Author Topic: coronavirus  (Read 64971 times)

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #200 on: March 09, 2020, 06:41:57 PM »
I don't have a good idea how to make it happen, but we need to take into account the mortality rate of COVID-19 based on age groups.  The forum software doesn't support tables, so here's a poor man's reproduction of that site's statistics. My takeaway is that this is clearly an age-risk related illness.

If you are under 50 years old, you don't need to take extraordinary precautions, but everyone under 50 should minimize or avoid contact with people over that age.  Those over 50 (I'm in the 8% group) should "self-isolate" or at least take extra precautions.   

AGE.........................DEATH RATE all cases
80+ years old...........14.8%
70-79 years old..........8.0%
60-69 years old..........3.6%
50-59 years old..........1.3%
40-49 years old..........0.4%
30-39 years old..........0.2%
20-29 years old..........0.2%
10-19 years old..........0.2%
0-9 years old.............no fatalities

These numbers are based on confirmed cases. Only if you have been actually diagnosed does the case get put into this calculation. Many cases have not met test criteria. Consequently, these numbers are significantly off.

Estimates I’ve seen are that there may be 20% - 80% more infected. The range is huge beTheir symptoms are often nonexistent or so light they don’t get tested or treated. Just split the difference and say 50%, that would be a huge shift in fatality rates.

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #201 on: March 09, 2020, 06:43:12 PM »
It's confounding, depressing and frankly weird that you think a fatal disease is somehow created and spread by propaganda.

It’s even weirder and, frankly, stupid beyond words, that you believe anyone thinks that. It’s pure TDS.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #202 on: March 09, 2020, 08:07:15 PM »
Not to one-up you, but the US is far behind Italy in testing, reporting and taking effective action.  I predict (sadly) that the outbreak in the US will be far worse than any other country in the world.

There are only 3 countries on the planet who even have the capability for it to be "worse" for them in total, one of is the origin for the virus(China), one is on the Equator so has the environment working to help suppress it(Indonesia), and the final one is India.

We're the 4th most populous nation on the planet. Of course the number of people impacted in the US is going to be worse than almost anywhere else.

I also suspect China's numbers will be worse in reality, although what they report will likely be another matter.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #203 on: March 09, 2020, 08:10:13 PM »
Quote
I can, and did, point to places where Democrat pundits expressed a desire to see the US economy to enter recession.

It's confounding, depressing and frankly weird that you think a fatal disease is somehow created and spread by propaganda.

Not what he claimed. Also remember a number of Democrats are completely all-in on the early-Obama Admin expression "A crisis is a terrible thing to waste" and they know a sour economy favors the challenger. Plenty of Democratic operatives and backers would be more than happy to use this outbreak as an excuse to tank to economy in order to improve the chances of ousting Trump.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #204 on: March 09, 2020, 08:11:01 PM »
It's confounding, depressing and frankly weird that you think a fatal disease is somehow created and spread by propaganda.

It’s even weirder and, frankly, stupid beyond words, that you believe anyone thinks that. It’s pure TDS.

Ok, you said it quite clearly:

Quote
Ever think that may, just maybe, the US media has a different agenda that your government? Maybe the media sees a benefit to driving hysteria that the WHO doesn’t share? Or, is the US media reporting everything exactly the same as what’s being reported by you government?

I can, and did, point to places where Democrat pundits expressed a desire to see the US economy to enter recession.

Did someone write that post for you and not tell you they were doing it?

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #205 on: March 09, 2020, 11:21:32 PM »
I don't have a good idea how to make it happen, but we need to take into account the mortality rate of COVID-19 based on age groups.  The forum software doesn't support tables, so here's a poor man's reproduction of that site's statistics. My takeaway is that this is clearly an age-risk related illness.

If you are under 50 years old, you don't need to take extraordinary precautions, but everyone under 50 should minimize or avoid contact with people over that age.  Those over 50 (I'm in the 8% group) should "self-isolate" or at least take extra precautions.   

AGE.........................DEATH RATE all cases
80+ years old...........14.8%
70-79 years old..........8.0%
60-69 years old..........3.6%
50-59 years old..........1.3%
40-49 years old..........0.4%
30-39 years old..........0.2%
20-29 years old..........0.2%
10-19 years old..........0.2%
0-9 years old.............no fatalities

These numbers are based on confirmed cases. Only if you have been actually diagnosed does the case get put into this calculation. Many cases have not met test criteria. Consequently, these numbers are significantly off.

Estimates I’ve seen are that there may be 20% - 80% more infected. The range is huge beTheir symptoms are often nonexistent or so light they don’t get tested or treated. Just split the difference and say 50%, that would be a huge shift in fatality rates.

The chart is valid; but as most statistics are like a bikini. What it reveals is interesting, but what it conceals is absolutely essential. It is not the age which is the main demographic - but underlying medical issues that make an individual susceptible. Since that susceptibility is often age-related, the chart makes a left-handed kind of sense.

Now if the young are immune, even if medically challenged, then there is something to drive research to find out why.

fizz

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #206 on: March 10, 2020, 07:03:13 AM »
A bunch of interesting links I've found:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32104915

Even if it is quite speculative yet, apparently it can spread to the central nervous system, and this may be why it's so lethal for some people.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2820%2930522-5/fulltext

The editorial of The Lancet regarding world governments tackling of the virus

https://www.thelancet.com/coronavirus

More in general, the same journal collection of medical articles on the virus is quite interesting, at least for people with some patience and some understanding of medical terminology (it's aimed at professionals, so it may be misleading for laypersons).

https://xkcd.com/2278/

Lastly, the last xkcd strip is quite apropos (not only of the coronavirus situation, mind you, but this is the current hot topic...)


Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #207 on: March 10, 2020, 07:38:23 AM »
It's confounding, depressing and frankly weird that you think a fatal disease is somehow created and spread by propaganda.

It’s even weirder and, frankly, stupid beyond words, that you believe anyone thinks that. It’s pure TDS.

Ok, you said it quite clearly:

Quote
Ever think that may, just maybe, the US media has a different agenda that your government? Maybe the media sees a benefit to driving hysteria that the WHO doesn’t share? Or, is the US media reporting everything exactly the same as what’s being reported by you government?

I can, and did, point to places where Democrat pundits expressed a desire to see the US economy to enter recession.

Did someone write that post for you and not tell you they were doing it?

Not only is that not right, it’s not even wrong. You’re just making things up now m

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #208 on: March 10, 2020, 07:44:05 AM »
Quote
Not only is that not right, it’s not even wrong.

I already used that Pauli quote.  Have someone find your own.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #209 on: March 10, 2020, 10:44:39 AM »
Quote
Ever think that may, just maybe, the US media has a different agenda that your government? Maybe the media sees a benefit to driving hysteria that the WHO doesn’t share?

Is their such a thing as MDS - media derangement syndrome

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #210 on: March 10, 2020, 10:57:00 AM »
Quote
Ever think that may, just maybe, the US media has a different agenda that your government? Maybe the media sees a benefit to driving hysteria that the WHO doesn’t share?

Is their such a thing as MDS - media derangement syndrome

You have to admit the democrats and deep state are really powerful. So powerful they got China and Italy to lock down entire regions and cities. I mean these people caused the entire 2007 financial crisis by tanking one real estate project in Vegas. "They" know exactly the levers to push to get massively outsized results. How can Trump hope to compete with such nefarious monsters, especially all the ones that used to be in his cabinet and senior staff. "They" waited all this time to plunge the whole world into a recession and kill thousands of people with a disease outbreak timed perfectly to hurt Trump in the 2020 election. "They" are evil incarnate, grand chess masters, manipulating and controlling all the media, and "they" picked JOE "which one of these women is my wife" BIDEN for Trump's opponent in the 2020 election!

<end satire - This tag is deemed necessary as satire becomes harder to distinguish>


Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #211 on: March 10, 2020, 11:16:09 AM »
Quote
<end satire - This tag is deemed necessary as satire becomes harder to distinguish>

Oh, satire!  I'm so gullible.  Until the other day I was thinking when Crunch said TDS he was talking about Total Dissolved Solids. My bad!

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #212 on: March 10, 2020, 11:27:15 AM »
Quote
<end satire - This tag is deemed necessary as satire becomes harder to distinguish>

Oh, satire!  I'm so gullible.  Until the other day I was thinking when Crunch said TDS he was talking about Total Dissolved Solids. My bad!

Honestly as absurd as some of those were - a number of the claims are pretty close to what fringe right-wing media is saying. People familiar with my views/posting history are likely to view that as satire - but the same post from an anonymous user or maybe even some of our members might not have been easily identifiable as satire.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #213 on: March 10, 2020, 11:28:25 AM »
You only have to deconstruct to know the difference.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #214 on: March 10, 2020, 11:35:14 AM »
You only have to deconstruct to know the difference.

Point conceded, our posters would have been able to identify the difference without stating the obvious.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #215 on: March 10, 2020, 11:37:41 AM »
You only have to deconstruct to know the difference.

Point conceded, our posters would have been able to identify the difference without stating the obvious.

I'm hoping people will catch on when I do the same (which I did in your post) :).

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #216 on: March 10, 2020, 11:49:19 AM »
Remember how political disagreements tore families and friends and households apart.

Just imagine if you disagreed on the seriousness of this virus.

What if some people in a household thought it was hype and others though it was very serious.

Some thought it was fine to go about their business, go to church, the gym, clubs, out to dinner and everything the same as before while others, older and more vulnerable with health issues perhaps, decided it would be best to self-quarantine until the fog of war lifts.

So the ones going out and about say you do you. You live your life how you want and I'll live mine as I please. The quarantiners say but if you bring it back you could make me very ill or maybe even get me killed.

I wonder if that's happening at all.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #217 on: March 10, 2020, 11:56:25 AM »
Like many big issues, opinions on the virus don't need to be binary ie. hype vs very serious. They're not mutually exclusive.

I believe it's a very serious threat, and that it's being over-hyped.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #218 on: March 10, 2020, 12:00:18 PM »
Quote
I wonder if that's happening at all.

If it's not already happening, it will.  Good post, btw.

Quote
I believe it's a very serious threat, and that it's being over-hyped.

It's too early to tell if it is or isn't.  Personally, I think we're late to the game to head it off without it becoming a major health problem in this country.  We should have acted sooner and been smarter.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #219 on: March 10, 2020, 12:01:12 PM »
I'm having those conversations now. My ex works for a company with a cluster of infections. Our children go back and forth between our homes. I'm taking measures to try to avoid contact with grandparents and make sure not to expose other people in high risk groups. Identifying symptoms* is going to be hard as allergy season kicks into high gear. I'm really hoping higher temps limit the spread of CV-19 like they do with the flu. Without weather aided control this thing looks like its going to get bad.

*Particularly in children sense thankfully the disease is most often mild in children.

fizz

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #220 on: March 10, 2020, 01:54:22 PM »
A small side note, although I know the US, or at least a large part of it, views its prison system in a somewhat different optic that may lead to perceive this as a minor problem.

Prisons by their very nature are a natural breeding ground for this kind of disease: closed spaces, crowding, difficult hygiene, naturally undisciplined characters, often compromised immune systems due to drug use etc. etc.

Here, recognizing this, special measures started to be introduced to put the prisons on an extra lock out, by completely suspending relative visits from outside and introducing a lot of extra strict measures.
This, combined with the panic for the incoming virus, have lead to a wave of prison revolts: there have been already about 20 inmates revolts in so many prisons, with many tens of dead (precise numbers yet to be made public, and many revolts are still ongoing) and even a couple of escapees (it does not help that our prisons have a 120% rate of overcrowding... 60k prisoners against 50k official places, but this is a different matter).

Anyway, as my usual update, we are at 10.149 infected and 631 dead, 168 more than yesterday.
There is a fall of the official numbers of new infected, but as i anticipated yesterday they are progressively stopping tests of the asymptomatic or even lightly symptomatic, if there aren't special reasons like professionals that have still to move: doctors,policemen, supplies delivery drivers, politicians, etc. etc.

If you are a normal citizen, presents light symptoms or have suspects you may have been in contact with an infected, but don't have more than 37,5°C (99,5 F, according to google) plus difficulties breathing, they simply tell you to close yourself in your home and stay quarantined till you either improve or worsen (minimum 14 days).

Oh, by the way: Lombardy region president asked the central government to introduce special even more strict rules for his region.
As the original hot spot, they are the most heavily hit, and their healthcare system is quickly overloading as the doctor themselves fall ill.
Anyway, the step they requested is to impose the closure of all shops apart for select grocery stores and pharmacies, and all offices.

We will see what will happens... even if they still send the occasional snide remark, all politicians both government and opposition are being quite unusually civil: it feels quite strange, honestly, and its more than a bit scary! :-p


Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #221 on: March 10, 2020, 02:04:00 PM »
Fizz, thanks for the updates.  We can't see what's happening there with any more clarity that we can see what's happening here.

fizz

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #222 on: March 10, 2020, 03:13:18 PM »
I think of it as providing a preview of things to come.
Also, lurking here, I got often the impression that many people do not exactly know much or have some weird ideas about what goes on outside your borders.
I try to stay out of your politic discussions because as a foreigner with only indirect knowledge and different cultural framework its not my place to intervene usually (on the contrary, I come here to get a better understanding on what normal Americans thinks about these topics, compared from what one can evince from media and news), but when the discussion steer on topics I can offer a different external point of view or direct knowledge, if I've time I'm glad to.
And in these days, with the self quarantine in act, I've more time than usual! :-p

Btw, a small curio about a group of... well... my vocabulary is too limited to find a non vulgar singular word to sum up what they are:
https://www.thecut.com/2020/03/smurfs-gather-in-france-break-world-record-amid-coronavirus.html

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #223 on: March 10, 2020, 03:29:23 PM »
I've noticed some people like this who say they aren't worried because they are young and it would be better to just let it run it's course sooner rather than later. Spoiler Alert for The Last Ship. They are like the Immunes in that tv series who purposefully spread the virus because it doesn't affect them and they figure if the susceptible die off it'll be better for the rest of humanity that survives because it would cull out the weak links in the human chain. I bet there are some very dangerous people who will try to spread it on purpose. Not saying these people are those but with their attitude it may amount to the same difference.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #224 on: March 10, 2020, 03:35:28 PM »
Quote
I believe it's a very serious threat, and that it's being over-hyped.

It's too early to tell if it is or isn't.  Personally, I think we're late to the game to head it off without it becoming a major health problem in this country.  We should have acted sooner and been smarter.

The thing here is, late to the game or not, the only way to have stopped this would have been to basically lock down anyone coming from China at the end of December, and keep them quarantined for 2 to 3 weeks, while keeping China under lockdown until things run their course there, which it still hasn't--3 months later.

The virus is a serious threat, people will die from it, but people die from a lot of other "preventable" things too. We're rapidly reaching diminishing returns on the countermeasures being employed, the virus is obviously outside of their containment at this point as it is obviously in the general population here in the US.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #225 on: March 10, 2020, 03:53:40 PM »
I've noticed some people like this who say they aren't worried because they are young and it would be better to just let it run it's course sooner rather than later. Spoiler Alert for The Last Ship. They are like the Immunes in that tv series who purposefully spread the virus because it doesn't affect them and they figure if the susceptible die off it'll be better for the rest of humanity that survives because it would cull out the weak links in the human chain. I bet there are some very dangerous people who will try to spread it on purpose. Not saying these people are those but with their attitude it may amount to the same difference.

I am concerned for my parents, they're in their 70's so they're in a high risk category. I'm lower risk as I'm under 50, and I'm not immune compromised, thankfully nobody in my immediate family is immune compromised, so we'll likely ride it out well enough. We do have friends and associates who are immune compromised, and several of them are over 50, so there is concern for them to be had all the same.

<sarcasm>But if you want to be completely amoral about the matter, Covid19 seems to be tailor-made for helping trim the tail on a number of social services if it manages to get its hooks into certain demographics. Reducing the baby boomer and older population by "just" 1 to 2% would do wonders for extending the Social Security Trust Fund, although it's impact on medicare is debatable, given the cost of someone potentially being hospitalized for weeks(under quarantine no less) prior to death certainly runs up quite the tab, but on the flip side, you're not spending tens of thousands/year on medications and other medical services for that person for another 10 to 20 years. but the mortality rate table aren't suggesting 1 to 2% for baby boomers, it's looking to be somewhere in excess of 4% going by the mortality numbers they have at present.</sarcasm>

As far as economic apocalypse scenarios go, this one certainly wasn't on my list though. A virus which mostly kills senior citizens and the immune comprised/already sick? That is not a recipe for social collapse on its own, as the people who you truly need for society to continue functioning are not the ones at any kind of significant risk. Sure, medical services could get swamped, but everything else should be able to function more or less normally. Even if the people involved are concerned about the welfare of loved ones and other associates.

It does create an interesting ethics question with regards to whose needs are being served by the economic disruption continued (already failed) containment efforts present. As the mortality tables make it clear that we're doing this to save the elderly, the sickly and infirm--hardly the engine that makes economies work.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #226 on: March 10, 2020, 04:01:53 PM »
Think of Covid19 as something of "a modest proposal".


DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #227 on: March 10, 2020, 04:10:36 PM »
The Logan's Run virus.

LetterRip

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #228 on: March 10, 2020, 04:13:21 PM »
I'm having those conversations now. My ex works for a company with a cluster of infections. Our children go back and forth between our homes. I'm taking measures to try to avoid contact with grandparents and make sure not to expose other people in high risk groups. Identifying symptoms* is going to be hard as allergy season kicks into high gear. I'm really hoping higher temps limit the spread of CV-19 like they do with the flu. Without weather aided control this thing looks like its going to get bad.

*Particularly in children sense thankfully the disease is most often mild in children.

Australia has fairly high temps and it hasn't seemed to slow the spread much so the hope for 'summer' limiting spread doesn't seem likely.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #229 on: March 10, 2020, 04:17:11 PM »
Quote
I am concerned for my parents, they're in their 70's so they're in a high risk category

To play the devil. those in that age group are equally at high risk for any flu.

If in the next week it is discovered that people have contracted the virus that can't trace it to anyone who traveled or such. That could be the tipping point.
The precautions people are taking now should always apply especially when in contact with the compromised.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2020, 04:25:06 PM by rightleft22 »

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #230 on: March 10, 2020, 04:18:56 PM »
Quote
Australia has fairly high temps and it hasn't seemed to slow the spread much so the hope for 'summer' limiting spread doesn't seem likely.

The Spanish flu slowed during the summer only to come back stronger.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #231 on: March 10, 2020, 04:35:14 PM »
Quote
I am concerned for my parents, they're in their 70's so they're in a high risk category. I'm lower risk as I'm under 50, and I'm not immune compromised, thankfully nobody in my immediate family is immune compromised, so we'll likely ride it out well enough. We do have friends and associates who are immune compromised, and several of them are over 50, so there is concern for them to be had all the same.

My wife and I are in the high-risk groups, but it's up to us to take precautions for ourselves.  Since almost everyone (99.8%) under 50 who get the disease will recover within 1-2 weeks (at most) I'm of the opinion that extraordinary measures should be reserved for people who aren't able to take those precautions.  Keep the schools open, let fans attend concerts and games, have fun at parties, just don't lick the punch bowl or sneeze on the salad bar.

fizz

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #232 on: March 10, 2020, 06:36:07 PM »
The mortality statistics don't tell all the story: like the articles I linked point out, even a good percentage of younger people suffers from breathing difficulties and pneumonia, requiring oxygen, treatment and even forced breathing in intensive care.

Now, most of the younger people kept under modern hospital care will recover given sufficient time, while the older at some point succumb to multiple organ failure and end up as statistics.

But if your hospital system is so swamped by patients that they can't keep on and your doctors start to fall sick themselves, it will not be only the elderly that die.

Stats point at a 20% of infected people that are so ill to require hospital care, and that percentage includes most age groups: those people if left untreated may succumb to the virus even if they would normally recover with standard hospital care.

Honestly, I hope it will all blow out in nothing and we will all laugh at how worried everybody was for such a nuisance.
But the signs, according to the experts, not me, point to something serious enough to deserve the kind of measures that China took: anything less is seriously playing with fire.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #233 on: March 10, 2020, 08:55:37 PM »
I just saw the article that Iranians have a higher death rate for Covid-19 because they die of Methanol poisoning which is thought to be a preventative for it. I wonder how this slants the metrics?

https://nypost.com/2020/03/10/dozens-of-iranians-die-from-alcohol-poisoning-in-attempt-to-fight-coronavirus/

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #234 on: March 11, 2020, 10:49:48 AM »
Quote
My wife and I are in the high-risk groups, but it's up to us to take precautions for ourselves.  Since almost everyone (99.8%) under 50 who get the disease will recover within 1-2 weeks (at most) I'm of the opinion that extraordinary measures should be reserved for people who aren't able to take those precautions.  Keep the schools open, let fans attend concerts and games, have fun at parties, just don't lick the punch bowl or sneeze on the salad bar.

The problem with this is that those in the high-risk groups interact with those under 50.  Are you going to quarantine yourselves from your children and grandchildren?  Or (if you don't have them), require those who do to do so?  How about those at grocery stores, pharmacies, and workplaces?  If everywhere is a hot-bed of Covid-19, those over 50 will have to isolate themselves for their own safety.

The other problem is with medical capacity.  Allowing the virus to spread uncontrollably can overwhelm the emergency ICUs for those who require help to recover.  P.Z. Myers has a nice graphic which illustrates this.  Allowing an uncontrolled spread of the virus guarantees a higher death rate simply because we don't have unlimited medical equipment and medicines for the worst cases.  Herd immunity is also important in controlling this disease.

And exactly how are you going to prevent those 5 - 9 year-olds from sneezing on the salad bar, much less the old codger who thinks it's all a bunch of hooey? ;)

Until we get an effective vaccine, we should use every tool available.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #235 on: March 11, 2020, 11:28:50 AM »
The overall efficacy rate for flu vaccine for people >=65 last year was 12%. Adjusted efficacy for all ages is 34%. That's after nearly a decade of tweaking.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines-work/2018-2019.html

Implementing massively disruptive policies and practices just "until we get a vaccine" is a bad strategy. 
« Last Edit: March 11, 2020, 11:30:57 AM by ScottF »

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #236 on: March 11, 2020, 11:40:05 AM »
The problem with this is that those in the high-risk groups interact with those under 50.  Are you going to quarantine yourselves from your children and grandchildren?  Or (if you don't have them), require those who do to do so?  How about those at grocery stores, pharmacies, and workplaces?  If everywhere is a hot-bed of Covid-19, those over 50 will have to isolate themselves for their own safety.

The other problem is with medical capacity.  Allowing the virus to spread uncontrollably can overwhelm the emergency ICUs for those who require help to recover.  P.Z. Myers has a nice graphic which illustrates this.  Allowing an uncontrolled spread of the virus guarantees a higher death rate simply because we don't have unlimited medical equipment and medicines for the worst cases.  Herd immunity is also important in controlling this disease.

And exactly how are you going to prevent those 5 - 9 year-olds from sneezing on the salad bar, much less the old codger who thinks it's all a bunch of hooey? ;)

Until we get an effective vaccine, we should use every tool available.

You're right that there are going to be problems.  I'm not "compromised" by any of the chronic diseases that the CDC lists, but in the past 8 weeks I've had pneumonia, flu A and a stomach virus, even though I had vaccines for the first two.  All my fault, as I spent 4 days in a casino in Louisville staying up all hours playing in a pool tournament with a motley 1000 or so pool players, many of whom didn't appear to have slept, washed or even eaten recently. 

My wife and I are planning to "self-isolate" once there are any reported cases in our community.  We've stocked up on food, bourbon, whiskey, gin, scotch and nitrile gloves.  Which reminds me to check the beer supply. Not seeing the grandkids would be a painful sacrifice, so we'll cross that bridge when the damn dam breaks, even if we have to invent a new metaphor to get past it.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #237 on: March 11, 2020, 11:49:23 AM »
My wife and I are planning to "self-isolate" once there are any reported cases in our community.  We've stocked up on food, bourbon, whiskey, gin, scotch and nitrile gloves.  Which reminds me to check the beer supply. Not seeing the grandkids would be a painful sacrifice, so we'll cross that bridge when the damn dam breaks, even if we have to invent a new metaphor to get past it.

I think you've prioritized your provisions correctly, but how long do you envision the self-isolation if/when it happens?  Not a gotcha, genuinely wondering how you're thinking about this.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #238 on: March 11, 2020, 11:55:59 AM »
I feel like I must have a blind spot around this. Is there a scenario where the virus slows with some degree of permanence through effective non-contact and isolation?

I'm going to read up a bit on South Korea's approach. Apparently they've been quite successful with this.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #239 on: March 11, 2020, 11:57:48 AM »
My wife and I are planning to "self-isolate" once there are any reported cases in our community.  We've stocked up on food, bourbon, whiskey, gin, scotch and nitrile gloves.  Which reminds me to check the beer supply. Not seeing the grandkids would be a painful sacrifice, so we'll cross that bridge when the damn dam breaks, even if we have to invent a new metaphor to get past it.

I think you've prioritized your provisions correctly, but how long do you envision the self-isolation if/when it happens?  Not a gotcha, genuinely wondering how you're thinking about this.

Depends on external circumstances.  I can be pretty happy in my study surrounded by books and music and at my pool table, so it might not be the hardship for me that it would be for others.  Besides, I'll always have you folks to vent at if I get bored :).

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #240 on: March 11, 2020, 12:02:53 PM »
The problem is that there seems to be significant lag between when the virus is present and spreading in the community and the first confirmed case. The time to self-isolate is before the virus shows up.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #241 on: March 11, 2020, 12:06:52 PM »
The problem is that there seems to be significant lag between when the virus is present and spreading in the community and the first confirmed case. The time to self-isolate is before the virus shows up.

True, but it's hard to see what isn't visible.  Two cases have been confirmed in Michigan so far, both within 50 miles of where we live, so we know it's coming and are taking steps, just not the "big one" yet.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #242 on: March 11, 2020, 12:20:16 PM »
My company has now issued guidance that employees can work from home until March 20. I'm not sure what's so special about that date, it seems they'll be constantly pushing that deadline out. Meanwhile, we're still figuring out things like flying candidates in for interviews. Maybe if they are in Seattle we'll go by video.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #243 on: March 11, 2020, 12:38:17 PM »
I just got back from buying lunch and the amount of stuff I had to touch that other people had touched was alarming. And I can't stop scratching my face.

Work is sorting out who has VPN access. We don't have the bandwidth for everyone to use it but no word on how/if "non business critical" people will work from home.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #244 on: March 11, 2020, 12:42:15 PM »
I could link to a video of people telling their viewers that they should avoid touching their faces as they are touching their own, but I like this one better.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #245 on: March 11, 2020, 01:23:30 PM »
No live audience for the DNC debate on Sunday.

fizz

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #246 on: March 11, 2020, 02:28:02 PM »
12462 total cases, 827 dead.
In Lombardy all intensive care units are full, so they've officially started to triaging and letting all the worst cases go with only palliative care.

ScottF

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #247 on: March 11, 2020, 02:32:26 PM »
fizz do you know the degree to which the traditional flu(s) are contributing to the health care overload? Would love to have a sense of where those 12K infected tip the scales when combined with other flu viruses.

fizz

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #248 on: March 11, 2020, 02:38:36 PM »
According to what my friends in hospital told me, it's quite rare to need a respirator: I've no specific numbers, but I know that there are a total of 5k respirators in all of Italy right now, and it have always been more than sufficient.
They've ordered 20k more, but it will take time to get them, as they will be soon quite scarce everywhere.

The point is that normal flu do react to treatments, so respirators are only needed to pass critical moments... this virus do not respond to anything, so sick people must be left under the respirator till their body heal naturally or they die.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2020, 02:42:19 PM by fizz »

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: coronavirus
« Reply #249 on: March 11, 2020, 04:07:48 PM »
Quote
“By now, we’re forced to provide intensive care treatment in the corridor, in the operating rooms, in the recovery rooms,” he said. “We gutted entire hospital wards to make room for the seriously ill. One of the best healthcare systems in the world, the Lombard one, is one step away from collapse.”

Lombardy’s top health official, Giulio Gallera, told Bloomberg that the region had dedicated 80% of its 1,123 acute-care beds to coronavirus. But Pesenti said that according to some forecasts, Lombardy could have 18,000 hospitalized coronavirus patients by March 26, between 2,700 and 3,200 of whom would require acute care.