death toll has climbed.

1 hour ago, LTuser said:

So why then are we seeing MORE folk seeming to catch it, the past 2 + months, than in the preecding 6??

If you were paying attention to the posts above, you'd already have the answer to that question.

But for the sake of discussion let's assume you're asking a genuine question here.

What's happened on the last few months that might have contributed to a rise in cases of an (extremely) communicable virus? What's been going on that might cause more people to gather in close proximity?

And how many of those people have been strictly adhering to the advice and guidelines of health care officials?

You may also want to investigate "exponential growth".

On 12/9/2020 at 9:59 PM, ScummyRebel said:

Maybe some other countries will be better off, but the US is going to be in lockdown a long while. My call is late 2022 most likely. Maybe early 2023?

Absolutely no offence intended to the sensible, intelligent and compassionate citizens of the United States and members of this forum, but as far as the rest of the world is concerned, the longer the better.

The figures coming out of the US on a daily basis at the moment are truly alarming, as is the lack of a co-ordinated country-wide response to the outbreak. I'm not convinced you're seeing a second wave yet or if the first ever truly finished.

Plus, with a change in power due and given the very partizan manner of the elections, the response of supporters of the old administration to any measures imposed by the new in the coming months will be very, very important.

6 hours ago, LTuser said:

So why then are we seeing MORE folk seeming to catch it, the past 2 + months, than in the preecding 6??

OMG.

Let's say you are in a forest with a hungry bear. How likely are you to be eaten?

Now, let's say you are in a forest with 500 hungry bears. NOW how likely are you to be eaten??

Now let's say that every person that gets eaten by a hungry bear turns into a hungry bear.

Make sense?

7 hours ago, Mep said:

A small percentage of those COVID deaths are just the virus. Most deaths are from a combination of ailments including COVID. So when you hear about excess deaths this year and that number is smaller than COVID deaths and smaller still when accounting for the excess deaths not directly due to COVID, it is because a large portion of those COVID deaths were going to happen this year, no matter what. That is when you are dealing with a population of people of course. There are plenty of individuals one can point to and say, probably would have made it a few more years had they not got COVID. That is of course impossible to know for certain but plausible.

If there are excess deaths, then statistically there were not "planned for" this year, or else they would not be in excess.

IMHO, any death helped along this year by exposure to a novel virus is a COVID death. You can split hairs if you want, but this kind of BS, especially in the USA, is why we are the world leader in COVID cases and deaths.

Having a blood sugar a couple points over normal makes you pre-diabetic. It takes 10 seconds for a doctor to want to put you on pills for mildly high blood pressure or cholesterol (in stead of say, correcting your diet). The cynic in me says the only reason our health care system isn't all over this is because there is nothing to sell (yet).

Nevertheless, sowing doubt that this virus is a significant health problem is just muddying the waters and leading to more cases faster.

15 hours ago, Mep said:

Actually influenza is a very homicidal virus.

I'm not certain anyone is saying that the flu is not a deadly virus, only that Covid-19 is more so.

10 hours ago, LTuser said:

So why then are we seeing MORE folk seeming to catch it, the past 2 + months, than in the preecding 6?

Because of exponential growth. Below is a comparison between linear growth and exponential growth. In linear growth, if three people per day are infected, it would take 333,334 days to infect 1 million people. That's 913ish years. But if we start with 3 people, and each one infects 3 more people each day you get this:

1. 3 infected
2. 9 infected
3. 27 infected
4. 81 infected
5. 243 infected
6. 729 infected
7. 2,187 infected
8. 6,561 infected
9. 19,683 infected
10. 59,049 infected
11. 177,147 infected
12. 531, 441 infected
13. 1,594,323 infected

13 days instead of 9 centuries.

Now lets add in social distancing, face masks, and quarantine measures. Let's say 1/2 of people follow these measures and they are hypothetically 100% effective (just for math, since this isn't the case). In linear growth, again starting with 3 people and removing 1/2 per day, increases the days to infect 1 million to 499,998 days or 1,369 years. Now, let's do exponential which each person infecting 3 more per day, and we'll round down the quarantine number because cutting a person in half kills the patient:

1. 3 infected
2. 9 infected - 4 quarantine = 5 active
3. 15 infected - 7 quarantine = 8 active
4. 24 infected - 12 quarantine = 12 active
5. 36 infected - 18 quarantine = 18 active
6. 54 infected - 27 quarantine = 27 active
7. 81 infected - 40 quarantine = 41 active
8. 123 infected - 61 quarantine = 62 active
9. 186 infected - 93 quarantine = 93 active
10. 279 infected - 139 quarantine = 140 active
11. 420 infected - 210 quarantine = 210 active
12. 630 infected - 315 quarantine = 315 active
13. 945 infected - 472 quarantine = 473 active
14. 1,419 infected - 708 quarantine = 709 active
15. 2,127 infected - 1,063 quarantine = 1,064 active
16. 3,192 infected - 1,596 quarantine = 1,596 active
17. 4,788 infected - 2,394 quarantine = 2,394 active
18. 7,182 infected - 3,591 quarantine = 3,591 active
19. 10,773 infected - 5,386 quarantine = 5,387 active
20. 16,158 infected - 8,079 quarantine = 8,079 active
21. 24,237 infected - 12,118 quarantine = 12,119 active
22. 36,357 infected - 18,178 quarantine = 18,179 active
23. 54,537 infected - 27,268 quarantine = 27,269 active
24. 81,807 infected - 40,903 quarantine = 40,904 active
25. 122,712 infected - 61,356 quarantine = 61,356 active
26. 184,068 infected - 92,034 quarantine = 92,034 active
27. 276,102 infected - 138,051 quarantine = 138,051 active
28. 414,153 infected - 207,076 quarantine = 207,077 active
29. 621,231 infected - 310,615 quarantine = 310,616 active
30. 931,846 infected - 465,923 quarantine = 465,924 active
31. 1,397,772 infected

31 days instead of 13 days with no quarantining. A great improvement, but you can see that once that ball got rolling somewhere around day 20, even removing half of the pool did little to slow the growth. That is where America is at. And if you add in a Halloween or a Thankgiving where people relax their safety measures during the high tide, the exponential growth grows faster.

Compare this to say Singapore, South Korea, or New Zealand who either made masks mandatory or commonplace (S Korea has 98% adoption rate without a law) and/or used vigorous testing, and they either curbed the cases in Singapore and New Zealand's case or prevented infection rates from even growing over 1,000 cases in South Korea's case. They took it seriously early on and didn't belittle the virus, and by effect, have largely been able to carry on with life as if Covid wasn't a thing. Addressing the issue early is key, but also universal adoption is key. And because of this, their economy's haven't faltered, their population is healthy, and their hospitals aren't anywhere near capacity.

If America, or any other country for that matter, took masks, testing, and contact tracing as serious as those countries, their Covid numbers would be significantly reduced, and would be able to carry on about life as if there wasn't a pandemic happening.

10 hours ago, Mep said:

High blood sugar can cause you to crash your car. Death certificates in the US have 4 fields for filling the cause of death, ranked in order of most acute/dire plus an additional field for listing other co-morbidities. There are many people due to poor health that are one infection from death. A good example is cancer. Most people who die of cancer don't necessarily die of direct organ failure due to cancer. The usual killers are infection, drug toxicity or opium over dose. The stay in nursing homes is typically not long. They don't go there to be youthify and get out, they go there to die. They are hospice care for those with terminal geriatric conditions. They too are one infection from death. Death from "natural causes" or "died after a short illness" usually means they died from an infection any normal healthy person would otherwise survive. The great exception is generally some kind of infarction. So when you hear 160,000 people die of COPD each year in the US, many of them died from both COPD and infection. Rarely does just one thing get someone. It is usually a combination, like a tree, a car and high blood sugar.

A small percentage of those COVID deaths are just the virus. Most deaths are from a combination of ailments including COVID. So when you hear about excess deaths this year and that number is smaller than COVID deaths and smaller still when accounting for the excess deaths not directly due to COVID, it is because a large portion of those COVID deaths were going to happen this year, no matter what. That is when you are dealing with a population of people of course. There are plenty of individuals one can point to and say, probably would have made it a few more years had they not got COVID. That is of course impossible to know for certain but plausible.

This is f***ing ridiculous.

My dad died this year from lung cancer. Actually, he died of pneumonia. There was too much fluid in his lungs for him to sustain his own life. You know what caused that pneumonia? The f***ing tumours in his lungs. You know what any sensible person would track his cause of death as for the purpose of statistical recording? F***ing lung cancer. If there had been a treatment that could have saved his life, do you know what that treatment would have been targeted at? The f***ing lung cancer!?

Would you go into a thread saying "no one actually dies of lung cancer, so we shouldn't bother trying to cure it, we should be working on reliable treatments for pneumonia because that's what actually kills people"?

Stop being a stubborn pr**k making arguments for the sake of argument. If someone was vulnerable for whatever reason to COVID and then they died after contracting it, they died of f***ing COVID.

I've got to say, I do love how threads like these become a honey trap for morons. Makes it so much easier to identify whose opinions I can just straight up ignore.

1 hour ago, GuacCousteau said:

My dad died this year from lung cancer. Actually, he died of pneumonia. There was too much fluid in his lungs for him to sustain his own life. You know what caused that pneumonia? The f***ing tumours in his lungs. You know what any sensible person would track his cause of death as for the purpose of statistical recording? F***ing lung cancer. If there had been a treatment that could have saved his life, do you know what that treatment would have been targeted at? The f***ing lung cancer!?

Sorry for your lost. As a cancer biologist I had to explain to my own mother how my stepfather would actually die of pneumonia when he got lung cancer. Yes lung cancer does lead to pneumonia and death. It is a very difficult thing to deal with because you aren't just dealing with cancer, but all the infectious diseases one can get along with cancer, especially when chemo hits the immune system. This is why it is very important for people to understand infectious diseases. If you had a copy of his death certificate (assuming US here) you would see four boxes where causes of death are recorded. For my own stepfather that pasted from lung cancer it was sepsis, right lower lobe pneumonia, metastatic lung cancer, non segment myocardial infarction. What wasn't listed was COPD, diabetes, and kidney failure. When people get very sick, everything hits them sadly.

The CDC does track people who die of cancer as cancer but they get more data than just that. So when someone who dies of lung cancer plus an infection, say COVID 19, it is tracked as both actually. That large number you see of all those deaths are rarely just COVID 19 as the sole cause of death. It is important to understand all the comorbidities that occur so the best supportive treatments can be given. People with cancer get treated for a multitude of things, not just the cancer. Again, sorry for your loss and I hope that explains how all this works a bit better and how these numbers are complied and reported. Our for profit media does a very piss poor job of explaining anything but an excellent job of propaganda, shaming and disgusting people so they watch more.

11 hours ago, LTuser said:

So why then are we seeing MORE folk seeming to catch it, the past 2 + months, than in the preecding 6??

The actual answer to your question isn't a political one but a biological one. Beta corona viruses are cold weather "common cold" viruses. In other words they hit during cold/flu season, typically late autumn, winter and early spring. This is best seen in Australia, who being in the southern hemisphere had their winter in June, July, and August and just got completely through their cold/flu season. Here is a pretty good graph showing this phenomena:

Australia is much closer to the equator than the US or Europe, which sadly have much longer cold/flu seasons and that season has just begun. So yeah, we will all be able to get vaccinated just in time for summer. Between the vaccinations and that large fusing ball of hydrogen in the sky it's very unlikely Gencon will be unsafe to take place, anymore than any other year, "convention cough" is the norm, but I am not sure they will get the all clear in time. So I doubt Gencon will happen this year.

I will say this, please do get vaccinated. It is important. Yes the vaccines were rushed, for good reason, but the technology behind them was actually developed in the 1990s for gene therapy and then adapted to vaccines. It is an "old tech" at this point. The underlining technology has been tested for vaccines for several other diseases, which is why there is high confidence in their safety. Even if you yourself are in a low risk group there are always immunocompromised people, such as cancer patients, where the vaccine will not do them any good directly.

5 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

IMHO, any death helped along this year by exposure to a novel virus is a COVID death. You can split hairs if you want, but this kind of BS, especially in the USA, is why we are the world leader in COVID cases and deaths.

Having a blood sugar a couple points over normal makes you pre-diabetic. It takes 10 seconds for a doctor to want to put you on pills for mildly high blood pressure or cholesterol (in stead of say, correcting your diet). The cynic in me says the only reason our health care system isn't all over this is because there is nothing to sell (yet).

Nevertheless, sowing doubt that this virus is a significant health problem is just muddying the waters and leading to more cases faster.

FYI, part of the Cares Act in the US was money to cover all health related expenses for COVID 19 infection. Nothing for unrelated health causes impacted by the pandemic. This is probably why the US is the leader in COVID cases. All other industrialize nations pretty much have universal health care and no financial incentive to cover COVID 19 more than any other health condition as all conditions are covered. The US health care system can sell COVID 19 to the government and the government will pay. All one has to do is let the PCR cycle several more times to get the positive result and cash out. It's a massive weakness in the US medical system, which in a normal year "only" has 3-10% of total cost being fraud, totaling hundreds of billions a year. It will be years before "what the **** just happened" is properly understood, including good estimates on fraud.

People who are impacted the most from this or any other aliment are those that are old. There is no "stay young forever" diet. No need to shame people on diet or anything else.

Now, on a linked question, Twice now i've seen news articles saying that "You could be fired, if you refused to get the vaccine at your work, should they mandate you all get it"..

Who here feels, companies should be able to mandate their workers get the vaccine? What about shoppers/customers? Should a company/business be able to say "Sorry, but since you have not been vaccinated, you cannot do business with us/enter our store"?

To me, that kind of does away with any sort of "formed consent", if one is literally being forced to get it, to work/shop...

1 hour ago, Mep said:

FYI, part of the Cares Act in the US was money to cover all health related expenses for COVID 19 infection. Nothing for unrelated health causes impacted by the pandemic. This is probably why the US is the leader in COVID cases...

...in all honesty, it's probably not.

In terms of "probable reasons" it's without a doubt way below size of country, size of population, density of population centres, lack of a co-ordinated, centralised response and testing levels.

10 minutes ago, LTuser said:

To me, that kind of does away with any sort of "formed consent", if one is literally being forced to get it, to work/shop...

Anti-vaxxers would go crazy.

Just now, FTS Gecko said:

...in all honesty, it's probably not.

Does anyone really buy China saying that they have less than the US?

Just now, Bravo Null said:

Does anyone really buy China saying that they have less than the US?

Nope. Although there's no doubt that China's response to the pandemic has been much more - comprehensive, shall we say? - than that of the US.

China doesn't want to discuss the coronavirus. It certainly doesn't want it investigated, as Australia has been finding out recently.

1 hour ago, LTuser said:

To me, that kind of does away with any sort of "formed consent", if one is literally being forced to get it, to work/shop...

It's "informed consent."

IIRC you once advocated for being allowed to have a gun at X-Wing events for reasons of "personal safety." Why would you NOT get a vaccine to protect yourself from unseen threats??

2 hours ago, Mep said:

Australia is much closer to the equator than the US or Europe, which sadly have much longer cold/flu seasons and that season has just begun. So yeah, we will all be able to get vaccinated just in time for summer. Between the vaccinations and that large fusing ball of hydrogen in the sky it's very unlikely Gencon will be unsafe to take place, anymore than any other year, "convention cough" is the norm, but I am not sure they will get the all clear in time. So I doubt Gencon will happen this year.

Means the companies making it should probably look at doing the initial distribution this coming spring and summer south of the equator if they can't get it down there sooner.

2 hours ago, Mep said:

I will say this, please do get vaccinated.

Do we know if the virus in the vaccine is live or not? As someone with Sarcoidosis that is a major concern for me.

39 minutes ago, LTuser said:

Who here feels, companies should be able to mandate their workers get the vaccine? What about shoppers/customers? Should a company/business be able to say "Sorry, but since you have not been vaccinated, you cannot do business with us/enter our store"?

It is their right to do so just as it is your right not to take the vaccine.

8 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:

Do we know if the virus in the vaccine is live or not? As someone with Sarcoidosis that is a major concern for me.

No idea. I do know that the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine that the UK is distributing this week has caused anaphylactoid reactions in a couple of patients, and they are not currently recommending it for people with a history of serious allergic reactions.

Apparently it needs to be stored and transported at ultra cold temperatures of -70C and has a very short viability period when thawed. This means mass vaccination could be a very complex process.

1 hour ago, LTuser said:

Who here feels, companies should be able to mandate their workers get the vaccine? What about shoppers/customers? Should a company/business be able to say "Sorry, but since you have not been vaccinated, you cannot do business with us/enter our store"?

To me, that kind of does away with any sort of "formed consent", if one is literally being forced to get it, to work/shop...

Legal precedent is generally in favour of businesses and individuals being allowed to choose who they employ or serve, aside from certain protected characteristics (gender, race, religion in most contexts etc). I'd imagine that most businesses wouldn't want to mandate staff having to be vaccinated (because that opens up a whole raft of potential legal matters surrounding managing medical data), nor could many shops decline customers (as it would be incredibly difficult to administer, especially if there isn't an official 'proof of vaccination' document).

I suspect the articles you saw were (correctly) pointing out that you *could* be fired for not getting vaccinated, just like you could get fired for exactly no good reason at all.

22 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:

Do we know if the virus in the vaccine is live or not? As someone with Sarcoidosis that is a major concern for me.

Live viral vaccines is 20th century technology and certainly there is legacy vaccines like oral Polio that get used in 3rd world countries, but no, actual live virus is not used in new vaccines anymore. You may hear of adenoviral vaccines but that is not a true virus. While it is adapted from a virus, it does not contain a genome for adenovirus, cannot replicate in any fashion and only has a small part of COVID 19 so you will make antibodies to that small part of that virus. Unless there is contamination, there is nothing "alive" in the vaccines.

Autoimmune conditions are tricky with anything, vaccines included. I don't know what the actual data on these vaccines with sarcoidosis currently stands. Do not go to your corner pharmacy for your vaccine. Go to an actual doctor and remind them of your condition. You may end up getting a recommended vaccine type, there are 3 currently, mRNA which is the one currently out, the adenoviral vector vaccines coming soon and recombinant vaccines, though I am not sure where those stand. Unless you are in a high risk group, such as the sarcoidosis got to your lungs, you may want to wait a bit for that data to come in and for there to be vaccine choices. That should happen in a few months time, so wait a bit means not long.

There may be a dosing problem with those mRNA vaccines, although the anaphylactic issues weren't reported as far as I know in trials, so it could be a thawing/mixing training issue happening in the clinics right now. Those issues can be worked out. Anaphylaxis is a huge concern and I had that issue with my cat when he got his rabies vaccine. However, anaphylaxis is easier to handle than serious case of COVID 19. With that said, getting vaccinated at the grocery store pharmacy isn't the best way to go about it. Go some where with an actual nurse that is good at sticking people and trained to handle the vaccine. I am hoping to get the mRNA vaccine myself but yes, those require very special handling, i.e. training, that is difficult to implement. Most of us will be getting the adenoviral based vaccine.

1 hour ago, LTuser said:

Now, on a linked question, Twice now i've seen news articles saying that "You could be fired, if you refused to get the vaccine at your work, should they mandate you all get it"..

I went through that years ago. The liability insurance wanted all staff that worked with live animals to get a tetanus vaccine. The fact I was working with mice without an immune system, in a sterile environment devoid of rusty nails wasn't relevant. If I wanted to continue working I had to get the shot. I had no issues getting a free tetanus shot I was over due for anyways, it was just absurd it was mandatory because there was no scientific reason to have it done. Complete waste of money that could have been used else where. These types of things happen all the time. The system has a great deal of waste and money grabbers.

Unless legislation is passed that removes liability for COVID infections from businesses, then yes, expect mandatory vaccinations for employment at many places. Their liability insurance will require it.

On 12/11/2020 at 3:42 PM, Bravo Null said:

Anti-vaxxers would go crazy.

Are they not already crazy??

On 12/12/2020 at 7:31 AM, LTuser said:

Now, on a linked question, Twice now i've seen news articles saying that "You could be fired, if you refused to get the vaccine at your work, should they mandate you all get it"..

Who here feels, companies should be able to mandate their workers get the vaccine? What about shoppers/customers? Should a company/business be able to say "Sorry, but since you have not been vaccinated, you cannot do business with us/enter our store"?

To me, that kind of does away with any sort of "formed consent", if one is literally being forced to get it, to work/shop...

Companies have a duty of care for their employees, because they do not subscribe to anti vaxxer psycho babble does not make them wrong. “You” are well within your rights to not get vaccinated, but with that choice goes consequences and responsibilities. As an employee, I would expect my employer to look after my health and as a consequence, my families health.
Some Australian states have a no jab no play policy for their schools. Your child isn’t immunised, you do not get access to daycare, but there are exemptions that can be received. It’s not a hard and fast policy, but the intent is there.

But to your point, one does not have to be forced to do anything, but that would be a consequence of your choices. Personal responsibility seems to be a swear word these days.

This thread is veering way off the topic of X-Wing events.

True dat. Sorry for taking it awol.. So back to conventions.

IF/when they do come back to opening in person gaming, how many here will actually go? Two of my former AD&D group, who dropped out of gaming cause of covid, have said since they get most of their gaming 'fix' now, via Roll 20, they don't think they'll Bother going back to in-person gaming, even WHEN Things 'get back to normal'. I've heard others (via gaming sites), say similar...

32 minutes ago, LTuser said:

Two of my former AD&D group, who dropped out of gaming cause of covid, have said since they get most of their gaming 'fix' now, via Roll 20, they don't think they'll Bother going back to in-person gaming, even WHEN Things 'get back to normal'. I've heard others (via gaming sites), say similar...

For my group, it's GURPS, but yeah, Roll20 is a lifesaver as well as a game changer.

Being truly together is nice, but avoiding 40 minutes of driving each way is certainly a QOL improvement from my end.

I figure we'll probably do 50/50 online vs. basement.

I've not really enjoyed playing X-wing digitally. I know that my FLGS plans to have our regular X-wing night be the first thing it begins running again once the rules allow it in our area (we're a smallish group who they can trust to follow instructions, unlike the Magic players...). I don't expect to get to that point until the vaccine rollout has reached the general public, though. As for RPGs, I'm in two games that have managed the jump to online play, but everyone wants to go back to playing in person. We've been playing together in one form or another for years, so the game nights are just as much about seeing each other than it is the game itself.