If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Here is a taped interview of Robert Byrd as an elderly statesman continuing to use the N word. He clearly did not change his ultra racist mindset from his youth.
Using the N-word, especially in the context that he used it, is a minor blip compared to all that he did in favor of race relations when he was in the Senate.
If we are going to hold to account everyone for everything they did in their youth, then Donald Trump should never have been President because of what he did to American workers and businesspeople with his 4 bankruptcies, putting many of them right out of business. And that's not to mention Trump's own racist acts during his younger years also (refusing to allow black tenants in his condos, as just one example).
But anyway, the main point here is that Hillary and Joe Biden were not so stupid (as Vlad implies) to praise Byrd for his youthful days of organizing for the KKK. I hope you are able to agree that Vlad was way out of line and disrespectful to his readers here to make that suggestion. Not only that, but Vlad is hypocritical to be supporting Trump knowing Trumps own racist past and then turning around and criticizing Biden for praising Byrd.
My original degree was in Molecular Biology so I would like to comment on these statistics. In the United States and Canada they use the Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to detect viral load.
This involves taking a small RNA sample and amplifying it to see if you have any viral RNA in your system. If you have a large viral load normally you go through 30 cycles of amplification to detect this and that has been the international standard for decades as per Oxford Professor Dr. Carl Heneghan editor of the prestigious British Medical Journal (BMJ)
Keep in mind that for each amplification cycle you double the amount of viral RNA from the previous cycle. So effectively it is an exponential scale of amplification. Currently the FDA and CDC guidelines for PCR amplification cycles is 47. Health Canada goes by CDC standards. At 47 cycles compared to 30 even the slightest trace of non infectious dead attenuated viral particles will leave behind traces of viral RNA.
So we are seeing millions of false positives being counted. Asymptomatic carriers of viral RNA do not spread COVID as per Dr. Fauci himself. Counting people who have been infected but their Tcells took care of it and they have traces of dead viral particles is completely irrelevant.
Effectively we do not need lockdowns or masks and the basis to do this is not based on science. The statistics you are quoting are meaningless. Detecting a true positive is done using an amplification rate of 30, not 47.
In Canada recently the number of new COVID Deaths recently is nill despite rising "cases". The PCR tests that are overly sensitive is the reason for this.
Not quite true Sid. Your last line - deaths recently is nill, actually well over a 100 in the last month. Deaths are the only final statistic, everything else can only be used as guidelines. Having said that, I am not debating or trying to educate, my posts are only a timeline which I can use for reference later so as not to have to look up thousands of statistics or graphs. That way this thread has some use to me.
So we are seeing millions of false positives being counted. Asymptomatic carriers of viral RNA do not spread COVID as per Dr. Fauci himself. Counting people who have been infected but their Tcells took care of it and they have traces of dead viral particles is completely irrelevant.
Effectively we do not need lockdowns or masks and the basis to do this is not based on science. The statistics you are quoting are meaningless. Detecting a true positive is done using an amplification rate of 30, not 47.
...
And now it appears that the head of the CDC, Dr. Robert Redfield, a Trump lickspittle, is disagreeing with you (and Trump) with respect to the efficacy of masks. Is the sun setting in the east?
Last edited by Peter McKillop; Wednesday, 16th September, 2020, 06:51 PM.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
When Trump lies like this, it shows a particular cunning genius, imo. His lie was easily disproven, but in getting "caught" the press writes an article with things like:
"Trump visited in 1999, when he was flirting with a run for president on the Reform party ticket. He was given gifts, if not awards: a brigade pin and, the Associated Press reported, “a plaque of the shoulder patch worn during the invasion”."
and
"Trump visited the museum again in October 2016, receiving “a hand-painted Brigade 2506 shield” which his campaign insisted on Sunday was the award in question.
Receiving the endorsement of the Bay of Pigs Veterans Association, Trump said: “You were fighting for the values of freedom and liberty that unite us all. The same values that are at stake in our election.”"
If you're a casual reader, what can you conclude? Trump paid attention to this group from as far back as 20 years ago. He also received the endorsement of a Veterans Association last election. Much better than an endorsement from Richard Spencer or David Duke if you want to garner votes. Further, the article goes on to mention Sanders as a Castro-lover, something which I should imagine isn't exactly popular amongst veterans of the Bay of Pigs nor Florida's former Cuban population who risked their lives to leave the place.
All politicians lie. Trump, however, mostly lies in a way that creates articles like this one. For better or worse, I don't know of any other politician who uses the press like this.
Yes, I read the article too and found it highly amusing. When someone is being presented with an award, isn't it usually crystal clear what is happening? There are prior arrangements to be made, speeches to be given, media coverage, etc. How did Trump manage to blow this, to misconstrue totally what was happening? Like you, Tom, and others, I've wondered if Trump has a media manipulation super power. Maybe he's a very strange idiot savant with the ability to manipulate the media to his advantage but a total doofus in other matters.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
- Asks why Biden, who isn't the president, didn't implement a national mask mandate
- When asked who thinks masks aren't good, he brings up a random story of waiters he saw touching their masks (he doesn't actually answer the question)
- Brings up what Fauci said 6 months ago
- Says that "all of a sudden they want to wear masks" as though our understanding of the spread of the virus is the same as it was in February (one of the reasons why Fauci told people not to wear masks at the time was also because of concerns of a shortage, which Trump always neglects to mention)
- Doesn't actually answer the original question except to say that masks are good in concept but you're constantly "touching it, you're touching your face, you're touching plates"
- Reiterates that there are people who think that masks aren't good, even though he never answered who these people are
Like you, Tom, and others, I've wondered if Trump has a media manipulation super power. Maybe he's a very strange idiot savant with the ability to manipulate the media to his advantage but a total doofus in other matters.
I have a theory about this, Peter. Most of us send out tells when we tell a lie. We all like to think we can detect these tells and thus can guard against confidence men and scammers. But all evidence to the contrary, the con men and scams continue. Trump, with no conscience, no sense of right or wrong, unable to distinguish between reality and fiction, no soul, no compassion, no empathy, thus can lie without sending out the normal signals. This makes him the super con man and manipulator.
Deaths are the only final statistic, everything else can only be used as guidelines. Having said that, I am not debating or trying to educate, my posts are only a timeline which I can use for reference later so as not to have to look up thousands of statistics or graphs.
The long term effects shall be not discounted. Some of them might lead to future deaths but they might attributed to other causes.
Sid, when you say "millions of false positives" are you referring just to USA and Canada? If there are millions of false positives, regardless of whether you're talking Can/USA or worldwide, then doesn't this imply that covid-19 is more lethal than has previously been suggested? Also, as a layperson, I find your use of the term 'false positive' confusing. If someone had covid-19 but beat it, asymptomatically, with their own immune system, then why shouldn't they still be counted? If you have/had it then you have/had it, right? And shouldn't these so-called false positives be of interest to the scientific community? If you had it and you beat it without a lot of fuss, wouldn't it be good to know why? How does a less rigorous testing regime help us?
"Sid, when you say "millions of false positives" are you referring just to USA and Canada?"
Yes that is correct.
"If there are millions of false positives, regardless of whether you're talking Can/USA or worldwide, then doesn't this imply that covid-19 is more lethal than has previously been suggested?"
The lethality of a virus is inversely proportional to its viability. A virus such as Ebola does not last very long as it runs out of hosts to infect as they are all dead. The common cold virus however, spreads and infects many as it is not lethal and therefore does not run out of hosts to infect. COVID19 has already mutated and evolved to a weaker strain that although more infectious is not nearly as lethal as what was originally seen the first quarter of the year.
"Also, as a layperson, I find your use of the term 'false positive' confusing. If someone had covid-19 but beat it, asymptomatically, with their own immune system, then why shouldn't they still be counted?"
That is very easy, the number of "cases" rate is a completely different matter than the number of infections.. Here is an article in the BMJ that should help clarify this for you.
"If someone had covid-19 but beat it, asymptomatically, with their own immune system, then why shouldn't they still be counted? If you have/had it then you have/had it, right? And shouldn't these so-called false positives be of interest to the scientific community? If you had it and you beat it without a lot of fuss, wouldn't it be good to know why? How does a less rigorous testing regime help us"
The idea is to track actual symptomatic cases that spread the virus. tracking both asymptomatic and symptomatic cases serves no useful purpose as the data we need to make life and death policy decisions such as lockdowns is only useful when we have data that shows us the case rate and not the infection rate that hides the actual case rate.
Using the N-word, especially in the context that he used it, is a minor blip compared to all that he did in favor of race relations when he was in the Senate.
If we are going to hold to account everyone for everything they did in their youth, then Donald Trump should never have been President because of what he did to American workers and businesspeople with his 4 bankruptcies, putting many of them right out of business. And that's not to mention Trump's own racist acts during his younger years also (refusing to allow black tenants in his condos, as just one example).
But anyway, the main point here is that Hillary and Joe Biden were not so stupid (as Vlad implies) to praise Byrd for his youthful days of organizing for the KKK. I hope you are able to agree that Vlad was way out of line and disrespectful to his readers here to make that suggestion. Not only that, but Vlad is hypocritical to be supporting Trump knowing Trumps own racist past and then turning around and criticizing Biden for praising Byrd.
"compared to all that he did in favor of race relations when he was in the Senate."
He almost derailed the historic 1964 Civil rights bill via filibustering. The man was a racist in his youth, middle age and old age. A truly vile human being.
Not quite true Sid. Your last line - deaths recently is nill, actually well over a 100 in the last month. Deaths are the only final statistic, everything else can only be used as guidelines. Having said that, I am not debating or trying to educate, my posts are only a timeline which I can use for reference later so as not to have to look up thousands of statistics or graphs. That way this thread has some use to me.
"Not quite true Sid. Your last line - deaths recently is nill, actually well over a 100 in the last month."
Last week Canada had its first 24 hour period of zero deaths since March 15th and continues to trend lower and lower.
For reasons explained in my original post the data you are now tracking is utterly meaningless.
And now it appears that the head of the CDC, Dr. Robert Redfield, a Trump lickspittle, is disagreeing with you (and Trump) with respect to the efficacy of masks. Is the sun setting in the east?
As I already explained asymptomatic carriers do not spread the virus. This has been the position of both Dr. Fauci and the WHO. Mask are of zero use at this point. In any event 42 peer reviewed studies on the efficacy of masks in preventing the spread of a viral infection (not bacterial) shows they are not effective.
Question “should you wear a mask if your healthy?? REDFIELD “NO!!”
As I already explained asymptomatic carriers do not spread the virus. This has been the position of both Dr. Fauci and the WHO. Mask are of zero use at this point. In any event 42 peer reviewed studies on the efficacy of masks in preventing the spread of a viral infection (not bacterial) shows they are not effective.
Question “should you wear a mask if your healthy?? REDFIELD “NO!!”
Not only are you for some reason citing something Fauci said in January, but you're completely misrepresenting it: he didn't say that asymptomatic transmission doesn't exist; he said that it's never been the DRIVER of outbreaks. Even the WHO link said that it does happen, although it's rare, and Fauci disagreed with that: “And we know from epidemiological studies they can transmit to someone who is uninfected even when they’re without symptoms. So to make a statement to say that’s a rare event was not correct.”
A WHO official clarified shortly after your link that, "Scientists have not determined yet how frequently people with asymptomatic cases of Covid-19 pass the disease on to other." From a briefing in July: "Multiple studies have shown that people infect others before they themselves became ill," and, "Transmission can also occur from people who are infected and remain asymptomatic, but the extent to which this occurs is not fully understood and requires further research as an urgent priority."
Here are 3 meta-analyses/systematic reviews published since June that support the effectiveness of masks:
Oh, and here's a quote from Redfield today: "I might even go so far as to say that this face mask is more guaranteed to protect me against Covid than when I take a Covid vaccine, because the immunogenicity may be 70%. And if I don't get an immune response, the vaccine is not going to protect me. This face mask will." He also said that masks are "the most important, powerful public health tool we have.” You can post all the old quotes you want; everyone you cited currently disagrees with you.
Not only are you for some reason citing something Fauci said in January, but you're completely misrepresenting it: he didn't say that asymptomatic transmission doesn't exist; he said that it's never been the DRIVER of outbreaks. Even the WHO link said that it does happen, although it's rare, and Fauci disagreed with that: “And we know from epidemiological studies they can transmit to someone who is uninfected even when they’re without symptoms. So to make a statement to say that’s a rare event was not correct.”
A WHO official clarified shortly after your link that, "Scientists have not determined yet how frequently people with asymptomatic cases of Covid-19 pass the disease on to other." From a briefing in July: "Multiple studies have shown that people infect others before they themselves became ill," and, "Transmission can also occur from people who are infected and remain asymptomatic, but the extent to which this occurs is not fully understood and requires further research as an urgent priority."
Here are 3 meta-analyses/systematic reviews published since June that support the effectiveness of masks:
"A WHO official clarified shortly after your link that, "Scientists have not determined yet how frequently people with asymptomatic cases of Covid-19 pass the disease on to other."
Yes, they backpedalled. This is the same organization controlled by the Chinese communist party that completely misled the world about the COVID19 since December of last year. The same for Dr . Fauci who has been inconsistent on many issues from the start including masks. So, your argument is irrelevant. My point is that these organizations took scientific fact that has been accepted for decades regarding airborne viruses and backpedaled when the circumstances suited their narrative without providing any additional or new data that would change this.
Redfield clearly stated that healthy people should not wear masks. Not sure why that bothers you.
Asymptomatic people do not spread the virus. In any event most of the cases being detected today are for people with trace amounts of dead viral RNA particles and they do not spread the virus period.
Bottom line as per Dr Redfield if you are healthy you do not need to put a mask on.
As for three papers you cited all of them effectively stated the following "additional evidence is required to better clarify the effectiveness of masks or face coverings in various circumstances" including RCT's.
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Wednesday, 16th September, 2020, 11:49 PM.
... Asymptomatic people do not spread the virus. .
Seriously Sid ? I have not seen anything that supports that. Would you be willing to spend a few hours in a small room with a group of asymptomatic people, and be 100% confident you will not contract the virus ?
Not only are you for some reason citing something Fauci said in January, but you're completely misrepresenting it: he didn't say that asymptomatic transmission doesn't exist; he said that it's never been the DRIVER of outbreaks. Even the WHO link said that it does happen, although it's rare, and Fauci disagreed with that: “And we know from epidemiological studies they can transmit to someone who is uninfected even when they’re without symptoms. So to make a statement to say that’s a rare event was not correct.”
A WHO official clarified shortly after your link that, "Scientists have not determined yet how frequently people with asymptomatic cases of Covid-19 pass the disease on to other." From a briefing in July: "Multiple studies have shown that people infect others before they themselves became ill," and, "Transmission can also occur from people who are infected and remain asymptomatic, but the extent to which this occurs is not fully understood and requires further research as an urgent priority."
Here are 3 meta-analyses/systematic reviews published since June that support the effectiveness of masks:
"A WHO official clarified shortly after your link that, "Scientists have not determined yet how frequently people with asymptomatic cases of Covid-19 pass the disease on to other."
Yes, they backpedalled. This is the same organization controlled by the Chinese communist party that completely misled the world about the COVID19 since December of last year. The same for Dr . Fauci who has been inconsistent on many issues from the start including masks. So, your argument is irrelevant. My point is that these organizations took scientific fact that has been accepted for decades regarding airborne viruses and backpedaled when the circumstances suited their narrative without providing any additional or new data that would change this.
Redfield clearly stated that healthy people should not wear masks. Not sure why that bothers you.
Asymptomatic people do not spread the virus. In any event most of the cases being detected today are for people with trace amounts of dead viral RNA particles and they do not spread the virus period.
Bottom line as per Dr Redfield if you are healthy you do not need to put a mask on.
As for three papers you cited all of them effectively stated the following "additional evidence is required to better clarify the effectiveness of masks or face coverings in various circumstances" including RCT's.
So the WHO and Fauci were worth citing when they supported what you believe, but as soon as they disagree, it's suddenly all a conspiracy and you should no longer listen to them. Interesting how you didn't respond to the fact that you basically just lied about what Fauci and the WHO said, but instead just immediately tried to discredit them as soon as it was shown that they actually don't agree with you. By the way, I provided some data that would change their though opinions on this. You just responded to it. It's right there.
In case you missed it, here are Redfield's current thoughts on masks: "I might even go so far as to say that this face mask is more guaranteed to protect me against Covid than when I take a Covid vaccine, because the immunogenicity may be 70%. And if I don't get an immune response, the vaccine is not going to protect me. This face mask will." He also said that masks are "the most important, powerful public health tool we have.” It truly speaks to the fact that you don't actually care about the truth that you simultaneously cite a Redfield quote that's months old, but at the same time ignore his current statements. I'm not bothered by his old statement; I'm bothered that you spread misinformation and lie about stuff that could cost people their lives.
Essentially all research papers will say in the discussion that more research is required; that's how science works: you provide and review the evidence, and then set up questions for further research. That in no way changes the fact that their conclusions are unequivocally that masks are effective. You're really grasping at straws to try to escape from the fact that the overwhelming scientific consensus disagrees with you.
Tweet
Comment