- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 5/2/20 at 5:32 pm to Ollieoxenfree99
quote:
Her posts in several threads make MUCH more sense now.
The Austin location and being a Longhorn fan can make it confusing, though.
Posted on 5/2/20 at 5:34 pm to Slingscode
quote:
Not this one.
Why you scared baw?
Posted on 5/2/20 at 5:43 pm to HubbaBubba
Hit up Keneally’s on Shepard in Houston! Man it was good, best car bombs in Texas!
Posted on 5/2/20 at 5:44 pm to bfniii
quote:
and yet another reason why your comment was wrong is the fact that antibody studies are showing a significant number of people have already been infected which affects transmission
How many people infected? Half? If you recall, the study stated that even if half of the populace had been infected, that sunlight (heat and humidity) would “probably not” have any effect on transmission.
If we were at half infected (which we are not), we’d be approaching herd immunity at 60-70 percent infected (that is, if antibodies create any kind of immunity, which no one knows yet).
quote:
first, that doesn't negate the court cases where the eo's lost. you're just making my point for me. second, the cases like the ones you cite can be appealed and still lose.
The Virginia decision you noted was a low-level judge, and it can be appealed, too. That’s why I wrote that lower-level decisions aren’t the end all, be all (keep reading).
quote:
we're not talking about masks. we're talking about forced isolation in defiance of the 1st amendment.
Ok, let’s look at a Fifth Circuit ruling from April (one step below the Supreme Court).
quote:
First, the district court ignored the framework governing emergency public health measures like GA-09. See Jacobson v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905). “[U]nder the pressure of great dangers,” constitutional rights may be reasonably restricted “as the safety of the general public may demand.” Id. at 29. That settled rule allows the state to restrict, for example, one’s right to peaceably assemble, to publicly worship, to travel, and even to leave one’s home.
LINK
Posted on 5/2/20 at 5:44 pm to StrangeBrew
quote:
3 mombo taxi’s
Mi Cocina or Taco Diner?
Posted on 5/2/20 at 5:48 pm to texashorn
quote:
that sunlight (heat and humidity)
Sunlight isn’t heat nor humidity though.
Posted on 5/2/20 at 5:50 pm to beerJeep
Know how I can tell you didn’t read? Because the study’s co-author addressed sunlight, heat and humidity.
Posted on 5/2/20 at 8:22 pm to texashorn
quote:
Know how I can tell you didn’t read? Because the study’s co-author addressed sunlight, heat and humidity.
Then say that.
Don’t say sunlight (heat and humidity).
Not my fault you can’t English good.
Posted on 5/2/20 at 8:23 pm to texashorn
Will your wife’s boyfriend let you leave the house soon?
Posted on 5/2/20 at 8:32 pm to texashorn
quote:again, debatable
even if half of the populace had been infected, that sunlight (heat and humidity) would “probably not” have any effect on transmission
you're trying to pass off debatable info as fact.
quote:yet another aspect you are probably wrong about
If we were at half infected (which we are not)
"A preliminary study by Jayanta Bhattacharya and Eran Bendavid from Stanford University found that between 48,000 to 81,000 people in California’s Santa Clara county had been infected with the Covid-19 virus by early April, a number that was 50 to 85 times the official number of cases."
quote:still making my point for me. i guess you don't even realize it
The Virginia decision you noted was a low-level judge, and it can be appealed, too
you are still on the losing side. it's just a matter of how long before you realize it
Posted on 5/2/20 at 8:44 pm to HubbaBubba
Went to lunch yesterday and dinner this evening in Rockport and it was pretty freaking awesome to be honest, doubling what I normally tip. Rockport is full of people, looks like a normal May weekend.
Posted on 5/2/20 at 9:25 pm to bfniii
Your link never said the study claimed heat and humidity would decrease transmission.
The only part that came close was part that was written by the Post reporters as conjecture.
IF.
Followed by:
This is no different than the other study that I posted.
More:
This does not address the immunity factor, in relation to efficient transmission, especially by comparing it to the flu, for which there IS widespread immunity.
Plus:
Your other link from the Chinese publication about the German study showed that antibody rates were in the teens.
That is nowhere near 50 percent at which the MIT researcher said heat and humidity in sunny conditions would “probably not” have an effect on transmission rates, much less the 60-70 percent required for herd immunity.
This study did claim that antibodies meant immunity, so props to you for that.
However,
I also notice you skipped past the Supreme Court decision (Jacobson v. Massachusetts) and the recent Fifth Circuit decision that referenced the “settled rule” that states can restrict travel, public worship, peaceable assembly and orders to stay home during a public emergency, all in relation to the present pandemic.
How does ignoring that make your point?
The only part that came close was part that was written by the Post reporters as conjecture.
quote:
If the summer months reduce the transmission rates of the virus, that would help officials’ efforts to squelch its spread without resorting to drastic mitigation measures, such as stay-at-home orders, that have had massive economic repercussions.
IF.
Followed by:
quote:
“It would be irresponsible for us to say summer will kill the virus,” Bryan said, calling summer conditions “another tool in toolbox” to use against the virus.
This is no different than the other study that I posted.
More:
quote:
Outside experts contacted by the Washington Post said the results suggest that the coronavirus behaves similarly to the flu in that it is most efficient at spreading during the colder months, when people are indoors and the air is cold and dry.
This does not address the immunity factor, in relation to efficient transmission, especially by comparing it to the flu, for which there IS widespread immunity.
Plus:
quote:
“This is another laboratory study but the interest is what happens in humans — the virus continues to circulate in Singapore in hot and humid conditions, and the precautionary measures in place (keeping surfaces clean and washing hands) that consider surfaces contaminated and a potential source of self-infection by hands touching the face should remain until proven otherwise, because this is [the] best practice in public health,” he said via email.
Your other link from the Chinese publication about the German study showed that antibody rates were in the teens.
That is nowhere near 50 percent at which the MIT researcher said heat and humidity in sunny conditions would “probably not” have an effect on transmission rates, much less the 60-70 percent required for herd immunity.
This study did claim that antibodies meant immunity, so props to you for that.
However,
quote:
But Christian Drosten, a virologist from Charité University Hospital in Berlin, said the lab tests had a “high rate of false positive signals” that could be detecting antibodies against seasonal coronaviruses, and not necessarily infection by Sars-Cov-2. Drosten said he could not draw any conclusions from the study, saying: “There is simply so little explained that you don’t understand everything.”
I also notice you skipped past the Supreme Court decision (Jacobson v. Massachusetts) and the recent Fifth Circuit decision that referenced the “settled rule” that states can restrict travel, public worship, peaceable assembly and orders to stay home during a public emergency, all in relation to the present pandemic.
How does ignoring that make your point?
This post was edited on 5/2/20 at 9:38 pm
Posted on 5/2/20 at 9:33 pm to Nephropidae
quote:
don’t mind people wearing masks. I’m wearing one of the person or place I’m engaging with has them on. Just ready to open this economy back up.
Amen. Don’t hate the mask wearers. Hate the power hungry politicians keeping too much locked down.
Posted on 5/2/20 at 9:43 pm to texashorn
quote:
Without widespread immunity, the heat will have negligible effect on transmission.
You are doing an outstanding job of repeating what you are told and you yourself know absolutely nothing about. Boy I bet they love people like you!
Posted on 5/2/20 at 9:45 pm to Kester5144
No, I’m repeating what I read, not what I feel or think.
Posted on 5/2/20 at 10:09 pm to texashorn
quote:
I’m repeating what I read, not what I think
Exactly. Do as you are told, do not under any circumstances form your own opinion of the situation, and make sure to call out anyone who does have differing thoughts.
Posted on 5/2/20 at 10:10 pm to texashorn
The country is pressing forward and reopening. My advice would be to get the frick over it.
Posted on 5/2/20 at 10:21 pm to Kester5144
It’s a two-way street, sir. It would be childish of me to comment on this board and not expect other people to discuss it, or even take issue with it.
Posted on 5/2/20 at 11:11 pm to texashorn
quote:it's in the freaking title
Your link never said the study claimed heat and humidity would decrease transmission
"White House promotes new lab results suggesting heat and sunlight slow coronavirus"
quote:wrong again
The only part that came close was part that was written by the Post reporters as conjecture
"emerging laboratory evidence on Thursday that suggests the spread of the novel coronavirus may ebb during the summer months, owing to how the virus interacts with ultraviolet light as well as heat and humidity."
it's like you can't read
quote:yes it does. directly. if sunlight and heat do affect the virus on surfaces, transmission will be diminished. it's a direct correlation. this topic is really escaping you
This does not address the immunity factor, in relation to efficient transmission, especially by comparing it to the flu, for which there IS widespread immunity
quote:what in the hell are you talking about. i cited a quote about the stanford/santa clara study. and it's just one of three so far making the same conclusion in the us.
Your other link from the Chinese publication about the German study
quote:it does not have to be for restrictions to start easing. 50% is an arbitrary number
That is nowhere near 50 percent
quote:supreme court rulings are not always accurate nor constitutional and can be overturned with further adjudication
I also notice you skipped past the Supreme Court decision (Jacobson v. Massachusetts) and the recent Fifth Circuit decision that referenced the “settled rule” that states can restrict travel, public worship, peaceable assembly and orders to stay home during a public emergency
so you are still WAY off regarding anything on this topic
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News