Fun with exponents

On 5/28/2020 3:07 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 27 May 2020 21:12:18 -0500, AMuzi wrote:
a quick search gives many results for buying pasticizers.
This seems relevant but I can't view past the 1st paragraph:
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/n...suits-science/

"But plasticizers eventually leach out of plastic as acidic,
corrosive outgassing, and speed plastic breakdown."

The article is interesting, but doesn't explain anything about the
chemistry involved, which plastics are affected, or if anything can be
done to fix the problem or salvage the plastic.

My main interest is in the decomposition of the rubberized paint found
on many computer accessories, laptops, phones, and similar products.
The rubber depolymerizes into a sticky black goo. I suspect this is
intentional where some companies (i.e. Logitech) are using it as a
sales enhancer. (Everything is a conspiracy).

Oddly, various LDPE plastics show fairly low volatiles. See:
NASA Outgassing Materials
https://outgassing.nasa.gov/index.cgi
https://outgassing.nasa.gov/cgi/uncgi/search/search_html.sh
https://outgassing.nasa.gov/help/og_help.html
TML = Total Mass Loss
CVCM = Collected Volatile Condensable Material

I'll dig some more when I have time.

I barely tolerate paywalls. Delete the National Geographic related
cookies from your web browser and hit refresh. That should give you 3
more articles that you can view before the paywall bites you again.
Hmmm... that didn't work too well with the National Geographic
paywall. I get a pop-up for creating an account. After removing the
related cookies, when I hit refresh, the pop-up appears again after 15
seconds. So, I speed read, refresh, speed read, etc. Sigh.





I seem to recall that of the two major plastics groups,
Bakelite and Celluloid don't do that and polyvinyls do.
Unclear on that point, sorry I can't search right now

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 5/28/2020 3:37 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/28/2020 11:37 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/28/2020 10:21 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/27/2020 9:38 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/27/2020 4:36 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/27/2020 2:36 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/27/2020 1:43 PM, wrote:

Only someone in a financially secure position could
ignore
the pain and suffering of people whose source of income
has been cut off...

Only a person who has no friend or family infected or
seriously at risk could ignore the pain and suffering of
those with COVID.

... for no reasons whatsoever.

That's the view of a person with zero qualifications,
despite strong disagreement from qualified experts in
every
country worldwide.


It is not heartless to observe that there is no
correlation between punishment and mortality rates.

There are definitely fatal policy errors (and Mr Cuomo
made more than a few of them. He's not alone.) but
destroying lives, income, businesses, wealth, opportunity
and hope has not meant less death, just more suffering
among the living.

Again, "punishment" is a deliberately loaded word. Things
like social distancing orders and travel restrictions were
intended to protect, not punish.

And again, those measures have worked extremely well in many
places. Look how excellently Hawaii has done! Less than 20
deaths last I looked. Isn't it obvious that can only be due
to the 'stay-at-home' orders?

;-)

That is not at all obvious. New York?? Chicago??

IOW, you mean that despite attempts at protective
regulations, New York and Chicago had lots of cases.

And I mean that because of protective regulations, Hawaii,
Nevada, New Mexico, Maine, Kansas etc. did really well. They
did exceptionally well in their rural areas.

So perhaps we should look at less extreme outliers? Is there
a chance that the regulations did have significant benefit,
but that in super-dense cities other factors contributed to
super-spreading? Perhaps one factor was ignoring the
regulations?

And is there a chance that without those regulations, the
super-spreading would have been far, far worse?

That's what epidemiologists around the world seem to think.


In my county there has been widespread disregard for the "Because I Said
So" rules with almost no fatal events[1].

You could posit that we all enjoy super immune systems but there's so
far no correlation between punishment of the citizenry and positive
outcomes.Â* Again, Japan advised her citizens and then stopped short of
destroying the society, with good results. New York, especially NYC,
tried to micromanage life to the smallest detail with abysmal outcome.

Have you ever tried to tell a New Yorker what to do? Heck, I remember
seeing a photo of a guy from Queens looking at the last solar eclipse
with no eye protection!

My serious point is this: Coronavirus transmission is a multi-variable
problem. You can't say "New York City had lots of cases so its
restrictions did nothing." Population density is almost certainly a
factor. Actual adherence to restrictions or recommendations is almost
certainly another factor - something I'd expect Japanese to do far
better than New Yorkers. Culture may be a factor - the relative
isolation of American suburban life vs. the dense daily multi-generation
contact in many other countries. And there's no telling how bad New York
City might have gotten without restrictions.

Certainly some rules are now considered mistaken for various reasons.
Some were based on then-best knowledge that has now been changed or
improved. (The effect of face masks seems to be one example.) Some rules
were judgment calls based on people's likely responses, but people
responded differently. Some rules still make no sense to me. And yes,
everyone understands the economic hit has been terrible.

But it's only a fringe contingent that's pretending we should have kept
everything running exactly as before. Certainly, all (and I mean ALL)
the people I hang out with are being very cautious. They seem to be in
agreement with the bulk of the world's epidemiologists.

It's interesting to me that I hear only about an American fringe
contingent skeptics; and that they tend to spout rationales plucked from
American right-wing media. Maybe our posters from other countries can
comment on any "resistance" groups in their countries?


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 5/28/2020 4:07 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 27 May 2020 21:12:18 -0500, AMuzi wrote:
a quick search gives many results for buying pasticizers.
This seems relevant but I can't view past the 1st paragraph:
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/n...suits-science/

"But plasticizers eventually leach out of plastic as acidic,
corrosive outgassing, and speed plastic breakdown."

The article is interesting, but doesn't explain anything about the
chemistry involved, which plastics are affected, or if anything can be
done to fix the problem or salvage the plastic.

My main interest is in the decomposition of the rubberized paint found
on many computer accessories, laptops, phones, and similar products.
The rubber depolymerizes into a sticky black goo. I suspect this is
intentional where some companies (i.e. Logitech) are using it as a
sales enhancer. (Everything is a conspiracy).

Oddly, various LDPE plastics show fairly low volatiles. See:
NASA Outgassing Materials
https://outgassing.nasa.gov/index.cgi
https://outgassing.nasa.gov/cgi/uncgi/search/search_html.sh
https://outgassing.nasa.gov/help/og_help.html
TML = Total Mass Loss
CVCM = Collected Volatile Condensable Material

I'll dig some more when I have time.

I barely tolerate paywalls. Delete the National Geographic related
cookies from your web browser and hit refresh. That should give you 3
more articles that you can view before the paywall bites you again.
Hmmm... that didn't work too well with the National Geographic
paywall. I get a pop-up for creating an account. After removing the
related cookies, when I hit refresh, the pop-up appears again after 15
seconds. So, I speed read, refresh, speed read, etc. Sigh.

I find that jumping between different browsers sometimes works,
especially with periodically deleting all cookies.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Wed, 27 May 2020 08:58:39 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...g_policy.html#!

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/04/...commendations/
Fauci first touts Vitamin C and D theropy and then when Trump suggests
it due to hospital evidence that it helps he reverses his own statements.
What else is new?

I suppose it would be futile to point out that literally every magical
cure proposed by anyone so far, have been demonstrated (not proven) to
be anywhere between ineffective and dangerous. I'll leave drinking
Clorox and swallowing UV-C lights as not requiring a demonstration.
Fortunately, such reversals have not stopped researchers from trying
to find suitable drugs:
"15 drugs being tested to treat COVID-19 and how they would work"
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41591-020-00019-9
(May 15, 2020).

Oh, that's right some SOB posting on a bicycle group tells us that
Trump doesn't know what he is talking about and that Fauci who has
sat on his butt for 37 years now is the world's leading expert.

I presume that SOB would be me. I did mention that Dr Fauci is our,
not the worlds, leading expert. I didn't write anything about
President Trump's competence. If you're going to confer the title of
SOB upon me, it would be helpful if you would get your citations
correct.

It's interesting that you fail to appreciate the value of competent
administrators such as Dr Fauci. It's a rare breed that know
something about both medicine and management. I spend some time
fixing computers for various doctors and one local hospital. There
were a fair number of competent doctors who couldn't run their own
private medical practice and were seriously deficient in management
skills. Over the years, most of these doctors have given up and
joined one of the growing medical groups, who provide management
services so that the doctors can practice medicine instead of office
management. If Dr Fauci were replaced by one of these medically
competent doctors, he or she would have been fired for daring to
contradict one of Trump's intuitive pontifications. Instead, Dr Fauci
is a survivor who apparently knows how to get things done, which is
what we need.

Compare Dr Redfield of the CDC with Dr Fauci of the NIAID. Who would
you rather have running thing?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ujv0VsJVPao (2:21)
(Mar 12, 2020)

"5 Times Trump Praised Dr. Fauci Before Retweeting That He Should Be
Fired"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMCewml44m4 (1:53)


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Thu, 28 May 2020 14:37:04 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/28/2020 11:37 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/28/2020 10:21 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/27/2020 9:38 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/27/2020 4:36 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/27/2020 2:36 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/27/2020 1:43 PM, wrote:

Only someone in a financially secure position could
ignore
the pain and suffering of people whose source of income
has been cut off...

Only a person who has no friend or family infected or
seriously at risk could ignore the pain and suffering of
those with COVID.

... for no reasons whatsoever.

That's the view of a person with zero qualifications,
despite strong disagreement from qualified experts in
every
country worldwide.


It is not heartless to observe that there is no
correlation between punishment and mortality rates.

There are definitely fatal policy errors (and Mr Cuomo
made more than a few of them. He's not alone.) but
destroying lives, income, businesses, wealth, opportunity
and hope has not meant less death, just more suffering
among the living.

Again, "punishment" is a deliberately loaded word. Things
like social distancing orders and travel restrictions were
intended to protect, not punish.

And again, those measures have worked extremely well in many
places. Look how excellently Hawaii has done! Less than 20
deaths last I looked. Isn't it obvious that can only be due
to the 'stay-at-home' orders?

;-)

That is not at all obvious. New York?? Chicago??

IOW, you mean that despite attempts at protective
regulations, New York and Chicago had lots of cases.

And I mean that because of protective regulations, Hawaii,
Nevada, New Mexico, Maine, Kansas etc. did really well. They
did exceptionally well in their rural areas.

So perhaps we should look at less extreme outliers? Is there
a chance that the regulations did have significant benefit,
but that in super-dense cities other factors contributed to
super-spreading? Perhaps one factor was ignoring the
regulations?

And is there a chance that without those regulations, the
super-spreading would have been far, far worse?

That's what epidemiologists around the world seem to think.


In my county there has been widespread disregard for the
"Because I Said So" rules with almost no fatal events[1].

You could posit that we all enjoy super immune systems but
there's so far no correlation between punishment of the
citizenry and positive outcomes. Again, Japan advised her
citizens and then stopped short of destroying the society,
with good results. New York, especially NYC, tried to
micromanage life to the smallest detail with abysmal outcome.


You keep saying that but just it isn't really true. There is even a
wiki page listing the Japanese response on a practically day by day
basis.

But no, they didn't impose draconian regulations on their people they
simply told them what to do and the Japanese being Japanese did what
they were told to do. As opposed to the U.S. approach that "I'm going
to do just as I damned please no matter what you tell me to do".

There really are "different strokes for different folks".

[1]One death on 29 March in an elder care facility, none since.
--
cheers,

John B.

On Thursday, May 28, 2020 at 4:02:12 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 28 May 2020 14:37:04 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/28/2020 11:37 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/28/2020 10:21 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/27/2020 9:38 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/27/2020 4:36 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/27/2020 2:36 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/27/2020 1:43 PM, wrote:

Only someone in a financially secure position could
ignore
the pain and suffering of people whose source of income
has been cut off...

Only a person who has no friend or family infected or
seriously at risk could ignore the pain and suffering of
those with COVID.

... for no reasons whatsoever.

That's the view of a person with zero qualifications,
despite strong disagreement from qualified experts in
every
country worldwide.


It is not heartless to observe that there is no
correlation between punishment and mortality rates.

There are definitely fatal policy errors (and Mr Cuomo
made more than a few of them. He's not alone.) but
destroying lives, income, businesses, wealth, opportunity
and hope has not meant less death, just more suffering
among the living.

Again, "punishment" is a deliberately loaded word. Things
like social distancing orders and travel restrictions were
intended to protect, not punish.

And again, those measures have worked extremely well in many
places. Look how excellently Hawaii has done! Less than 20
deaths last I looked. Isn't it obvious that can only be due
to the 'stay-at-home' orders?

;-)

That is not at all obvious. New York?? Chicago??

IOW, you mean that despite attempts at protective
regulations, New York and Chicago had lots of cases.

And I mean that because of protective regulations, Hawaii,
Nevada, New Mexico, Maine, Kansas etc. did really well. They
did exceptionally well in their rural areas.

So perhaps we should look at less extreme outliers? Is there
a chance that the regulations did have significant benefit,
but that in super-dense cities other factors contributed to
super-spreading? Perhaps one factor was ignoring the
regulations?

And is there a chance that without those regulations, the
super-spreading would have been far, far worse?

That's what epidemiologists around the world seem to think.


In my county there has been widespread disregard for the
"Because I Said So" rules with almost no fatal events[1].

You could posit that we all enjoy super immune systems but
there's so far no correlation between punishment of the
citizenry and positive outcomes. Again, Japan advised her
citizens and then stopped short of destroying the society,
with good results. New York, especially NYC, tried to
micromanage life to the smallest detail with abysmal outcome.


You keep saying that but just it isn't really true. There is even a
wiki page listing the Japanese response on a practically day by day
basis.

But no, they didn't impose draconian regulations on their people they
simply told them what to do and the Japanese being Japanese did what
they were told to do. As opposed to the U.S. approach that "I'm going
to do just as I damned please no matter what you tell me to do".

There really are "different strokes for different folks".

[1]One death on 29 March in an elder care facility, none since.


"I woke up in a free country!" [as told to fascist Costco employee]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1xCJa-qltY

Say goodbye to the cheap paper towels. Its the price of liberty!

BTW, you didn't wake up in a free Costco. Try getting in without your membership card.


-- Jay Beattie.

On 5/28/2020 6:46 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, May 28, 2020 at 4:02:12 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 28 May 2020 14:37:04 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/28/2020 11:37 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/28/2020 10:21 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/27/2020 9:38 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/27/2020 4:36 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/27/2020 2:36 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/27/2020 1:43 PM, wrote:

Only someone in a financially secure position could
ignore
the pain and suffering of people whose source of income
has been cut off...

Only a person who has no friend or family infected or
seriously at risk could ignore the pain and suffering of
those with COVID.

... for no reasons whatsoever.

That's the view of a person with zero qualifications,
despite strong disagreement from qualified experts in
every
country worldwide.


It is not heartless to observe that there is no
correlation between punishment and mortality rates.

There are definitely fatal policy errors (and Mr Cuomo
made more than a few of them. He's not alone.) but
destroying lives, income, businesses, wealth, opportunity
and hope has not meant less death, just more suffering
among the living.

Again, "punishment" is a deliberately loaded word. Things
like social distancing orders and travel restrictions were
intended to protect, not punish.

And again, those measures have worked extremely well in many
places. Look how excellently Hawaii has done! Less than 20
deaths last I looked. Isn't it obvious that can only be due
to the 'stay-at-home' orders?

;-)

That is not at all obvious. New York?? Chicago??

IOW, you mean that despite attempts at protective
regulations, New York and Chicago had lots of cases.

And I mean that because of protective regulations, Hawaii,
Nevada, New Mexico, Maine, Kansas etc. did really well. They
did exceptionally well in their rural areas.

So perhaps we should look at less extreme outliers? Is there
a chance that the regulations did have significant benefit,
but that in super-dense cities other factors contributed to
super-spreading? Perhaps one factor was ignoring the
regulations?

And is there a chance that without those regulations, the
super-spreading would have been far, far worse?

That's what epidemiologists around the world seem to think.


In my county there has been widespread disregard for the
"Because I Said So" rules with almost no fatal events[1].

You could posit that we all enjoy super immune systems but
there's so far no correlation between punishment of the
citizenry and positive outcomes. Again, Japan advised her
citizens and then stopped short of destroying the society,
with good results. New York, especially NYC, tried to
micromanage life to the smallest detail with abysmal outcome.


You keep saying that but just it isn't really true. There is even a
wiki page listing the Japanese response on a practically day by day
basis.

But no, they didn't impose draconian regulations on their people they
simply told them what to do and the Japanese being Japanese did what
they were told to do. As opposed to the U.S. approach that "I'm going
to do just as I damned please no matter what you tell me to do".

There really are "different strokes for different folks".

[1]One death on 29 March in an elder care facility, none since.


"I woke up in a free country!" [as told to fascist Costco employee]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1xCJa-qltY

Say goodbye to the cheap paper towels. Its the price of liberty!

BTW, you didn't wake up in a free Costco. Try getting in without your membership card.


-- Jay Beattie.



At the diner where I take my morning coffee there's the
occasional person with a mask but those are rare. I
otherwise haven't seen them except driving, where some
people drive on the Interstate with a mask, alone in their
own car. Weird.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 5/28/2020 3:07 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 27 May 2020 21:12:18 -0500, AMuzi wrote:
a quick search gives many results for buying pasticizers.
This seems relevant but I can't view past the 1st paragraph:
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/n...suits-science/

"But plasticizers eventually leach out of plastic as acidic,
corrosive outgassing, and speed plastic breakdown."

The article is interesting, but doesn't explain anything about the
chemistry involved, which plastics are affected, or if anything can be
done to fix the problem or salvage the plastic.

My main interest is in the decomposition of the rubberized paint found
on many computer accessories, laptops, phones, and similar products.
The rubber depolymerizes into a sticky black goo. I suspect this is
intentional where some companies (i.e. Logitech) are using it as a
sales enhancer. (Everything is a conspiracy).

Oddly, various LDPE plastics show fairly low volatiles. See:
NASA Outgassing Materials
https://outgassing.nasa.gov/index.cgi
https://outgassing.nasa.gov/cgi/uncgi/search/search_html.sh
https://outgassing.nasa.gov/help/og_help.html
TML = Total Mass Loss
CVCM = Collected Volatile Condensable Material

I'll dig some more when I have time.

I barely tolerate paywalls. Delete the National Geographic related
cookies from your web browser and hit refresh. That should give you 3
more articles that you can view before the paywall bites you again.
Hmmm... that didn't work too well with the National Geographic
paywall. I get a pop-up for creating an account. After removing the
related cookies, when I hit refresh, the pop-up appears again after 15
seconds. So, I speed read, refresh, speed read, etc. Sigh.





A bit of Internet wandering shows the groups I could not
remember are thermoplatic and thermoset, the latter being
generally less volatile. There's a NASA paper on outgassing
tests in vacuum for materials used in outer space. Also,
some indication that both thermoplastic urethanes and
thermoset urethanes can have low volatility. It's not such a
bright line between groups as I thought.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Thu, 28 May 2020 16:44:29 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 5/28/2020 3:37 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/28/2020 11:37 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/28/2020 10:21 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/27/2020 9:38 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/27/2020 4:36 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/27/2020 2:36 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/27/2020 1:43 PM, wrote:

Only someone in a financially secure position could
ignore
the pain and suffering of people whose source of income
has been cut off...

Only a person who has no friend or family infected or
seriously at risk could ignore the pain and suffering of
those with COVID.

... for no reasons whatsoever.

That's the view of a person with zero qualifications,
despite strong disagreement from qualified experts in
every
country worldwide.


It is not heartless to observe that there is no
correlation between punishment and mortality rates.

There are definitely fatal policy errors (and Mr Cuomo
made more than a few of them. He's not alone.) but
destroying lives, income, businesses, wealth, opportunity
and hope has not meant less death, just more suffering
among the living.

Again, "punishment" is a deliberately loaded word. Things
like social distancing orders and travel restrictions were
intended to protect, not punish.

And again, those measures have worked extremely well in many
places. Look how excellently Hawaii has done! Less than 20
deaths last I looked. Isn't it obvious that can only be due
to the 'stay-at-home' orders?

;-)

That is not at all obvious. New York?? Chicago??

IOW, you mean that despite attempts at protective
regulations, New York and Chicago had lots of cases.

And I mean that because of protective regulations, Hawaii,
Nevada, New Mexico, Maine, Kansas etc. did really well. They
did exceptionally well in their rural areas.

So perhaps we should look at less extreme outliers? Is there
a chance that the regulations did have significant benefit,
but that in super-dense cities other factors contributed to
super-spreading? Perhaps one factor was ignoring the
regulations?

And is there a chance that without those regulations, the
super-spreading would have been far, far worse?

That's what epidemiologists around the world seem to think.


In my county there has been widespread disregard for the "Because I Said
So" rules with almost no fatal events[1].

You could posit that we all enjoy super immune systems but there's so
far no correlation between punishment of the citizenry and positive
outcomes.* Again, Japan advised her citizens and then stopped short of
destroying the society, with good results. New York, especially NYC,
tried to micromanage life to the smallest detail with abysmal outcome.

Have you ever tried to tell a New Yorker what to do? Heck, I remember
seeing a photo of a guy from Queens looking at the last solar eclipse
with no eye protection!

My serious point is this: Coronavirus transmission is a multi-variable
problem. You can't say "New York City had lots of cases so its
restrictions did nothing." Population density is almost certainly a
factor. Actual adherence to restrictions or recommendations is almost
certainly another factor - something I'd expect Japanese to do far
better than New Yorkers. Culture may be a factor - the relative
isolation of American suburban life vs. the dense daily multi-generation
contact in many other countries. And there's no telling how bad New York
City might have gotten without restrictions.

Certainly some rules are now considered mistaken for various reasons.
Some were based on then-best knowledge that has now been changed or
improved. (The effect of face masks seems to be one example.) Some rules
were judgment calls based on people's likely responses, but people
responded differently. Some rules still make no sense to me. And yes,
everyone understands the economic hit has been terrible.

But it's only a fringe contingent that's pretending we should have kept
everything running exactly as before. Certainly, all (and I mean ALL)
the people I hang out with are being very cautious. They seem to be in
agreement with the bulk of the world's epidemiologists.

It's interesting to me that I hear only about an American fringe
contingent skeptics; and that they tend to spout rationales plucked from
American right-wing media. Maybe our posters from other countries can
comment on any "resistance" groups in their countries?

Well here the government imposed rather strict rules as "emergency
regulations", The closed the borders, some provinces even closed their
borders, set up over 500 police checks on highways to control travel,
closed all shops and businesses except those selling food and
medicines, banned all gatherings, outlawed alcohol beverages (Thais
like to get together over a few beers), imposed a curfew, and imposed
and enforced penalties such as 10,000 baht fines - minimum salary is
300 baht per day - and/or two months in jail, for disobeying the
emergency regulations.

As of the 15th of the month some of the regulations were relaxed, all
shops and stores are now open, alcohol is sold, and the hours of the
curfew relaxed. But, all of the larger malls and stores still require
face masks and a temperature check before allowing you to enter and
social distancing is the norm.

A week or so ago one of the major "newspapers" conducted a survey and
approximately 75% of those surveyed agreed with the government's acts.

As an aside, color coordinated face masks are now quite the rage among
the fairer sex :-) I bought my wife several but she complained that
they didn't match her dresses :-(
--
cheers,

John B.

On Thu, 28 May 2020 15:40:36 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/28/2020 3:00 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
AMuzi writes:

On 5/27/2020 7:21 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 27 May 2020 11:42:30 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/27/2020 11:29 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/27/2020 11:42 AM, wrote:
On Tuesday, May 26, 2020 at 7:17:19 PM UTC-7, Jeff
Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 26 May 2020 15:18:53 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Tuesday, May 26, 2020 at 10:46:36 AM UTC-7, Jeff
Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 26 May 2020 08:30:38 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

I have a very low respect for doctors because so few
of them
want to be competent. Top of the list in that category
is Dr. Fauci
of the CDC who has continually acted an expert at
things he knows
very little about.

Dr Fauci has been director of the NIAID (National
Institute of Allergy
and Infectious Diseases) since 1984. He does NOT work
for the CDC.
NIAID is part of the NIH (National Institute of
Health). He's has
been involved with controlling several previous
epidemics, which I
presume qualifies as experience:
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/anthony-s-fauci-md-bio
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/director
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/niaid-history

Can you provide the name of someone in the US who is
better qualified
to discuss pandemics than Dr Fauci?

There is a place for those who sit around, think and
read papers.
I do not deny Fauci that much. But he is not working in
the real world
as many other epidemiologists are and they often
interview them on
FOX and they ALL say what I've been saying. There isn't
much you can
do about a pandemic with a linear growth rate.

I see. You want to be advised on how to protect yourself
from a viral
epidemic by an epidemiologist via Fox News. I don't
think that's what
you intended to say, but that's what you wrote. You also
seem to have
changed your position on Dr Fauci from:

"Dr. Fauci of the CDC(sic) who has continually acted an
expert at things he knows very little about."

to:

"I do not deny Fauci that much."

That's quite a change from calling the leading expert on
infectious
diseases in the US an incompetent, to not denying him
something you
didn't bother to specify. Of course, you're entitled to
have an
opinion about anyone and anything, but I'm also entitled
to discount
your opinion as rubbish. Anyway, kindly stabilize your
opinion about
Dr Fauci. If it's critical, please provide the name of
someone in the
US that is equally or more qualified to advise on how to
handle a
pandemic. Incidentally, I could probably provide some
names in China
that are substantially more qualified and equally
experienced, but
such experts would not be considered as candidates for
advising our
president, who knows more than any or all of them,
Here's one
candidate that might have qualified had he not resigned
for having is
bureau eliminated by the Trump administration:
"A top pandemic expert is leaving the Trump
administration amid the
coronavirus crisis"
https://www.businessinsider.com/top-pandemic-expert-leaving-the-trump-administration-amid-coronavirus-2020-5



No bicycle related content this time. Sorry(tm).

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

The leading expert? Jeff, that is about the most foolish
thing that you could say. Fauci is NOT an expert. Sitting
around in hallowed halls of government does NOT make you
an expert. The epidemiologists in the field say the
opposite and that you like some sort of moron deny that
they know anything for the simple reason that they are
interviewed on FOX shows that you are nothing more than
some stupid biased punk.

Your homework, Tom:

!) Find or assemble a CV for Dr. Anthony Fauci. I say that
because you obviously know very, very little about him.

2) Find or assemble a CV for the guy you allude to whom Faux
News managed to dig up.

Analyze and compare those to prove to us that your guy with
his predictable complaints is more qualified than Fauci.

We'll even give bonus points for a little more work:

3) Give us your own CV. Show us why we should listen to your
opinions on epidemiology... and history, genetics, theology,
ballistics, human anatomy, politics, engineering, medicine,
sociology, geology, meteorology, technology, etc. You know -
all the other things about which you, as a high school
dropout, claim to be much smarter than hundreds of trained,
experienced, and recognized experts.


Fauci is probably a successful agency administrator and
political survivor who knows something but surely not
everything. Dr John Ionnidis who's no slouch in the area has
different opinions but gets no media traction:

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...ge-establishm/

And yet, countries that did institute a lock down, in a timely manner,
have noticeably lower cases and deaths.
(please note the phrase "timely manner")


Italy did and lost many. Japan did not and lost few.
Sweden is not out of line to her neighbors and yet still has some GDP
remaining.

There's no correlation. You can imply one as you will but it's not
clear at all that such relationship exists.

You might like this article from the Financial Times:

https://www.ft.com/content/6b4c784e-...2-648ffde71bf0

They show excess mortality statistics for countries where they are
available, and plot versus infections per million on "lockdown day". In
the absence of a legal lockdown, they use the day when transit usage
fell to 50% of pre-pandemic levels. It's not clear to me how comparable
the "infections per million" figures are, given the wide variation of
testing capabilities over space and time.

They claim to find a correlation between early lockdown and lower excess
deaths, but their points are very widely scattered.

Spain comes off worst in excess mortality, followed by the UK, and then
Italy.

Food for thought:
https://www.ft.com/content/6b4c784e-...2-648ffde71bf0


Regarding testing, I read a report yesterday interviewing
RNs who have tested both positive and negative on different
days, back and forth, for weeks.

I don't know but I'm reasonably certain that any conclusion
based on large population testing is inaccurate.

BTW I'm not disagreeing with you generally, just stopping
short of accepting ratios dependent on current testing.

I have read several news articles stating that some of the testing
does not give accurate results.
https://www.healthline.com/health-ne...u-have-illness
https://abc7.com/covid-19-coronaviru...-core/6112137/
https://www.11alive.com/article/news...4-2297526c0cc0
--
cheers,

John B.