A whole load of elderly people left by themselves almost all the time for three months are going to get burgled. It's very sad.
Imagine being burgled and then killed by the infection the burglar leaves behind!
I didn’t say that.
But it’s a serious concern though.
Also, I’m happy to say that my old shop was way ahead of me with regards to care packages. But I was able to help out with addresses. The assisted lifts I remember from my time as a bin man and the people my mum helped when she worked in care. Point them in the right direction at least.
Not all good news though. My friend is now out of work.
So what it boils down to is are we really saying the british /western public is so selfish they won't respect quarantie protocols and directives or are willing accept social responsibility?
Yes. Absolutely. People (myself included) have a phenomenal capacity for petty selfishness and it doesn't take all that many to pee in the proverbial soup.
MiguelFelstone wrote: I kind of feel like an ass complaining about gaming when people losing their lives, jobs, businesses ect but i don't get out of the house often and i was really looking forward to this years escalation league. I've already bought the full army, and we had 4 more months to go
It's okay to be disappointed, so long as you keep it in perspective. My kids were poised to have really fun baseball seasons because reasons, and I'm sad they won't get the chance to have those experiences and memories. Public health is infinitely more important and if this saves lives it's worth it, but I'm still sad for them.
This. Absolutely this.
Me? I’m going to have to miss a Toy Dolls gig in April. The family holiday in May to where we used to caravan when I was a kid? Gone. Chances of my New York trip going ahead in late June? Quite possibly not going to happen.
These things disappointment me. Of course they do. It sucks.
But other than that? I’m actually OK. Working from home is to my benefit, and double win, my season ticket expires the end of this month. That’s potentially £520 back in my pocket, provided I’m working from home for at least two months (which seems entirely possible).
That there are others worse off is no reason for us not to be upset. Just keep things in perspective, and do whatever you can to assist others perhaps less fortunate.
I did a shop for my local Foodbank this morning, buying some essentials. Because I suspect when those on Zero Hour contracts aren’t getting hours, or the otherwise self employed and those who don’t get sick pay worth a damn? The Foodbanks (which are a national cause for shame as it is) are going to be busier than ever.
I’m a socialist, and currently financially in a very, very strong position. So I feel a moral obligation to do this. And no, you don’t need to be a fellow socialist to do this.
Simple math proves the wrong thoug and funny thing is even UK goverment realized that their herd immunity is going to lead to literally hundreds of thousands dead. The "just let it spread for herd immunity" approach would not keep rates lower than italy and since UK has even LESS intensive care room than italy per population it will obviously mean that unless rate is lower than italy(which it wouldn't have been) you get more, not less, patients on your lower amount of beds.
And simpe fact is for herd immunity you need 60% of population as bare minimum(preferably more) infected. Then even with very optimistic 0.5% mortality rate we get to 200k.
This is basic math and funny that is what was even given to boris & co initially but ignored...
Now at least they have woken up a bit and realized it won't work after all. But too late. But that's what you get when you ignore experts.
.
You are misreading this. Herd immunity is the answer, because claims of containment are going to fail and no matter our strategy, it will end with herd immunity. We will develop herd immunity is more honest than we are going to stop the virus.
This pandemic doesn't have neat easy correct answers, it is going to be messy, many will die. This will happen if you make media friendly actions of actions that the media dislike.
There are too many experts with an internet connection, Boris and Co chose which ones they are going to listen to, and they made their point clearly.
Had Johnson advocated total lockdown alternate experts would be saying herd immunity is the thing, lockdown wasnt going to work and it will cost 200k casualties before the mistake is rectified, and the press would lap it up. Whichever strategy was adopted, opposed strategy scientists would get air time. That is how press works, particularly in the UK.
You cant win the media war in a scenario where there isn't a single obvious solution, all you can do is make the best of bad choices to deal with the pandemic. Nobody knows what the right strategy is, but the health experts the government are following have espoused a sound plan, its logical and it makes sense. It has convinced me. Others may be convinced by alternate approaches, or just passed around between multiple negative articles in the press.
I gave a warning on page one or two of this thread, when this was just a China issue, that if it reached the west there would be too many opinions and action would be constrained by our natural liberties. An authoritarian society has the best chance of succeeding in a lockdown, and they can best ensure compliance. You really think you are going to seal France? There will be leakage, there will be outbreaks. Sorry lockdowns don't work in western culture, we are too used to our liberties, and our people are soft and easily scared.
Works pretty well so far in terms of slowing the spread and buying time to prepare in every other country that went the whole hog from the get-go in implementing "draconian" measures.
Poor leadership is poor leadership.
So what it boils down to is are we really saying the british /western public is so selfish they won't respect quarantie protocols and directives or are willing accept social responsibility?
UK rise infection rates is similar to that elsewhere in Europe outside Italy. There is little difference.
The wise go with what virologists and epidemiologists say, I do, hopefully so do you. The problem is various virologists and epidemiologists say different things and do not agree. We can make our own minds up as to which expert is more likely to be right, and can logically differ.
Now must compound this with media attention which highlights the path not taken. In the UK herd immunity is questioned, in Italy lockdown is questioned. In both countries the media is saying not enough is being done.
Nobody knows which is the best route forward, there are too many variables.
However flip flopping between contrary poliicies is likely to be the worse option.
Pick a sound contingency and stick with it.
ChargerIIC wrote: Hopefully they'll calm down. Local FLGS released an estimate of the cost (to their business) of the shelter in place. It's pretty scary. Wonder if this will be what finally kills off the FLGS business model
The corona panic was created by Amazon to get those last few retail stores to close. In the future, we will all work for and be consumers of Amazon. It will be our government, our employer, our family, and our god. The future isn't cyberpunk, it's idiocracy.
I'm kidding about Amazon being behind the panic, but there is no doubt that Amazon will be one of the few who actually escape this situation unharmed (in fact, they are doing record business right now). The devastation to the retail space will destroy many businesses, and likely many small towns. I feel like the hobby gaming market will be particularly effected, as a lot of businesses rely on FLGS selling their product. With low margins, how is a company barely scraping by going to survive having its primary mode of distribution, marketing, and support disappear for a month (or longer)?
They have actually cut off a lot of non-COVID-19 business so those smaller companies on the Amazon Network are also going to get killed.
So, my job - my building is now starting to encourage people to work from home. Turns out my department is considered critical, and we must have at least 2 people onsite 24 hours a day. My supervisor advised 1 of those people can be a supervisor.... but he's working from home, of course. So, as a technical lead.... I think I am here for the duration. Despite the fact, I want to reiterate, I work from home regularly and there is nothing I can only do here.
You guys should not trust science and scientists in general. They are known to be remarkably wrong and arrogant. Recently there was tests done for an entire village in Italy. Almost entire village was diagnosed as infected with corona virus despite none of them showing any symptoms. This only confirms that coronavirus is only dangerous for the weak and various numbers pulled by scientists are utter nonsense. One study finds 30% mortality rate, another 10% then it is 2% and then it is as low as 0.5%. In reality, nobody knows anything about this disease and anyone's guess at this time is as good as my.
In my country countless Lithuanians are stuck abroad. Here people have a lot of hatred for these people, because they did not listened recommendations to come back in time and now they are screaming for help. What is most concerning that these idiots are who will infect Lithuania. We have now 25 cases and all of them are from these morons coming from abroad. We had set up ships and trains to bring our people back home, but nobody is talking about the obvious how these dumb dumbs should be locked in prisons or other quarantine areas for 14 days before they prove they are not sick. Now these plaguebearers are coming back to our land to infect all of us.
Our government had proven competent enough in responding to crisis, but I'm deeply disappointed by their weak willed nature. People responsible for supplies should be checked for virus when entering country. Every ordinary person coming into our country should be immediately quarantined in prison or other detainment facilities if tests are in short supply. Otherwise, it is mandatory tests for everybody, depending on their reliability. Now due to these tourists and personal rights we are going to get uncontrolled spread of disease in our country. It will be tomorrow or at the end of the week. So far the only vectors of virus were all tourists and they are all isolated, but it is only the matter of time before virus starts spreading freely in our country.
RiTides wrote:So what it boils down to is are we really saying the british /western public is so selfish they won't respect quarantie protocols and directives or are willing accept social responsibility?
Give it a couple weeks and we'll see. Italy is what, 7 days in? That's the longest quarantine outside of China, where it's somewhat easier to enforce it...
Ernestas wrote: You guys should not trust science and scientists in general. They are known to be remarkably wrong and arrogant.
Yeah, nobody should trust anyone who is specifically educated, trained, and experienced in a field of expertise, they're all arrogant and known to be remarkably wrong
Guess I'll get my next medical checkup done at the gas station and take my car in for servicing at the donut shop then.
Recently there was tests done for an entire village in Italy. Almost entire village was diagnosed as infected with corona virus despite none of them showing any symptoms. This only confirms that coronavirus is only dangerous for the weak and various numbers pulled by scientists are utter nonsense. One study finds 30% mortality rate, another 10% then it is 2% and then it is as low as 0.5%. In reality, nobody knows anything about this disease and anyone's guess at this time is as good as my.
A basic stats class would tell you that none of this is particularly outrageous or unexpected. Nobody is going by what any single study says, they're reading the aggregate trends and attempting to react in real time to an event that is outpacing their ability to measure and analyze it.
Ernestas wrote: You guys should not trust science and scientists in general. They are known to be remarkably wrong and arrogant. Recently there was tests done for an entire village in Italy. Almost entire village was diagnosed as infected with corona virus despite none of them showing any symptoms. This only confirms that coronavirus is only dangerous for the weak and various numbers pulled by scientists are utter nonsense. One study finds 30% mortality rate, another 10% then it is 2% and then it is as low as 0.5%. In reality, nobody knows anything about this disease and anyone's guess at this time is as good as my.
.
Back to the dark ages we go! It's all the cats faults! Kill them all.
And check in on your neighbours. Polite knock, step or two back, friendly greeting. If they need owt from the shop, and you’re going anyway? Do your best to grabs the gubbins they need whilst you’re there,
If people would actually follow those studies, they would quickly find that all these studies and information being spread are wildly different from study to study. I looked at some articles to make my mind on virus and I couldn't get even most base facts straight. Following these professionals at this point is worse than reading Wikipedia.
So far the best coverage of this situation I had heard from North Korea's news agency...
Our government had proven competent enough in responding to crisis, but I'm deeply disappointed by their weak willed nature. People responsible for supplies should be checked for virus when entering country. Every ordinary person coming into our country should be immediately quarantined in prison or other detainment facilities if tests are in short supply. Otherwise, it is mandatory tests for everybody, depending on their reliability. Now due to these tourists and personal rights we are going to get uncontrolled spread of disease in our country. It will be tomorrow or at the end of the week. So far the only vectors of virus were all tourists and they are all isolated, but it is only the matter of time before virus starts spreading freely in our country.
This might interest you about how prison might not be the best place, not just for prisoners but for containment as a system.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Well, that's it.. They've closed the gym on my unit. Might aswell just end it all now
I'm not saying that this corroborates the conspiracy theory that this was a biological agent intentionally released by China as a prelude to invading all freedom-loving people, but leaving our once-swole bodies to wither and atrophy doesn't disprove it, either.
I've been told I'm working from home for the foreseeable future as of today, though with the freeways empty it was kinda nice commuting for once. Almost eerie.
Roberts84 wrote: There is no freedom on this forum. Language filter, soft warnings over nonsense. It's just another nanny state. A day care center.
It's a private internet web forum devoted to plastic toy soldiers that happens to have an off-topic forum. I'm not sure what people would be expecting out of such, or why anyone would think that language filters, warnings, etc wouldn't be a routine part of that...
In the US there is currently talks about some kind of bailout for people being laid off, but it's still in the broadest of strokes and of course - side-stepping the specific politics of it - it's neither going as smoothly as it could be, or as fast as it could be. And, don't dare call it a baillout.
Generally speaking, I have no problem with a bailout when the problem isn't due to controllable factors. This isn't really different from recovering from a natural disaster, and we already expect assistance recovering from those. The avoidable bailouts - the financial ones for the banks that came with a moral hazard, that's a different situation for a different forum.
If you're (say) a bartender who can't work because the government ordered your establishment closed, the government should make you whole, regardless of what country you live in, I think. That's got to be pretty non-controversial.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Well, that's it.. They've closed the gym on my unit. Might aswell just end it all now
I'm not saying that this corroborates the conspiracy theory that this was a biological agent intentionally released by China as a prelude to invading all freedom-loving people, but leaving our once-swole bodies to wither and atrophy doesn't disprove it, either.
Wake up, sheeple!
I don't mind the politics, its the mock cynicism that hurts.
I hope this doesn't class as political question as it not meant to offend or for discussion but in general where do countries in Europe and us get such colossal sums of money for there stimulus packages? Do they have it in banks or what? And if they borrow from whom?
One of the profs In the uk said a death toll off 20000 would basically a great result, i am struggling to get my head round that , I understand what is going on and 20000 is probably conservative but wow what horrific numbers , a tradegy indeed and that's just uk estimate.
Marxist artist wrote: I hope this doesn't class as political question as it not meant to offend or for discussion but in general where do countries in Europe and us get such colossal sums of money for there stimulus packages? Do they have it in banks or what? And if they borrow from whom?
It's typically borrowed, usually in the form of bonds.
Marxist artist wrote: One of the profs In the uk said a death toll off 20000 would basically a great result, i am struggling to get my head round that , I understand what is going on and 20000 is probably conservative but wow what horrific numbers , a tradegy indeed and that's just uk estimate.
In what context did he say that would basically be a great amount?
Simple math proves the wrong thoug and funny thing is even UK goverment realized that their herd immunity is going to lead to literally hundreds of thousands dead. The "just let it spread for herd immunity" approach would not keep rates lower than italy and since UK has even LESS intensive care room than italy per population it will obviously mean that unless rate is lower than italy(which it wouldn't have been) you get more, not less, patients on your lower amount of beds.
And simpe fact is for herd immunity you need 60% of population as bare minimum(preferably more) infected. Then even with very optimistic 0.5% mortality rate we get to 200k.
This is basic math and funny that is what was even given to boris & co initially but ignored...
Now at least they have woken up a bit and realized it won't work after all. But too late. But that's what you get when you ignore experts. .
You are misreading this. Herd immunity is the answer, because claims of containment are going to fail and no matter our strategy, it will end with herd immunity. We will develop herd immunity is more honest than we are going to stop the virus. This pandemic doesn't have neat easy correct answers, it is going to be messy, many will die. This will happen if you make media friendly actions of actions that the media dislike. There are too many experts with an internet connection, Boris and Co chose which ones they are going to listen to, and they made their point clearly.
Had Johnson advocated total lockdown alternate experts would be saying herd immunity is the thing, lockdown wasnt going to work and it will cost 200k casualties before the mistake is rectified, and the press would lap it up. Whichever strategy was adopted, opposed strategy scientists would get air time. That is how press works, particularly in the UK.
You cant win the media war in a scenario where there isn't a single obvious solution, all you can do is make the best of bad choices to deal with the pandemic. Nobody knows what the right strategy is, but the health experts the government are following have espoused a sound plan, its logical and it makes sense. It has convinced me. Others may be convinced by alternate approaches, or just passed around between multiple negative articles in the press.
I gave a warning on page one or two of this thread, when this was just a China issue, that if it reached the west there would be too many opinions and action would be constrained by our natural liberties. An authoritarian society has the best chance of succeeding in a lockdown, and they can best ensure compliance. You really think you are going to seal France? There will be leakage, there will be outbreaks. Sorry lockdowns don't work in western culture, we are too used to our liberties, and our people are soft and easily scared.
Works pretty well so far in terms of slowing the spread and buying time to prepare in every other country that went the whole hog from the get-go in implementing "draconian" measures. Poor leadership is poor leadership.
So what it boils down to is are we really saying the british /western public is so selfish they won't respect quarantie protocols and directives or are willing accept social responsibility?
UK rise infection rates is similar to that elsewhere in Europe outside Italy. There is little difference. The wise go with what virologists and epidemiologists say, I do, hopefully so do you. The problem is various virologists and epidemiologists say different things and do not agree. We can make our own minds up as to which expert is more likely to be right, and can logically differ. Now must compound this with media attention which highlights the path not taken. In the UK herd immunity is questioned, in Italy lockdown is questioned. In both countries the media is saying not enough is being done. Nobody knows which is the best route forward, there are too many variables. However flip flopping between contrary poliicies is likely to be the worse option. Pick a sound contingency and stick with it.
The WHO index begs to differ... All the countries that went on an immediate lockdown are faring much much better in terms of daily new cases by a 4-5 times. The UK is currently 3rd after Italy and spain overall.
Part of the problem with Italy and spains rapid spread was their cultural approach to being social. As in they greet physicaly and kiss eachother on the cheek even between strangers. What excuse does the UK have other than inaction? Herd immunity.. Many will loose loved ones before their time was the strategy couple days ago. Everyone could see how dumb that was and how utterly callous for not looking out for its citizens the inaction was. Of course you are entitled to your opinion. That initial response is crucial in the slow down and management.
Im not saying these measures would have prevented this ultimately reaching critical mass. As its an influenza virus the genie is well and truly out of the bottle according to Michael Osterholm, but the key thing is to delay as much as possible to give as many people as possible a chance and stagger the spread.
That's of course like my opinion given the limited knowledge only I certainly am no expert and just interpreting what information I have found.
Marxist artist wrote: I hope this doesn't class as political question as it not meant to offend or for discussion but in general where do countries in Europe and us get such colossal sums of money for there stimulus packages? Do they have it in banks or what? And if they borrow from whom?
One of the profs In the uk said a death toll off 20000 would basically a great result, i am struggling to get my head round that , I understand what is going on and 20000 is probably conservative but wow what horrific numbers , a tradegy indeed and that's just uk estimate.
They get it from you. Governments don't have any money. They have your money.
That's really what democracies are; people paying Governments who in turn bribe them with their own money by making promises which they are seemingly under no legal obligation to deliver.
Either that or it comes from the Federal reserve, which unlike citizens, has the power to simply print more money and kick the can down the road forever. When this happens, Politicians then scream about how high national debt is, and manage to convince people that this is equivalent to the debts they have on their credit cards, car loans and mortgaes, whilst neglecting to mention the fact that you and I don't have the right of Fiat.
The context in regards the 20000 deaths was there mathematical models and expected outcomes , it was not hooray 20000 deaths more if that is what the actual figures turn out as it's less than expected and the strategy has been successful.
Marxist artist wrote: I hope this doesn't class as political question as it not meant to offend or for discussion but in general where do countries in Europe and us get such colossal sums of money for there stimulus packages? Do they have it in banks or what? And if they borrow from whom?
It's typically borrowed, usually in the form of bonds.
Except if you are switzerland, which had implemented financial regulations on the state budget, leading to alot of excess money.
So much so that out finance federal councilor had to correct earnings upwards to his dismay.
(For the record, federal council is the highest executive Branche in out government.)
But yes in General they borrow the money from the Obligation market. In some cases also get money from national banks and if you are Germany Set up Bonds via Front company to rearm. Wait that's the history book talking.
Jokes aside, switzerland now declared emergency right.
Called upon more men then they are normally allowed without parliament which is Set out atleast until April 19 .
Shops closed beyond Food and Gas.
20 dead sofar and a high estimated grey area.
Marxist artist wrote: One of the profs In the uk said a death toll off 20000 would basically a great result, i am struggling to get my head round that , I understand what is going on and 20000 is probably conservative but wow what horrific numbers , a tradegy indeed and that's just uk estimate.
In what context did he say that would basically be a great amount?
He was asked by Hunt at the select committee to clarify if it was correct that the most recent modelling showed a decrease from ca.200,000 dead to ca.20,000 was accurate. He said that 20,000 seemed viable and was what he hoped would be possible.
Vaktathi wrote: Yeah, nobody should trust anyone who is specifically educated, trained, and experienced in a field of expertise, they're all arrogant and known to be remarkably wrong
Guess I'll get my next medical checkup done at the gas station and take my car in for servicing at the donut shop then.
You say that, but my wife went to the hospital to have our first child. She had done her research and was adamantly against inducing labor, especially using pitocin which has some very serious complications. The doctor insisted that she do it, and my wife continued to refuse - they made her sign a document stating that she was going against the medical advice of the doctor. And when she was sleeping, they tried to slip pitocin into her IV without her knowledge or consent (luckily, her mother was there and stopped them). We used a midwife for our second kid, and the experience was considerably more pleasant.
That experience, and several others that were worse but of a more personal nature, has convinced me that doctors don't nearly have their gak together as well as they would like you to believe. That's not to say you should go to a gas station for medical advice, but in my experience, sometimes doing nothing is better for you than doing what the doctor suggests.
And I think this coronavirus thing is another one of those situations. In 2018, the US had a terrible flu season. An estimated 80,000 Americans died from the flu over a few months, with 1,600 people dying per week at its worst - and that's with an easily accessible flu vaccine. If we had tracked the flu in 2018 with the granularity that we track the coronavirus, we'd be even more scared because it was much, much worse. At the very least, the death numbers now don't seem to be higher than the expected for a flu season, meaning that the coronavirus is probably killing people that would've died from the flu anyway. But because we are getting hourly updates and everybody is buying all the toilet paper, we're freaking out, man! New York City is threatening a quarantine when they've only had 7 deaths so far. More people die from tripping into manholes.
My main concern is that they are going to credit these absurdly draconian measures for saving the human race, so that next year's flu season will result in the same measures taken again.
Vaktathi wrote: Yeah, nobody should trust anyone who is specifically educated, trained, and experienced in a field of expertise, they're all arrogant and known to be remarkably wrong
Guess I'll get my next medical checkup done at the gas station and take my car in for servicing at the donut shop then.
You say that, but my wife went to the hospital to have our first child. She had done her research and was adamantly against inducing labor, especially using pitocin which has some very serious complications. The doctor insisted that she do it, and my wife continued to refuse - they made her sign a document stating that she was going against the medical advice of the doctor. And when she was sleeping, they tried to slip pitocin into her IV without her knowledge or consent (luckily, her mother was there and stopped them). We used a midwife for our second kid, and the experience was considerably more pleasant.
That experience, and several others that were worse but of a more personal nature, has convinced me that doctors don't nearly have their gak together as well as they would like you to believe. That's not to say you should go to a gas station for medical advice, but in my experience, sometimes doing nothing is better for you than doing what the doctor suggests
I can get that, and as with anything, an individual can be wrong or negligent despite gobs of experience and training, for sure, and is why for most major medical procedures a 2nd or even 3rd opinion should always be sought. But when the overwhelmingly vast majority of a profession are saying "hey, this is serious and could be very bad", that bears listening to.
Sqorgar wrote: And I think this coronavirus thing is another one of those situations. In 2018, the US had a terrible flu season. An estimated 80,000 Americans died from the flu over a few months, with 1,600 people dying per week at its worst - and that's with an easily accessible flu vaccine.
(snip)
My main concern is that they are going to credit these absurdly draconian measures for saving the human race, so that next year's flu season will result in the same measures taken again.
Without in any way disagreeing with the second sentence, I do want to point out that flu season specifically was the worst in 40 years - not a typical flu season. So I don't think we can use it as a baseline.
You know, more and more, I think of Y2K. All throughout 1998-1999, people complained the sky would fall when the year 2000 hit because many computing systems, critical systems, were not set up to take a 4 character year field. Nothing actually really significant happened, and people generally remember Y2K as being much ado about nothing.
What they don't remember is that Y2K wasn't a big deal because of an intense, coordinated effort across many industries to remediate the issue beforehand, costing unspeakable numbers of man-hours and budgeting.
One of the problems with successfully predicting and averting a catastrophe is that people use the lack of a catastrophe to question the effort.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Roberts84 wrote: Donkeys live a long time.
None of you has ever seen a dead donkey.
That, or some of us perhaps have a more rational perspective about the liberties we can expect on a wargaming forum's off-topic board, I guess. But, by all means, piss on the floor the minute you walk in and decry the injustice of being pleasantly asked to take it to the bathroom.
nfe wrote: He was asked by Hunt at the select committee to clarify if it was correct that the most recent modelling showed a decrease from ca.200,000 dead to ca.20,000 was accurate. He said that 20,000 seemed viable and was what he hoped would be possible.
Ah. I suppose one of the few contexts that 20,000 people dead is a welcome number is when it's coming down from 200,0000. Thanks for expanding on that.
MiguelFelstone wrote: I kind of feel like an ass complaining about gaming when people losing their lives, jobs, businesses ect but i don't get out of the house often and i was really looking forward to this years escalation league. I've already bought the full army, and we had 4 more months to go
It's okay to be disappointed, so long as you keep it in perspective. My kids were poised to have really fun baseball seasons because reasons, and I'm sad they won't get the chance to have those experiences and memories. Public health is infinitely more important and if this saves lives it's worth it, but I'm still sad for them.
Yup, beaches in FL are packed right now, and we have such a huge vulnerable population here.
So Florida's schools are closed through April 15th now, out another 2 weeks. Additionally, our state testing and school grading has been canceled for this school year. The possibility of an e-semester or optional semester is being floated- parents are being given the choice to hold their kid back or promote them.
That will have amounted to about a 5 week closure if we do come back the 15th- and will leave us with 5 weeks left for the school year.
Gitzbitah wrote: So Florida's schools are closed through April 15th now, out another 2 weeks. Additionally, our state testing and school grading has been canceled for this school year. The possibility of an e-semester or optional semester is being floated- parents are being given the choice to hold their kid back or promote them.
That will have amounted to about a 5 week closure if we do come back the 15th- and will leave us with 5 weeks left for the school year.
Gearing up for something similar in Australia. Hasn't really hit us yet but the rate of infection is exponential as observed elsewhere. GF's University has cancelled lectures, and it's looking like the Childcare center she manages will shutting up shop before the week is out.
Sqorgar wrote: [q
Second, I'm not sure self isolation of healthy individuals is really a good play. Everything I've read has suggested that exercise and nutrition are of paramount importance, and essentially imprisoning people to the point where they can get neither will only make the population more susceptible to the virus. Not to mention the effects to mental healthy that isolation can create. We could be trading a cough for depression in young healthy adults.
But children are little disease factories and I spent the first few years of my kids in preschool getting sick repeatedly, so I'm not against closing down schools for a little bit. It is easy to say that though, since I have someone to watch them and lose nothing from school being closed for a while.
Then again the isolation basically is "stay clear of others, avoid insides".
You don't have to stay locked inside your home...You can go out. If you are out and aren't in close contact with other humans you are safe. The thing doesn't jump 5m away to you in outside. Nor are cases reported where you contacted surface. Contacts have happened with close contact with infected people(and generally inside at that).
Ya that's not funny bud. People at my church were talking about how this was engineered by China to cause our collapse, these are the same people buying TP by the pallet. I don't wana get political but rolls down hill, maybe disbanding the NSC pandemic response wasn't a great idea.
And I have heard claims it was north korea and CIA
Conspiracy theorists are crazy.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gitzbitah wrote: So Florida's schools are closed through April 15th now, out another 2 weeks. Additionally, our state testing and school grading has been canceled for this school year. The possibility of an e-semester or optional semester is being floated- parents are being given the choice to hold their kid back or promote them.
That will have amounted to about a 5 week closure if we do come back the 15th- and will leave us with 5 weeks left for the school year.
Here they are going for study from home system at least for now.
My niece's biggest worry with the virus(bless kids small worries) is schools being closed she'll have to spend july at school instead Well kid's have kid sized worries. If that's the worst kids have to worry about good. They will learn bigger worries eventually anyway.
Regardless of anything else, this whole fiasco should be a wake-up call. It should really drive home how dependent we are in the west on imports and foreign manufacturing. There's actually a paracetamol shortage in Australia right now because all of the paracetamol in Australia is produced in India, and India has closed its borders.
Roberts84 wrote: Regardless of anything else, this whole fiasco should be a wake-up call. It should really drive home how dependent we are in the west on imports and foreign manufacturing. There's actually a paracetamol shortage in Australia right now because all of the paracetamol in Australia is produced in India, and India has closed its borders.
"paracetamol" = acetaminophen.
There is stuff out there saying Ibuprofen exacerbates the COVID-19 virus condition/symptoms (I think it was the French Health Minister who initially said this?), but then I've heard that there is not enough evidence of this happening to definitively say it is 'true'.
But...maybe take acetaminophen or something other then Ibuprofen if you're trying to reduce a fever...?
Vaktathi wrote:I can get that, and as with anything, an individual can be wrong or negligent despite gobs of experience and training, for sure, and is why for most major medical procedures a 2nd or even 3rd opinion should always be sought. But when the overwhelmingly vast majority of a profession are saying "hey, this is serious and could be very bad", that bears listening to.
I don't know. I go through phases of learning everything I can about different things. A few years back, I did a deep dive into the US education system, and the stuff I learned shocked the hell out of me. And now, I'm reading about the history of disease and modern medicine, and I'm equally flabbergasted.
I won't go heavily into any of this stuff, but if you look up the stories of perpetual fever, Sister Kenny, Coney Island incubators, the Cutter incident, SV-40, or how Rockefeller influenced the direction of modern medical education, I think you'll come to a similar opinion on doctors.
Ouze wrote:Without in any way disagreeing with the second sentence, I do want to point out that flu season specifically was the worst in 40 years - not a typical flu season. So I don't think we can use it as a baseline.
I wasn't using it as a baseline. I was pointing out that two years ago, we had an outbreak that was much, much, much worse and nobody even noticed or cared, while freaking the heck out over something which is relatively innocuous in comparison.
One of the problems with successfully predicting and averting a catastrophe is that people use the lack of a catastrophe to question the effort.
While that is a possibility, it should be possible to see the effects of different approaches. For instance, the way the UK is currently handling stuff should show what a non-response should look like when compared to San Fransisco's complete lockdown.
Gitzbitah wrote:So Florida's schools are closed through April 15th now, out another 2 weeks. Additionally, our state testing and school grading has been canceled for this school year. The possibility of an e-semester or optional semester is being floated- parents are being given the choice to hold their kid back or promote them.
There's been, what, 190 cases reported in Florida? 7 deaths? And now they are closing schools, canceling all testing, and potentially extending the school year, if not straight up holding a bunch of kids back? For a disease which has a 0% mortality for children?
I don't want to watch my children for four weeks straight. I don't send them to school to learn. I send them to school so that I can get some peace and quiet. Guess it is time to start a family Necromunda league...
Roberts84 wrote: Regardless of anything else, this whole fiasco should be a wake-up call. It should really drive home how dependent we are in the west on imports and foreign manufacturing. There's actually a paracetamol shortage in Australia right now because all of the paracetamol in Australia is produced in India, and India has closed its borders.
Panadol is manufactured in Victoria, and still accounts for the bulk of paracetamol sales. Most of the 'shortages' in the shops at the moment are due to panic buying causing unprecedented sales lavels, rather than actual supply shortages.
This is one of those times I am exceedingly glad I don't work in supply chain logistics anymore. The job I was in three years ago would be a nightmare, right now.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sqorgar wrote: There's been, what, 190 cases reported in Florida? 7 deaths? And now they are closing schools, canceling all testing, and potentially extending the school year, if not straight up holding a bunch of kids back? For a disease which has a 0% mortality for children?
The mortality rate in children isn't the issue. The issue is the mortality rate in the people it gets passed on to if it's allowed to spread freely. Children generally aren't being killed by it, but they are carrying it.
All of the shutdowns and other precautions being taken are intended to prevent situations like we saw in China when this all started, where it spread incredibly quickly and the medical services simply couldn't keep up.
The fact that more isn't being done about the flu mortality rate is a completely separate issue, and is in no way an indication that we should be ignoring this virus.
That's next quarter, which might as well be a million years away from the typical CEO's viewpoint. Profits NOW are vastly more important, especially since he stock options just went down the toilet.
Sqorgar wrote: I wasn't using it as a baseline. I was pointing out that two years ago, we had an outbreak that was much, much, much worse and nobody even noticed or cared, while freaking the heck out over something which is relatively innocuous in comparison.
But is it innocuous in comparison? In 2018, roughly 43 million people in the US got the flu, and about 60k died. That's about 0.14% fatality.
By comparison, as of this writing in the US, 5,600 people have it, and 101 people have died. So, 1.8% mortality - more than 10 times worse than the worst flu season in 40 years.
if 43 million people get Covid-19, then at that rate, 775,000 people will die. And of course, it's likely going to be more, since the flu season was spread out over a really long time, and didn't overwhelm the medical system.
why do you keep claiming the flu and Covid are roughly analogous? It's so clearly, inarguably, indisputably just... not.
Sqorgar wrote: There's numerous reasons to believe that it won't be as bad in the US. Climate, health, nutrition, distance, and so on should ensure that the disease spreads much slower, while these same factors could also mean that the severity of the disease in those who do get it will be much less. Smoking definitely seems to be a major factor in the severity of the disease, and as I've mentioned, smokers have three time higher chance of getting pneumonia than non-smokers.
There's also factors saying America will get hit far worse. First and foremost, our for-profit health care system that leaves millions without affordable access to health care, and millions more for whom a major expense like three weeks on a respirator will bankrupt an entire family. Alongside that is large segments of the workforce with either no sick leave, or highly restricted sick leave, and these are highly concentrated in the food/service industry where they can do the most harm. These two factors have created a HUGE 'working even when I'm sick' culture in America.
Then there's identity politics involved, which I won't go into detail but you know what I mean.
Given that, you have quite a large number of Americans who are not going to self-isolate even when they're feeling poorly and spread the virus far and wide, and even more who will avoid seeking help early and wait until they're literally in the process of dying before heading over to the hospital, at which point there may not be much the hospital can do.
All the public places around here are ghost towns. I think people are taking it pretty seriously now, even if it took a week to really hit home. I have seen very few people being cavalier about things...
Roberts84 wrote: Regardless of anything else, this whole fiasco should be a wake-up call. It should really drive home how dependent we are in the west on imports and foreign manufacturing. There's actually a paracetamol shortage in Australia right now because all of the paracetamol in Australia is produced in India, and India has closed its borders.
Panadol is manufactured in Victoria, and still accounts for the bulk of paracetamol sales. Most of the 'shortages' in the shops at the moment are due to panic buying causing unprecedented sales lavels, rather than actual supply shortages.
This is one of those times I am exceedingly glad I don't work in supply chain logistics anymore. The job I was in three years ago would be a nightmare, right now.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sqorgar wrote: There's been, what, 190 cases reported in Florida? 7 deaths? And now they are closing schools, canceling all testing, and potentially extending the school year, if not straight up holding a bunch of kids back? For a disease which has a 0% mortality for children?
The mortality rate in children isn't the issue. The issue is the mortality rate in the people it gets passed on to if it's allowed to spread freely. Children generally aren't being killed by it, but they are carrying it.
All of the shutdowns and other precautions being taken are intended to prevent situations like we saw in China when this all started, where it spread incredibly quickly and the medical services simply couldn't keep up.
The fact that more isn't being done about the flu mortality rate is a completely separate issue, and is in no way an indication that we should be ignoring this virus.
Wow. My chemist literally bullshitted me in that case. Gave me a spiel about how there's a paracetamol shortage that will be ongoing due to the fact Australia doesn't produce any, and it all comes out of india.
Roberts84 wrote: Wow. My chemist literally bullshitted me in that case. Gave me a spiel about how there's a paracetamol shortage that will be ongoing due to the fact Australia doesn't produce any, and it all comes out of india.
Most of the generic brand stuff does, and they have indeed shut down exports. When that will actually have an impact depends on how much stock is sitting over here in warehouses.
Well, lost my day job today. Not a good time to be working for a vacation company that's for sure. They laid off the entire marketing dept because there is nothing to market. Supposedly going to invite everyone back when this is all over. Didn't stop me from sending out about a dozen resumes so far, there's usually a lot of web design jobs in the area so fingers crossed. Good thing we stocked up before the axe fell
Necros wrote: Well, lost my day job today. Not a good time to be working for a vacation company that's for sure. They laid off the entire marketing dept because there is nothing to market. Supposedly going to invite everyone back when this is all over. Didn't stop me from sending out about a dozen resumes so far, there's usually a lot of web design jobs in the area so fingers crossed. Good thing we stocked up before the axe fell
Sorry about your job Necros... I am a teacher at a high school, and a college (Welding) and they have shut us down for 3 weeks for now but they are talking about ending it for the rest of the school year. I am only really concerned about getting to next Monday as the War Department and I are leaving to Mexico on that day and I have been looking forward to this since October.
I am not a doctor or scientist, but I have serious problems with the way that the media has been handling this. Not just main stream, but social media and uneducated morons that start all kinds of false rumors and are helping to blow this way out of proportion. I am only finding out bits and pieces because I have no social media or any kind of real internet presence. People that the War Department works with are losing their minds about this thing.
I don't know... maybe I am being obtuse but, I am just hanging back and watching the proverbial fireworks wondering how people are going this absolute bonkers over toilet paper. One of my kids asked me last friday what I would do if I had nothing to use. The shower is right next door to ole jonnie was my reply. Gross? Kinda. Effective in a bind? To say the least. TBH I just found this thread and there was zero chance I could read past page 6 until I skipped to the end, is this the end of the world and I am just like Peter from Office Space, or is this just completely out of control?
Sqorgar wrote: New York City is threatening a quarantine when they've only had 7 deaths so far. More people die from tripping into manholes.
Sigh. I see a lot of the utterly ignorant 'more people die from X' (when X is something usually fully established and the Covid is barely beginning, so the comparison is nonsense to begin with) and wonder if there is something wrong with math education these days.
To put it simply, suppose you have one sick person, who passes the disease to another once every 2 days (far smaller rate than Covid, by the way). Do you know how long that one person needs to infect every single human on earth? With 2 days between infections, and only one infection at once? Less than TWO MONTHS.
That's why people ""freak out"" about 7 infections - because it's last possible second to stop the pandemic. You do nothing, and a week later, you will have not 7 infections, but a hundred thousand. Guess how many ICU beds there are in the entire NY state - spoiler alert, it's two orders of magnitude less. And that's without considering one more week and the entire 20 million NY population will be sick, with a handful of exceptions. That's also 600.000 dead given the 3% mortality rate, which is coincidentally 50% more than USA lost in the entire World War 2, just from one state.
Gee, I see no reason whatsoever to be worried, and that's not even the worst case scenario
insaniak wrote:The mortality rate in children isn't the issue. The issue is the mortality rate in the people it gets passed on to if it's allowed to spread freely. Children generally aren't being killed by it, but they are carrying it.
For the most part, their parents aren't in any danger either. The grandparents are, and even then, probably not as much in danger as they would lead you to believe (and if they were in danger, they be just as endangered by getting the flu, and we do feth all to prevent that). Seems a lot easier to tell the grandparents to avoid their grandchildren for two months than to take 3 million children out of school, cancelling all standardized tests, and potentially holding many of them back a year.
This is a GROSS overreaction.
All of the shutdowns and other precautions being taken are intended to prevent situations like we saw in China when this all started, where it spread incredibly quickly and the medical services simply couldn't keep up.
I'm convinced that it is physically impossible for an outbreak in the US to resemble what happened in China, partly because China was largely operating on incomplete information as they were the first to identify and deal with the virus. There's many other factors, like smoking rate and climate, that will also slow the spread of the virus in the US.
The fact that more isn't being done about the flu mortality rate is a completely separate issue, and is in no way an indication that we should be ignoring this virus.
What should be done about the flu is less about quarantine and cancelling school and more about improving the nutrition and health of the population.
Ouze wrote:
But is it innocuous in comparison? In 2018, roughly 43 million people in the US got the flu, and about 60k died. That's about 0.14% fatality.
By comparison, as of this writing in the US, 5,600 people have it, and 101 people have died. So, 1.8% mortality - more than 10 times worse than the worst flu season in 40 years.
First, I wasn't comparing mortalities. I was saying that something with many, many more deaths and infections happened two years ago and nobody noticed or cared. If we followed that flu with the same fervor, we'd still be in the middle of martial law. Luckily, we didn't, or else we'd be panicking about every flu season since.
Second, we don't know the actual mortality rate of this virus due to a lack of testing. When testing everybody on the cruise ship, something like 50% of them tested positive but showed no signs of sickness. We don't have the mortality of the virus, we have the mortality of the virus among those hospitalized. With the measles, you have a 1 in 1000 chance of being hospitalized, and of those hospitalized, you have something like a 1 in 100 chance of death. What you are saying is that the measles has a 1 in 100 chance of death because you only test the people already in the hospital.
if 43 million people get Covid-19, then at that rate, 775,000 people will die.
There's no evidence that this would be true. Even if every single one of those 43 million were hospitalized, the danger zone for the virus is largely the old and infirm - of which we have a limited number of. Basically, we'd run out of old, sick people before we reached that number. Most likely, the ones that are most at risk are also the ones who are most at risk from dying of the flu, which means that we'd probably max out between 50,000 and 80,000 deaths.
Something like the Spanish flu, which killed a reported 50 million people, is physically impossible to happen today because we don't have millions of soldiers pooping in buckets in trenches during a war.
why do you keep claiming the flu and Covid are roughly analogous? It's so clearly, inarguably, indisputably just... not.
Because there is limited and conflicting evidence that it is worse than the flu. It seems incredibly likely to me that the numbers we are seeing is largely because we are actively looking for this virus, thus we are actively finding it. In other words, because we are measuring it, we are getting a lot more data about this singular virus, when past flu epidemics didn't have nearly the same granularity of study.
Roberts84 wrote: Wow. My chemist literally bullshitted me in that case. Gave me a spiel about how there's a paracetamol shortage that will be ongoing due to the fact Australia doesn't produce any, and it all comes out of india.
Most of the generic brand stuff does, and they have indeed shut down exports. When that will actually have an impact depends on how much stock is sitting over here in warehouses.
The cetirizine hayfever allergy tablets I rely on most days of the year are made in India too so I bought the big 100 tablet box a couple weeks back.
I had a game session on Monday. Decided to bring a prsent for everyone. I had plenty so I packed a roll of toilet paper per player, and gave them out. One player was out so it turned from bizarre weirdness to meaningful gift, gave her the bog roll of players who didn't turn up that day.
Today DM cancelled next four sessions, his brother has flu like symptoms and has had to quarantine.
Ouze wrote:if 43 million people get Covid-19, then at that rate, 775,000 people will die.
There's no evidence that this would be true. Even if every single one of those 43 million were hospitalized, the danger zone for the virus is largely the old and infirm - of which we have a limited number of. Basically, we'd run out of old, sick people before we reached that number.
That "limited number" of people in the US population over 65 is 51 million people. if 40% of that population got it, and 2% of those that contracted it died, 400,000 people would die. if 20% of that population got it, you'd still have 200,000 people dead. And that's just the cohort of old people!
How exactly are you calculating 60-80k mortality at best while also advocating we're going too far in trying to do anything at all to flatten out the curve and reduce the speed of infection?
Orlanth wrote: UK rise infection rates is similar to that elsewhere in Europe outside Italy. There is little difference.
The wise go with what virologists and epidemiologists say, I do, hopefully so do you. The problem is various virologists and epidemiologists say different things and do not agree. We can make our own minds up as to which expert is more likely to be right, and can logically differ.
Now must compound this with media attention which highlights the path not taken. In the UK herd immunity is questioned, in Italy lockdown is questioned. In both countries the media is saying not enough is being done.
Nobody knows which is the best route forward, there are too many variables.
However flip flopping between contrary poliicies is likely to be the worse option.
Pick a sound contingency and stick with it.
Except you don't. Actual experts who aren't his underlings called the de Spaffle plan 'a parody' - this alone should give you a pause and rethink moment.
The herd immunity plan is exceptionally stupid for three reasons - first, because because it doesn't give a damn about disease spread and tens of thousands who will die as a result. The point of lockdown is not stopping the spread, it's slowing it down so hospitals can manage things. There is already death triage going on in Italy even with lockdowns - think for a second, how much worse it will be in UK with far greater sick numbers? It's literally condemning people to die. Easily preventable death, at that, just because you piled so much work on doctors there were no resources left for most of the patients.
Second, because Covid, unlike what Murdoch media say, is not harmless. It damages the lungs of people who survive it - opening them wide open to subsequent bacterial and fungal infections. This not only will add tens of billions to healthcare costs down the road, it will add to number of deaths, even if said deaths are seemingly not work of Covid (and will add to dumb crowing "flu/cold/whatever is more dangerous" when the primary reason why these will soon become deadlier is because Covid broken the ground, so to speak).
Third, and most worrying case - viruses mutate. The more often the more of them there are. Bozo wants to explode their numbers, greatly increasing chance one mutates into something far worse, ready to reap already weakened population. How is that a sane plan? Just look at Spanish flu - terrifying as it was, its first stage was merely an appetizer. It's only when it really got going, it mutated by chance into the second stage that claimed the most victims, thanks to predecessor's work. A year from now, this moment might seem positively rosy compared to what came next. Then again, it might not - but what the Tories are doing right now is pulling at the pin of live grenade. Even if it doesn't go off, the mere idea of doing so is lunacy.
There is a reason why UK choose this, though. It's easy path, allows the PM to do nothing and just blame things at political opponents/poor/virus/foreigners/whatever, all while cutting more funds from the NHS (save for a few token splashes of money that can be quietly withdrawn once press reports these), plus giving a few more tax breaks to the 1%. After all, Singapore on Thames, etc, etc (ignoring the fact the real Singapore went hard into the lockdown, as usual doing exact opposite of what UK politicians say it supposedly did).
Irbis wrote:Sigh. I see a lot of the utterly ignorant 'more people die from X' (when X is something usually fully established and the Covid is barely beginning, so the comparison is nonsense to begin with) and wonder if there is something wrong with math education these days.
It was a facetious comparison, I admit. But shutting down New York City has a very real cost that will be measured in unemployment, economic disaster, crime, and even lost lives. Doing so without the coronavirus being a clear and present danger is irresponsible and dangerous.
To put it simply, suppose you have one sick person, who passes the disease to another once every 2 days (far smaller rate than Covid, by the way). Do you know how long that one person needs to infect every single human on earth? With 2 days between infections, and only one infection at once? Less than TWO MONTHS.
Except that is a completely naive way to model the disease. It doesn't factor in pretty much any factors in transmission. It assumes a 100% transmission rate, that people have equal social interaction, that they are all close together, that the conditions for transmission are perfect, that nobody successfully fights the disease, that climate and environment don't affect the transmission of the disease, and so on. Plus, well before you reached 100%, you'd hit herd immunity in certain populations that would act as a buffer against further spread of the disease. Even the Spanish Flu didn't infect every single human on earth, and it had the help of a world war and the most unsanitary conditions of the twentieth century.
What's most important is to avoid hyperbole or to blow things completely out of proportion due to paranoia and anxiety.
That's why people ""freak out"" about 7 infections - because it's last possible second to stop the pandemic. You do nothing, and a week later, you will have not 7 infections, but a hundred thousand. Guess how many ICU beds there are in the entire NY state - spoiler alert, it's two orders of magnitude less. And that's without considering one more week and the entire 20 million NY population will be sick, with a handful of exceptions. That's also 600.000 dead given the 3% mortality rate, which is coincidentally 50% more than USA lost in the entire World War 2, just from one state.
Poppycock. Let's dial the hysterical overreaction back a bit and look at the Diamond Princess cruise ship. There is probably no better conditions for the spread of a highly infectious disease than a closed environment like that with an open buffet. Presumably, every person on that ship was in close enough proximity to each other, breathing recycled air, to have encountered the virus. Of the 3,618 people tested, there were 692 confirmed with the coronavirus. Of those, 410 were asymptomatic (not sick), meaning only 282 showed any symptoms at all. There were 7 deaths. 3 Japanese citizens in their 80s, an "elderly Japanese man", a British national in his 70s, a 78-year old Australian man, and a Hong Kong man of undisclosed age or health.
By your reasoning, with a 3% mortality rate and 100% infected, the whole cruise ship should've become infected and had about 108 deaths. Of the entire group of people on the cruise ship, passengers and crew, the mortality rate is 0.19%. It you assume that the entire state of New York (which has 20 million people, the city only has 8 million) follows the same trend, you'd expect to see about 38,000 deaths. Not great, but far, far fewer than the apocalyptic 600,000 dead.
And good news, New York state is not a cruise ship. The numbers would only improve in real world conditions. Likely, there would be entire communities in the state which never get even a single case. And the numbers would improve further if simple, but non-draconian steps are taken to further reduce potential casualties in the populations that are most at risk. We don't need to lock everybody in their homes and close down all the businesses. We just have to focus our efforts where they will be most helpful. If you could save 30,000 people by doing something simple, but needed to basically destroy society to save 38,000 people, isn't saving 30,000 people enough?
And I have to ask - how well do you think an 83 year old with a chronic respiratory disease is going to do in isolation anyway? You think they can make their own meals, stave off loneliness, get exercise, get their medicine refilled, and so on? They can't even watch sports, now that they've cancelled them all. How many of them will have fallen and can't get up, dying on their kitchen floor from a fractured hip bone because they can't reach their phone? Quarantine will likely be the hardest (and most deadly) for seniors, even if they never get the disease.
Sqorgar wrote: It was a facetious comparison, I admit. But shutting down New York City has a very real cost that will be measured in unemployment, economic disaster, crime, and even lost lives. Doing so without the coronavirus being a clear and present danger is irresponsible and dangerous.
We have a whole bunch of experts who say that there is a clear and present danger. And, I'm sorry, but the experts trump 'guy on the internet who distrusts experts'.
Yeah, I’m losing a LOT of respect for ostriches in this thread (people putting their heads in the sand about how bad this is). It’s bad. If you disagree...well, get over yourself. The entire world is practically shut down. Do you have ANY idea how bad that is? How much it takes to do that? It’s never happened before in my lifetime and I’m 35. If the experts tell you it’s bad and you don’t want to listen...then just go blow all your cash at the game store, watch as your job shuts down and you’re broke because “it really wasn’t that bad”. Sheesh.
timetowaste85 wrote: Yeah, I’m losing a LOT of respect for ostriches in this thread (people putting their heads in the sand about how bad this is). It’s bad. If you disagree...well, get over yourself. The entire world is practically shut down. Do you have ANY idea how bad that is? How much it takes to do that? It’s never happened before in my lifetime and I’m 35. If the experts tell you it’s bad and you don’t want to listen...then just go blow all your cash at the game store, watch as your job shuts down and you’re broke because “it really wasn’t that bad”. Sheesh.
People panic. Right now, Twitter is absolutely flooded with people saying that Oprah has been arrested for sex trafficking - doesn't seem to be any reliable source behind it. Thousands of tweets without a single source. A rumor goes halfway around the world before the truth even gets its pants on.
Sqorgar wrote: It was a facetious comparison, I admit. But shutting down New York City has a very real cost that will be measured in unemployment, economic disaster, crime, and even lost lives. Doing so without the coronavirus being a clear and present danger is irresponsible and dangerous.
We have a whole bunch of experts who say that there is a clear and present danger. And, I'm sorry, but the experts trump 'guy on the internet who distrusts experts'.
Sqorgar wrote: Right now, Twitter is absolutely flooded with people saying that Oprah has been arrested for sex trafficking - doesn't seem to be any reliable source behind it. Thousands of tweets without a single source. A rumor goes halfway around the world before the truth even gets its pants on.
The people that are warning that Covid needs to be taken seriously and urging for measures to try to flatten the curve are not random, unsourced strangers on Twitter.
timetowaste85 wrote: Yeah, I’m losing a LOT of respect for ostriches in this thread (people putting their heads in the sand about how bad this is). It’s bad. If you disagree...well, get over yourself. The entire world is practically shut down. Do you have ANY idea how bad that is? How much it takes to do that? It’s never happened before in my lifetime and I’m 35. If the experts tell you it’s bad and you don’t want to listen...then just go blow all your cash at the game store, watch as your job shuts down and you’re broke because “it really wasn’t that bad”. Sheesh.
People panic. Right now, Twitter is absolutely flooded with people saying that Oprah has been arrested for sex trafficking - doesn't seem to be any reliable source behind it. Thousands of tweets without a single source. A rumor goes halfway around the world before the truth even gets its pants on.
Oh that's fething brilliant. Governments all over the world which are basically run by corporations and the upper class, whose number one priority is profits, are shutting down everything costing those corporations and governments fething trillions in said profits and taxes because of rumours and overreaction on social media? Do you actually think the people who actually run the world would let that happen? If the corporations, big banks, wall street executives, and hedge fund managers actually allow their stooge politicians, who they paid good money for, do that then this is some serious gak. Think for a damned minute.
If this scares them enough to risk their precious money and power then it should scare you too.
timetowaste85 wrote: Yeah, I’m losing a LOT of respect for ostriches in this thread (people putting their heads in the sand about how bad this is). It’s bad. If you disagree...well, get over yourself. The entire world is practically shut down. Do you have ANY idea how bad that is? How much it takes to do that? It’s never happened before in my lifetime and I’m 35. If the experts tell you it’s bad and you don’t want to listen...then just go blow all your cash at the game store, watch as your job shuts down and you’re broke because “it really wasn’t that bad”. Sheesh.
People panic. Right now, Twitter is absolutely flooded with people saying that Oprah has been arrested for sex trafficking - doesn't seem to be any reliable source behind it. Thousands of tweets without a single source. A rumor goes halfway around the world before the truth even gets its pants on.
I'm soryy.. Say what now ? Does anyone sane takes seriously what people on social media and more specifically twitter have to say?
Really, they should not be shutting down whole counties and closing schools, restaurants, etc...
Instead, what should be happening is identify and quarantine the vulnerable populations. The elderly and immune compromized who are vulnerable should be locked down by the authorities and kept isolated. Let the general population continue as normal, just keep the vulnerable people isolated till the pandemic passes.
Ernestas wrote: You guys should not trust science and scientists in general. They are known to be remarkably wrong and arrogant.
Why wouldn't you trust the people who decided their entire lives to a chosen field? Who are you going to trust?
Ernestas wrote: Recently there was tests done for an entire village in Italy. Almost entire village was diagnosed as infected with corona virus despite none of them showing any symptoms. This only confirms that coronavirus is only dangerous for the weak and various numbers pulled by scientists are utter nonsense.
Just because you are either A systematic or had mild symptoms (you are healthy) doesn't mean your not putting the vulnerable population of a given community at risk by being a carrier of the virus.
One study finds 30% mortality rate, another 10% then it is 2% and then it is as low as 0.5%.
That's because the projected mortality rate keeps changing. It would like you heard a tropical storm was heading your way and then 3 days later your hit with a category 5 hurricane, that doesn't mean the meteorologist was wrong 3 days ago when it WAS a tropical storm.
insaniak wrote: Equating unverified rumours on twitter with information from actual medical professionals?
Medical professionals are just as prone to it as anyone else, especially when they all get their information from the same one or two sources.
There used to be this thing that happened called "perpetual fever". What it was is that women, after childbirth in a hospital, would mysteriously develop a high fever and then die. In extraordinary numbers. Mortality rates for women giving birth rose as high 40% in the 1800s. Nobody could figure it out. Then doctor realized that women who gave birth with midwives had much much lower rates death. He figured out that if he washed his hands before handling a birth, he reduced the cases of childbed fever by 90%. It turns out, the doctors were handling corpses in the morgue and bringing disease with them, on their hands, and giving it to the mothers. Washing hands. That simple.
The other doctors HATED this guy. They didn't believe it (even when it was an easily tested hypothesis) because it went against what was understood to be the case in medical literature of the day. More than that, they were offended at the very idea that their hands could be dirty, and refused to wash their hands on principle. The doctor, under extreme pressure and ridicule from the medical profession, ended up moving out of the country before ultimately dying in a mental institution.
There's also the case of Sister Kenny. During the polio outbreak, this woman with no medical training created a method for treating polio paralysis using warm compresses and moving the muscles. Before this, paralytic polio was treated by surgically breaking and reforming the paralyzed limbs, and keeping them immobile in casts - sometimes for years at a time. The idea that paralytic polio could be treated by, gasp, moving the limbs seemed counter intuitive. Sister Kenny was able to ease the symptoms of paralytic polio using her methods (which became the foundation of physical therapy that we have today) in most cases, but the doctors hated her and didn't trust her. They would only let her work on patients that they had already failed to help, and she was still successful. The ended up making a movie about her, which was stampeded by parents hoping to get a glimpse of the person they credited with fixing polio.
Want more? Incubators. The guy who created incubators was completely ignored and rejected by the medical establishment. Not giving up, he created a sideshow on Coney Island where he charged people 25 cents to come in a stare at premature babies. He used the money from this sideshow in order to fund the nursing staff and incubators so that parents didn't have to pay for it. All told, he saved THOUSANDS of premature babies, that the medical establishment would've otherwise let die, before incubators became commonplace in maternity wards.
Here's another one. The reason why the polio epidemic got as bad as it did was because of tonsillectomies. It turns out that the tonsils are part of your body's defense mechanism and removing them cause a specific type of nerve damage that allowed the poliomyelitis virus to enter the body, and generally lead to the worst kind of paralysis - paralysis of the lungs (insert picture of hundreds of children chilling in iron lungs). In trying to cure a chronic sore throat, they increased the severity and size of the polio epidemic considerably.
The fact is, doctors get bad information too, and new, better information tends to be really slow to percolate - sometimes taking 50 to 100 years! The CDC's record keeping leaves much to be desired, and a vast number of their quoted disease rates are estimates. I mean, how could they know how many people actually get the flu every year? Well, they take a set of solid, but incomplete data, and then they multiply it by a set percentage. Since we have no way of seeing the actual numbers, we don't have any idea how correct those numbers are. They could be orders of magnitude off, or complicated by biases not represented in their estimates. But they base a lot of what they do on these estimates, and nobody is treating them like estimates. It is not uncommon for the CDC to significantly overestimate the danger and spread of a virus. If the CDC (or the WHO, for that matter) is wrong about something, then everybody who gets their information from them is wrong too.
So did most of us. Some with hard numbers that you can actually use to calculate percentages - which are actually worse than the experts are saying.
With regards to school closings and kids not getting sick. Do you people really think kids are the only people in school?
Aside from parents/grandparents (!) picking up kids, there's teachers (but they're expendable, right?), administration staff, janitors, in some cases kitchen staff.
All of whom can contract the virus from one another or the kids causing another infection center. Closing schools shuts down that vector of infection, slowing the spread.
Which, as has been repeatedly pointed out and ignored is the point of the isolation or lockdown policies. Not to stop the spread, but to limit it so health services aren't overwhelmed and herd immunity is (eventually) achieved in a controlled manner.
The infected to death ratio, even if it only takes into account hospitalised is still far worse than flu. Put it this way I work in the hospital and we don't set aside 2 whole wards for flu patients but have for covid and they are filling quickly.
I mean I hope the death rate is lower than expected , I really do as I have seen first hand what it does to people and the effect on families.
To not take this seriously is irresponsible as we could potentially be looking at millions of deaths world wide.
Comparing it to something else is irrelevant as this is covid and it is killing people and is as tradegy and if taken measures to save lives work then its worth doing. Economies can recover the dead cannot.
insaniak wrote: Equating unverified rumours on twitter with information from actual medical professionals?
Medical professionals are just as prone to it as anyone else, especially when they all get their information from the same one or two sources.
There used to be this thing that happened called "perpetual fever". What it was is that women, after childbirth in a hospital, would mysteriously develop a high fever and then die. In extraordinary numbers. Mortality rates for women giving birth rose as high 40% in the 1800s. Nobody could figure it out. Then doctor realized that women who gave birth with midwives had much much lower rates death. He figured out that if he washed his hands before handling a birth, he reduced the cases of childbed fever by 90%. It turns out, the doctors were handling corpses in the morgue and bringing disease with them, on their hands, and giving it to the mothers. Washing hands. That simple.
The other doctors HATED this guy. They didn't believe it (even when it was an easily tested hypothesis) because it went against what was understood to be the case in medical literature of the day. More than that, they were offended at the very idea that their hands could be dirty, and refused to wash their hands on principle. The doctor, under extreme pressure and ridicule from the medical profession, ended up moving out of the country before ultimately dying in a mental institution.
There's also the case of Sister Kenny. During the polio outbreak, this woman with no medical training created a method for treating polio paralysis using warm compresses and moving the muscles. Before this, paralytic polio was treated by surgically breaking and reforming the paralyzed limbs, and keeping them immobile in casts - sometimes for years at a time. The idea that paralytic polio could be treated by, gasp, moving the limbs seemed counter intuitive. Sister Kenny was able to ease the symptoms of paralytic polio using her methods (which became the foundation of physical therapy that we have today) in most cases, but the doctors hated her and didn't trust her. They would only let her work on patients that they had already failed to help, and she was still successful. The ended up making a movie about her, which was stampeded by parents hoping to get a glimpse of the person they credited with fixing polio.
Want more? Incubators. The guy who created incubators was completely ignored and rejected by the medical establishment. Not giving up, he created a sideshow on Coney Island where he charged people 25 cents to come in a stare at premature babies. He used the money from this sideshow in order to fund the nursing staff and incubators so that parents didn't have to pay for it. All told, he saved THOUSANDS of premature babies, that the medical establishment would've otherwise let die, before incubators became commonplace in maternity wards.
Here's another one. The reason why the polio epidemic got as bad as it did was because of tonsillectomies. It turns out that the tonsils are part of your body's defense mechanism and removing them cause a specific type of nerve damage that allowed the poliomyelitis virus to enter the body, and generally lead to the worst kind of paralysis - paralysis of the lungs (insert picture of hundreds of children chilling in iron lungs). In trying to cure a chronic sore throat, they increased the severity and size of the polio epidemic considerably.
The fact is, doctors get bad information too, and new, better information tends to be really slow to percolate - sometimes taking 50 to 100 years! The CDC's record keeping leaves much to be desired, and a vast number of their quoted disease rates are estimates. I mean, how could they know how many people actually get the flu every year? Well, they take a set of solid, but incomplete data, and then they multiply it by a set percentage. Since we have no way of seeing the actual numbers, we don't have any idea how correct those numbers are. They could be orders of magnitude off, or complicated by biases not represented in their estimates. But they base a lot of what they do on these estimates, and nobody is treating them like estimates. It is not uncommon for the CDC to significantly overestimate the danger and spread of a virus. If the CDC (or the WHO, for that matter) is wrong about something, then everybody who gets their information from them is wrong too.
I don't even know where to start with this.
Here's the thing - sometimes, people get things wrong. If, however, your, say, mechanic is mistaken about what's causing that knocking noise in your car, and it takes him a while to figure out the actual cause, the next time you have a problem with your car, do you take it to a mechanic, or do you ask some random person on the internet?
The simple fact is that despite the fact that they are not all-knowing, a medical professional is still the best source of knowledge on medical issues. On account of them being a medical professional. The fact that some doctors thought things that turned out to be wrong a hundred years ago, and medical knowledge and processes have evolved since then is not a reason to completely disregard the opinions of medical professionals now. Nor is the fact that some doctors make mistakes now. Because a doctor who makes mistakes is still exponentially more likely to be correct on medical matters than some guy who studies at the university of Google for ten minutes and thinks it makes him an expert.
MiguelFelstone wrote: Just because you are either A systematic or had mild symptoms (you are healthy) doesn't mean your not putting the vulnerable population of a given community at risk by being a carrier of the virus.
Being asymptomatic doesn't necessarily mean you are an asymptomatic carrier either. There does seem to be the case that this coronavirus is being transmitted, at least in part, by asymptomatic carriers. It is a likely explanation for coronavirus transmission when known carriers can't be found, but the only article I've found is the suggestion that a woman was an asymptomatic carrier who infected her whole family, despite not having any symptoms and testing negative for the virus itself (either the test is wrong, or she wasn't the actual vector of disease - but someone was). At the very least, it appears that asymptomatic carriers were not the primary manner in which this disease has been spread, so it likely isn't particularly common.
It's probably unnecessary to treat everyone without symptoms as if they are a secret Typhoid Mary at this time. We'll need a bit more evidence to go on before we decide to go all monsters due on Maple Street.
Vaktathi wrote:I can get that, and as with anything, an individual can be wrong or negligent despite gobs of experience and training, for sure, and is why for most major medical procedures a 2nd or even 3rd opinion should always be sought. But when the overwhelmingly vast majority of a profession are saying "hey, this is serious and could be very bad", that bears listening to.
I don't know. I go through phases of learning everything I can about different things. A few years back, I did a deep dive into the US education system, and the stuff I learned shocked the hell out of me. And now, I'm reading about the history of disease and modern medicine, and I'm equally flabbergasted.
Guys guys guys! All the professors of virology and epidemiology are wrong. I've been reading the Internet for four days!
Here's the thing - sometimes, people get things wrong. If, however, your, say, mechanic is mistaken about what's causing that knocking noise in your car, and it takes him a while to figure out the actual cause, the next time you have a problem with your car, do you take it to a mechanic, or do you ask some random person on the internet?
The point of those stories was not that the doctors got it wrong, but how they behaved in the face of someone else who go it right. The point isn't that doctors didn't wash their hands. The point is that the doctors refused to wash their hands even in the face of evidence of its effectiveness - and then harassed and shamed the guy who thought it was a pretty nifty idea until he died in a mental institution. They didn't just make a mistake.
Because a doctor who makes mistakes is still exponentially more likely to be correct on medical matters than some guy who studies at the university of Google for ten minutes and thinks it makes him an expert.
There are medical experts saying as much as well. Here's a video by Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, a German physician and politician with a history of criticizing the WHO (and the influence of pharmaceutical companies on the WHO). Essentially, he says that we aren't measuring "the incidence of coronavirus diseases, but the activity of the specialists searching for them".
My point here is not to pass myself off as a medical doctor, but to provide an alternate, less doomsday perspective on this whole disease. I think that as we increasingly give up our freedom, security, and well being in our panic over this virus, some perspective might be needed to make sure that we don't give up something we may never get back in our fervor.
I don't think I've contradicted anything the WHO has said (even they admit that everything is estimated and they need more testing and hard numbers), except in my doubt of their projections of the future spread of the disease. Mostly, my opposition is against excessive quarantining. I don't think the WHO recommended that Florida shut down all bars for the foreseeable future or hold children back a grade or limit any social gathering of any size - that was the politicians interpreting the WHO's suggestions for social distancing in an extreme way. Last I heard, the WHO said wash your hands, don't touch your face, and stand 3 feet away from others. They certainly didn't tell anybody to buy all the toilet paper or to avoid all old people because YOU MAY HAVE ALREADY KILLED THEM.
Grey Templar wrote: Really, they should not be shutting down whole counties and closing schools, restaurants, etc...Instead, what should be happening is identify and quarantine the vulnerable populations. The elderly and immune compromized who are vulnerable should be locked down by the authorities and kept isolated. Let the general population continue as normal, just keep the vulnerable people isolated till the pandemic passes.
Historically, shutting down schools has slowed down epidemics. Particularly, children do not perform hygiene as well as adults, and entire households have contracted the virus. Thus, the contagion rate of parents is effectively as high as their children. If the parents work, then the contagion rates of their co-workers, even single ones, are effectively the same as a child in school.
There is no vaccine. Nobody in a first world country in their 20's to 40's, the "healthy" demographic for the virus, has lived through a period of time when a contagious disease has not had a vaccine. Polio, back in 1955, may be a similar situation to today, since at the time, Americans were waiting for a vaccine for it while it was virulent each summer. Even those who have not been vaccinated benefit from those who have, through the "herd effect", where a critical mass has immunity, suchthat any viral infection in one person is unlikely to spread to another. If the fatality rate is low, but the transmission rate is high (which happens when nobody has been vaccinated, schools remain open, people go to work, people travel, and people go to large social events), the final numbers will still be high and our hospital systems will be overwhelmed. Fatalities will rise for *all* patients, including those who cannot get a bed, even if they are in the hospital for a reason besides the virus.
"Because no one was immune to the new virus, “the majority of the population will be infected” absent the quick arrival of a vaccine or drastic public health interventions such as closing public places and canceling public events,"
The fatality rate, though based on Wuhan data is : "For those aged 15 to 44, the fatality rate was 0.5%, though it might have been as low as 0.1% or as high as 1.3%. For people 45 to 64, the fatality rate was also 0.5%, with a possible low of 0.2% and a possible high of 1.1%. For those over 64, it was 2.7%, with a low and high estimate of 1.5% and 4.7%." Assuming the same rate of transmissions and thus infections among age groups, those aged 15 to 44 can have the same fatality as those over 64 by congregating more often at work, school, and social events. A healthy person with a child and going to work five days a week has far more exposure and thus risk than a retired couple at home. Schools are being closed, but cases of elementary and high school children being infected have been reported in Sacramento, CA, and San Francisco Bay Area, CA.
Without a vaccine and without precautions, the expected high number of infections means that the actual number of infected healthy people will be much higher than the seasonal flu. The high number of severe cases in older victims and those with pre-existing conditions already means a shortage of hospital beds. So where will the new cases go? As Dr. Harris' twitter feed put it, "It's the difference between finding an ICU bed & ventilator or being treated in the parking lot tent." Without vaccines, the only way to slow down the spread of the virus so that hospitals are not overwhelmed is by isolation, or "social distancing". Unlike vaccines, this is less meant so you, as an individual, are infected ("containment"), than to not overwhelm hospitals ("mitigation").
Taiwan started taking action against CoVid in early January, while only now has the San Franciso Bay Area, one of the area of the country with the highest number victims, taken action. Taiwan has had only one death from CoVid. Meanwhile, the number of US cases is now over one hundred. Perhaps social distancing will have the same "herd effect" as a vaccine for those who choose to still go out. My own hope is that we will have a vaccine by the end of the year so will have a better idea of the actual danger of this virus.
If anything, I read yesterday that it's statistically more likely to affect men, although I imagine that's more down to a higher percentage of males in the workforce, being exposed more, possibly having compromised immune systems from industry, smokers etc.
Can someone explain the Covid is a conspiracy to exert control narrative?
Seems to me it will both deeply financially harm any entity that would possibly wish to do so and as time goes on would seem more likely to wake up the meek to just how badly they've been already subjugated by the powerful.
Eldarain wrote: Can someone explain the Covid is a conspiracy to exert control narrative?
Seems to me it will both deeply financially harm any entity that would possibly wish to do so and as time goes on would seem more likely to wake up the meek to just how badly they've been already subjugated by the powerful.
No one can explain it, it's a conspiracy theory. Of course it doesn't make sense.
Covid-19 is clearly serious, and people should be taking appropriate precautions to prevent infection, and more to the point, to prevent passing on the virus to other people. This doesn't mean panic buying all the loo roll though! A loo roll fort isn't going to save you.
This corona virus if anything has done to me and my family is illuminate how dependant the economy is on services industries. And how many things we touch on a daily basis without noticing it.
So its day three quarantine here in chicago, its pretty interesting in the burbs people are out and about in the parks avoiding benches etc and just walking around talking with their families cause we have no confirmed cases in my burbs (Yet). But people are trying to make the best of it with their families to calm them which is a great idea, as long as people are practicing self distancing which is 6 - 18ft.
To see people freaking out online when in reality its quite normal for most of us, our lives are going on, and there won't be a panic in my state at least, everyone is relatively calm. Even when I went to vote today, people were just going on their daily lives, but staying farther away from each other, waashing their hands, being mindful of others etc.
This is going to be an interesting next few months.
Eldarain wrote: Can someone explain the Covid is a conspiracy to exert control narrative?
Seems to me it will both deeply financially harm any entity that would possibly wish to do so and as time goes on would seem more likely to wake up the meek to just how badly they've been already subjugated by the powerful.
In my experience, the only people I know who believe stuff like that are the ones who have that unique combination of consistently making terrible life decisions while (crucially) being abjectly aware of how poor their judgement is; the very sharpest tip of the first peak of the Dunning-Kruger chart.
The corona virus is bad for every country, every economy is going to take a few years to recover from it. As everything grinds to halt people will start to think... Oh crapolia our economy is based on the service industry! Gak! What ever shall we do without actual economical spenders, and consumers! People who think differently aren't watching the economy drop down a literal cliff. Every nation will suffer from this china had ceased production, the US is in a standstill and only the crazy companies are out working (when most people are at home). We are going to see a recession most likely, and our economy will suffer for ages to come. This isn't fear mongering more of a reality check personally. I don't really see riots in the streets, but I do see protests, people angry that our economy has gotten so gak.
People aren't making any money cause they can't go to work, or because their stores they worked at closed. Many americans live paycheck to paycheck have 0 money to spend to influence the economy cause they can't save for anything, an average american can only spend around 4k for a medical service. (UBI actually might be useful here to stimulate the economy just a bit)
Then we have all these other things that prove faults in our economic systems, social programs, and our social dynamics. This might be life changing to many people, entire cultures have shifted because of lesser things.
LMPD to no longer respond to hit and run wrecks, other incidents
Jason Riley and Travis Ragsdale
Mar 17, 2020 Updated 10 hrs ago
LOUISVILLE, Ky., (WDRB) – Louisville Metro Police will no longer respond to several emergency situations, including some burglaries and speeding, according to Louisville Metro Police Chief Steve Conrad.
Conrad said the department will take reports over the phone in many non-violent incidents, to protect officers and the public from spreading the coronavirus.
In addition, police will not be dispatched to public intoxication cases, speeding, illegal parking and loitering, among other incidents.
Conrad said the changes are being made "in the interest of focusing on making sure our officers are able to respond in an emergency situation or life is threatened and to keep them healthy."
The department hasn't seen any increase in officers out sick "with this particular illness," Conrad said, but attendance is being monitored as shifts begin.
Police headquarters, among other buildings, will be closed.
In addition, LMPD officers are no longer allowed to request vacation time.
In a memo written by Conrad on Monday, a “state of emergency” has been declared and only vacation requests already approved for this year will be allowed.
Conrad did not mention the memo at a press conference on Tuesday but said officers will get sick with the virus and the department is taking several precautions to ensure there is enough staffing.
He said he is moving personnel between divisions and using investigative staff to help patrol divisions "where absences are there."
In addition, Conrad said police will be limiting public access to headquarters, division stations and the city's impoundment lot. Visits to the lot and the LMPD property room will now be done by appointment, he said.
In a separate email sent by the assistant director of Louisville Metro Emergency Services as of 7 p.m. on Tuesday, police will not be responding to several types of events:
· Medical alarms, unless there is a known safety issue
· Non-injury accidents
· Hit-and-run accidents
· Disorderly persons
· Intoxicated persons
· Reckless drivers
Conrad did not mention all incidents police are currently not responding to during the press conference.
Eldarain wrote: Can someone explain the Covid is a conspiracy to exert control narrative?
Seems to me it will both deeply financially harm any entity that would possibly wish to do so and as time goes on would seem more likely to wake up the meek to just how badly they've been already subjugated by the powerful.
In my experience, the only people I know who believe stuff like that are the ones who have that unique combination of consistently making terrible life decisions while (crucially) being abjectly aware of how poor their judgement is; the very sharpest tip of the first peak of the Dunning-Kruger chart.
There are easier ways to achieve something with much less damage to the exact Same thing you want.
Heck a good old fashioned military coup would sufice in most countries with detiorating and polarized societies.
LMPD to no longer respond to hit and run wrecks, other incidents
Jason Riley and Travis Ragsdale
Mar 17, 2020 Updated 10 hrs ago
LOUISVILLE, Ky., (WDRB) – Louisville Metro Police will no longer respond to several emergency situations, including some burglaries and speeding, according to Louisville Metro Police Chief Steve Conrad.
Conrad said the department will take reports over the phone in many non-violent incidents, to protect officers and the public from spreading the coronavirus.
In addition, police will not be dispatched to public intoxication cases, speeding, illegal parking and loitering, among other incidents.
Conrad said the changes are being made "in the interest of focusing on making sure our officers are able to respond in an emergency situation or life is threatened and to keep them healthy."
The department hasn't seen any increase in officers out sick "with this particular illness," Conrad said, but attendance is being monitored as shifts begin.
Police headquarters, among other buildings, will be closed.
In addition, LMPD officers are no longer allowed to request vacation time.
In a memo written by Conrad on Monday, a “state of emergency” has been declared and only vacation requests already approved for this year will be allowed.
Conrad did not mention the memo at a press conference on Tuesday but said officers will get sick with the virus and the department is taking several precautions to ensure there is enough staffing.
He said he is moving personnel between divisions and using investigative staff to help patrol divisions "where absences are there."
In addition, Conrad said police will be limiting public access to headquarters, division stations and the city's impoundment lot. Visits to the lot and the LMPD property room will now be done by appointment, he said.
In a separate email sent by the assistant director of Louisville Metro Emergency Services as of 7 p.m. on Tuesday, police will not be responding to several types of events:
· Medical alarms, unless there is a known safety issue
· Non-injury accidents
· Hit-and-run accidents
· Disorderly persons
· Intoxicated persons
· Reckless drivers
Conrad did not mention all incidents police are currently not responding to during the press conference.
Copyright 2020 WDRB Media. All Rights Reserved.
that is failure, why not mobilize mp with Abc equipment or medical formations if they are this afraid Off risking regular police forces?
Sqorgar wrote: There's been, what, 190 cases reported in Florida? 7 deaths? And now they are closing schools, canceling all testing, and potentially extending the school year, if not straight up holding a bunch of kids back? For a disease which has a 0% mortality for children?
I don't want to watch my children for four weeks straight. I don't send them to school to learn. I send them to school so that I can get some peace and quiet. Guess it is time to start a family Necromunda league...
Ah yes. Children are safe so let them infect everybody else including groups in danger. And btw there's people as young as 16 in critical care that I know because of corona.
But yes. It's fine. Children are safe so children are free to infect everybody else. Makes perfect sense.
Ouze wrote:if 43 million people get Covid-19, then at that rate, 775,000 people will die.
There's no evidence that this would be true. Even if every single one of those 43 million were hospitalized, the danger zone for the virus is largely the old and infirm - of which we have a limited number of. Basically, we'd run out of old, sick people before we reached that number.
That "limited number" of people in the US population over 65 is 51 million people. if 40% of that population got it, and 2% of those that contracted it died, 400,000 people would die. if 20% of that population got it, you'd still have 200,000 people dead. And that's just the cohort of old people!
How exactly are you calculating 60-80k mortality at best while also advocating we're going too far in trying to do anything at all to flatten out the curve and reduce the speed of infection?
Not to mention it's not just old and firm. Around half the critical care patients are under 60
Sqorgar wrote: There's been, what, 190 cases reported in Florida? 7 deaths? And now they are closing schools, canceling all testing, and potentially extending the school year, if not straight up holding a bunch of kids back? For a disease which has a 0% mortality for children?
I don't want to watch my children for four weeks straight. I don't send them to school to learn. I send them to school so that I can get some peace and quiet. Guess it is time to start a family Necromunda league...
Ah yes. Children are safe so let them infect everybody else including groups in danger. And btw there's people as young as 16 in critical care that I know because of corona.
But yes. It's fine. Children are safe so children are free to infect everybody else.
While not disputing children can carry it or become unwell (although alot less likely) I think the theory in the uk anyway is if you close the schools the health workers have to watch there kids and therefore cannot be at work putting the critically sick at further risk of dying and overwhelming the health care system.
I mean follow what the advice has been its not hard, stay at home, practice safe social distancing. Wash your hands don't be a fool.
Children are always carriers for diseases they can get other people sick very easily, and the fact we can limit their interactions with other families is very beneficial to all families.
We want to curbstomp this virus by ensuring it runs out of bodies to go through.
Super simple. Well until a Vaccine comes out and our bodies build antibodies from said vaccine.
LMPD to no longer respond to hit and run wrecks, other incidents
Jason Riley and Travis Ragsdale
Mar 17, 2020 Updated 10 hrs ago
LOUISVILLE, Ky., (WDRB) – Louisville Metro Police will no longer respond to several emergency situations, including some burglaries and speeding, according to Louisville Metro Police Chief Steve Conrad.
Conrad said the department will take reports over the phone in many non-violent incidents, to protect officers and the public from spreading the coronavirus.
In addition, police will not be dispatched to public intoxication cases, speeding, illegal parking and loitering, among other incidents.
Conrad said the changes are being made "in the interest of focusing on making sure our officers are able to respond in an emergency situation or life is threatened and to keep them healthy."
The department hasn't seen any increase in officers out sick "with this particular illness," Conrad said, but attendance is being monitored as shifts begin.
Police headquarters, among other buildings, will be closed.
In addition, LMPD officers are no longer allowed to request vacation time.
In a memo written by Conrad on Monday, a “state of emergency” has been declared and only vacation requests already approved for this year will be allowed.
Conrad did not mention the memo at a press conference on Tuesday but said officers will get sick with the virus and the department is taking several precautions to ensure there is enough staffing.
He said he is moving personnel between divisions and using investigative staff to help patrol divisions "where absences are there."
In addition, Conrad said police will be limiting public access to headquarters, division stations and the city's impoundment lot. Visits to the lot and the LMPD property room will now be done by appointment, he said.
In a separate email sent by the assistant director of Louisville Metro Emergency Services as of 7 p.m. on Tuesday, police will not be responding to several types of events:
· Medical alarms, unless there is a known safety issue
· Non-injury accidents
· Hit-and-run accidents
· Disorderly persons
· Intoxicated persons
· Reckless drivers
Conrad did not mention all incidents police are currently not responding to during the press conference.
Copyright 2020 WDRB Media. All Rights Reserved.
Oh great. Like Louisville wasn't already bad enough. Keeping my hillbilly backside in the woods.
This is an epidemiological response, not an individual one. We know most of us won't be seriously harmed by this- but some of us will. We also know that most of us will become infected- the thing spreads too fast, and is asymptomatic while infectious for too long for us to avoid it.
The goal is to limit exposure of the population to keep the number of critical cases at a level the healthcare system can manage. Italy is in triage. That is what the shut down of schools is intended to prevent. We want to slow new cases before we are swamped because once we are, deaths will skyrocket.
UK-National Trust have opened all their open spaces to people free of charge. Cafes and indoor spaces will be closed though, so take a packed lunch
Social distancing doesn't mean you need to stay in your home and incubate. Get out into nature. Its good for your immune system, good for your mental health, and the ultimate way to socially distance. Plus, the UV light from the suns rays can kill or weaken virus', and having airflow around you also decreases your chances of infection. so whats not to like?
Sqorgar wrote: I was saying that something with many, many more deaths and infections happened two years ago and nobody noticed or cared. If we followed that flu with the same fervor, we'd still be in the middle of martial law. Luckily, we didn't, or else we'd be panicking about every flu season since.
This is something a lot of people keep arguing and it is just the worst nonsense. The currently low rate of infections is because the virus is at its earliest stages, before it has spread across the population. The only reason to think it won't spread across the population is because we've identified it now, and are able to take actions to stop its spread.
Don't believe me? You shouldn't, I'm just some guy on the internet wth absolutely no medical training at all. But you should listen to the Imperial College, because they have an infectious disease as good as any in the world. They released their report on 16th March. Its the report that got the Johnson government to realize its 'herd immunity' policy was nonsense, and got the Trump government to realize the scope of the issue. Its a British study and it looked at different possible approaches and the likely mortality in the US and UK. I'll summarize their findings of the expected results in the US;
If the US does nothing and just lets the virus happen, it will spread to 80% of the population, leading to 2.2 million direct deaths, and because the number of patients would overwhelm the system and leave millions without ventilators and other essential support, we'd soon be looking at another 2 million dead. About 12% of people over 70 would die.
Of course no country will do nothing. Once the reality of what's starting to happen sinks in, even 'its just the flu' people will come on board and start responding. That's where quarantine and the social distancing and other soft measures come in. This reduces total deaths a bit but the best effect is in how it reduces the strain on the healthcare system, so it brings the total deaths down to around 2 million. That's the population of Houston. Its 3 times the deaths in the American Civil War. It is still a horror show.
Then there's the third choice they considered - which is something like what Italy has done. Do all the above, and also shut down schools and colleges, and close most workplaces. Stop social gatherings. This works. Their modeling says peak deaths will be a few thousand, in a few weeks time, and then steadily taper down. We could actually end up with casualties that would be 'not much worse than a normal flu'. But there's a catch - as soon as the isolation ends the virus will start up again, and only reduce with a reinstatement of isolation. That would have to be maintained in some form until an effective vaccine was deployed, which is maybe 18 months away.
The study didn't consider the South Korean method, which was just to test like crazy, constantly, tracing a spread through the community and isolating those people specifically. That might be a more practical method to operate over the long period until a vaccine is developed.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: If anything, I read yesterday that it's statistically more likely to affect men, although I imagine that's more down to a higher percentage of males in the workforce, being exposed more, possibly having compromised immune systems from industry, smokers etc.
Last I read, it's b/c of smoking. Most men in China smoke, most women do not. “In China, mortality rates were higher in men than women. One of the hypotheses is that this was also due to smoking. About 50 percent of men in China smoke, compared to only 2% of women. ... One of Israel’s few coronavirus patients to be listed as serious is a 38-year-old man who was exposed to the virus while driving a group of Greek tourists. According to reports, the severity of his condition — unusual for a man of his age — was linked by doctors to the fact that he is a smoker." One thing US got right was effectively banning smoking in 2003. (Fun fact: China's cigarettes are a state-owned monopoly, and Chinese doctors smoke.Of course, only a few generations ago, smoking was common in western doctors as well.) https://komonews.com/news/coronavirus/does-smoking-or-vaping-put-you-at-a-higher-risk-of-coronavirus
Sqorgar wrote: The point of those stories was not that the doctors got it wrong, but how they behaved in the face of someone else who go it right. The point isn't that doctors didn't wash their hands. The point is that the doctors refused to wash their hands even in the face of evidence of its effectiveness - and then harassed and shamed the guy who thought it was a pretty nifty idea until he died in a mental institution. They didn't just make a mistake.
So doctors are human beings, prone to resisting change and making mistakes just like the rest of us. Big whoop. The point is, though, that even though it took longer than it should have, eventually the medical profession as a whole DID change their point of view.
The same thing happened with Darwin, Galileo, Copernicus and god knows how many other trailblazers.
Unlike, say, religion, or "gut feeling", or "obvious common sense", scientists can and do sometimes admit they're wrong and then move forward. Not as often as perhaps they should, because they're still human, but it's still a much better average than nearly every other institution on the planet.
There are medical experts saying as much as well. Here's a video by Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, a German physician and politician with a history of criticizing the WHO (and the influence of pharmaceutical companies on the WHO). Essentially, he says that we aren't measuring "the incidence of coronavirus diseases, but the activity of the specialists searching for them".
This is the exact same argument climate change deniers use, and it's just as misguided/misleading here.
Mostly, my opposition is against excessive quarantining. I don't think the WHO recommended that Florida shut down all bars for the foreseeable future or hold children back a grade or limit any social gathering of any size - that was the politicians interpreting the WHO's suggestions for social distancing in an extreme way. Last I heard, the WHO said wash your hands, don't touch your face, and stand 3 feet away from others. They certainly didn't tell anybody to buy all the toilet paper or to avoid all old people because YOU MAY HAVE ALREADY KILLED THEM.
The WHO is actually criticising the Dutch policy to try for a contained outbreak in order to eventually achieve herd immunity naturally (as opposed to limiting our freedoms even further with a complete lockdown) as being risky as long as an actual vaccine doesn't exist.
The toilet paper thing is just people being idiots and actually acting against official advice - just in case you weren't being facetious there.
As to the old people thing - so you're saying that just because there's a possibility they may have been infected already we should continue to expose them thus eventually turning a possibility into a certainty? Or am I misunderstanding your point here?
Sooooo....
yeah smoking is definitely a big factor. now is the time to give up for sure. it makes sense as your lungs are basically at a huge disadvantage, if not fully compromised.
I've never smoked cigarettes, but I'm not even indulging in my rare occasion cigars at the moment.
China has been using japanese flu medicine to treat patients. So far with good success rate compared to those without that medicine. Doesn't help if symptoms have reached serious stage but for those with initial signs has reduced numbers reaching serious symptoms and quickened healing process.
Britain just announced rescinding their decision to let healthy people carry on as usual, while quarantining elderly and other vulnerable demographics.
"The British government’s official advice to its citizens was, essentially, just to keep calm and carry on. Schools, restaurants, theaters, clubs, and sporting venues remained open; only the over-70s and those with flu-like symptoms were advised to stay at home.
On Monday night, that theory collided with the facts. A new analysis by immunologists at Imperial College London and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine of the impact of the coronavirus in Italy suggested that up to 30 percent of patients hospitalized with the virus would require intensive care treatment. Those numbers, if repeated in the U.K., would quickly overwhelm Britain’s state-run National Health Service.
Within hours of the report, U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson appeared at a daily briefing at No. 10 Downing St. to reverse the herd immunity policy. Acknowledging that “drastic action” was required, Johnson announced that from now on Britons should try to work from home and voluntarily refrain from unnecessary travel and social contact.
"A rate with a value of 1 would mean that one person can pass it on to at least one other person. The higher this number, the more infections from that one case. So to end the spread, this number will need to drop below 1. The reproduction rate for coronavirus is between 2 and 3. ... One expert analysis found that creating herd immunity in the UK would require more than 47 million people to be infected. With a 2.3% fatality rate and a 19% rate of severe disease, this could result in more than a million people dying and a further eight million needing critical care."
ced1106 wrote: Britain just announced rescinding their decision to let healthy people carry on as usual, while quarantining elderly and other vulnerable demographics.
Spoiler:
"The British government’s official advice to its citizens was, essentially, just to keep calm and carry on. Schools, restaurants, theaters, clubs, and sporting venues remained open; only the over-70s and those with flu-like symptoms were advised to stay at home.
On Monday night, that theory collided with the facts. A new analysis by immunologists at Imperial College London and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine of the impact of the coronavirus in Italy suggested that up to 30 percent of patients hospitalized with the virus would require intensive care treatment. Those numbers, if repeated in the U.K., would quickly overwhelm Britain’s state-run National Health Service.
Within hours of the report, U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson appeared at a daily briefing at No. 10 Downing St. to reverse the herd immunity policy. Acknowledging that “drastic action” was required, Johnson announced that from now on Britons should try to work from home and voluntarily refrain from unnecessary travel and social contact.
"A rate with a value of 1 would mean that one person can pass it on to at least one other person. The higher this number, the more infections from that one case. So to end the spread, this number will need to drop below 1. The reproduction rate for coronavirus is between 2 and 3. ... One expert analysis found that creating herd immunity in the UK would require more than 47 million people to be infected. With a 2.3% fatality rate and a 19% rate of severe disease, this could result in more than a million people dying and a further eight million needing critical care."
We've been talking about this here for two days! Advice changed on Sunday and the Imperial paper leaked Sunday night. I posted it here yesterday morning a few pages back i think.
can someone explain why there would be a resurgence? I understand the principle that no immunity is built, and therefore when measures are relaxed, people will contract it again, but say for example, if you completely quarantined the majority of the population, until late summer, surely those who got the virus would then either be hospitalised, and either die, or pass through, and those who didnt would just not be exposed, so where does the virus stay? surely it has to stay dormant somewhere, but where? if the summer heat and sunlight does kill off a lot of the virus, and no one is really spreading it, surely the vast majority of it will die off?
LMPD to no longer respond to hit and run wrecks, other incidents
Jason Riley and Travis Ragsdale
Mar 17, 2020 Updated 10 hrs ago
LOUISVILLE, Ky., (WDRB) – Louisville Metro Police will no longer respond to several emergency situations, including some burglaries and speeding, according to Louisville Metro Police Chief Steve Conrad.
Conrad said the department will take reports over the phone in many non-violent incidents, to protect officers and the public from spreading the coronavirus.
In addition, police will not be dispatched to public intoxication cases, speeding, illegal parking and loitering, among other incidents.
Conrad said the changes are being made "in the interest of focusing on making sure our officers are able to respond in an emergency situation or life is threatened and to keep them healthy."
The department hasn't seen any increase in officers out sick "with this particular illness," Conrad said, but attendance is being monitored as shifts begin.
Police headquarters, among other buildings, will be closed.
In addition, LMPD officers are no longer allowed to request vacation time.
In a memo written by Conrad on Monday, a “state of emergency” has been declared and only vacation requests already approved for this year will be allowed.
Conrad did not mention the memo at a press conference on Tuesday but said officers will get sick with the virus and the department is taking several precautions to ensure there is enough staffing.
He said he is moving personnel between divisions and using investigative staff to help patrol divisions "where absences are there."
In addition, Conrad said police will be limiting public access to headquarters, division stations and the city's impoundment lot. Visits to the lot and the LMPD property room will now be done by appointment, he said.
In a separate email sent by the assistant director of Louisville Metro Emergency Services as of 7 p.m. on Tuesday, police will not be responding to several types of events:
· Medical alarms, unless there is a known safety issue
· Non-injury accidents
· Hit-and-run accidents
· Disorderly persons
· Intoxicated persons
· Reckless drivers
Conrad did not mention all incidents police are currently not responding to during the press conference.
Copyright 2020 WDRB Media. All Rights Reserved.
It seems a bit much to me, but at the same time I am sure the ones making the decision know a hell of a lot more about their local crime than I do. However I do feel like even if that is the new policy they should not up and TELL everyone that.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: can someone explain why there would be a resurgence? I understand the principle that no immunity is built, and therefore when measures are relaxed, people will contract it again, but say for example, if you completely quarantined the majority of the population, until late summer, surely those who got the virus would then either be hospitalised, and either die, or pass through, and those who didnt would just not be exposed, so where does the virus stay? surely it has to stay dormant somewhere, but where? if the summer heat and sunlight does kill off a lot of the virus, and no one is really spreading it, surely the vast majority of it will die off?
You only need one person to slip the net.
That one person then goes to a supermarket, their gym, their job and travels to and from work by train/bus. As a result now they've likely infected dozens to hundreds of people (if its the London Underground system easily hundreds). Give all those people 1 week moving around, infecting others and you've got a huge restoration. Plus it won't be localised either. Some of those commuting will be from other counties, perhaps the other end of the country. Taking it home with them on the Friday as they head home for the weekend. Now you've got multiple pockets erupting all over the place.
LMPD to no longer respond to hit and run wrecks, other incidents
Jason Riley and Travis Ragsdale
Mar 17, 2020 Updated 10 hrs ago
LOUISVILLE, Ky., (WDRB) – Louisville Metro Police will no longer respond to several emergency situations, including some burglaries and speeding, according to Louisville Metro Police Chief Steve Conrad.
Conrad said the department will take reports over the phone in many non-violent incidents, to protect officers and the public from spreading the coronavirus.
In addition, police will not be dispatched to public intoxication cases, speeding, illegal parking and loitering, among other incidents.
Conrad said the changes are being made "in the interest of focusing on making sure our officers are able to respond in an emergency situation or life is threatened and to keep them healthy."
The department hasn't seen any increase in officers out sick "with this particular illness," Conrad said, but attendance is being monitored as shifts begin.
Police headquarters, among other buildings, will be closed.
In addition, LMPD officers are no longer allowed to request vacation time.
In a memo written by Conrad on Monday, a “state of emergency” has been declared and only vacation requests already approved for this year will be allowed.
Conrad did not mention the memo at a press conference on Tuesday but said officers will get sick with the virus and the department is taking several precautions to ensure there is enough staffing.
He said he is moving personnel between divisions and using investigative staff to help patrol divisions "where absences are there."
In addition, Conrad said police will be limiting public access to headquarters, division stations and the city's impoundment lot. Visits to the lot and the LMPD property room will now be done by appointment, he said.
In a separate email sent by the assistant director of Louisville Metro Emergency Services as of 7 p.m. on Tuesday, police will not be responding to several types of events:
· Medical alarms, unless there is a known safety issue
· Non-injury accidents
· Hit-and-run accidents
· Disorderly persons
· Intoxicated persons
· Reckless drivers
Conrad did not mention all incidents police are currently not responding to during the press conference.
Copyright 2020 WDRB Media. All Rights Reserved.
It seems a bit much to me, but at the same time I am sure the ones making the decision know a hell of a lot more about their local crime than I do. However I do feel like even if that is the new policy they should not up and TELL everyone that.
Yeah, they know it's the most dangerous city in the whole damned state. And no wonder with cops like that. Perfect time to abandon their duties. And announcing it to every criminal. For feths sake.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: can someone explain why there would be a resurgence? I understand the principle that no immunity is built, and therefore when measures are relaxed, people will contract it again, but say for example, if you completely quarantined the majority of the population, until late summer, surely those who got the virus would then either be hospitalised, and either die, or pass through, and those who didnt would just not be exposed, so where does the virus stay? surely it has to stay dormant somewhere, but where? if the summer heat and sunlight does kill off a lot of the virus, and no one is really spreading it, surely the vast majority of it will die off?
While it's been reported that victims were reinfected, it's more likely that erroneous testing procedures gave that impression; "“I’m not saying that reinfection can’t occur, will never occur, but in that short time it’s unlikely,” said Florian Krammer, a virologist at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York. Even the mildest of infections should leave at least short-term immunity against the virus in the recovering patient, he said. More likely, the “reinfected” patients still harbored low levels of the virus when they were discharged from the hospital, and testing failed to pick it up." : https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/29/health/coronavirus-reinfection.html
Quarantining the majority of the population slows down the virus, but will not eliminate it. The virus is highly contagious. Also, the 14-day quarantine period will catch *most* victims, but not all. And that small number undetected is enough to continue things all over again. So, in practice, you cannot contain a virus, only mitigate it, like we do with influenza. The only virus that has been eliminated is small pox, and that required vaccination.
The Bloomberg article suggests country location as well as seasonal climate is important. "Arid regions will see a higher rate of infections but the worst-hit areas will be temperate countries and high-altitude areas closer to the equator. The period between June and September should see a slowing rate of infections in much of Europe and North America, they wrote, although areas closer to the poles in Scandinavia, Russia and Canada may see worsening conditions as the climate warms enough to support local infections.
So... while we can slow down the rate of infection with quarantine, we cannot completely eliminate it. So, if quarantine were to suddenly stop, then the virus infection rate would start all over again. I'm waiting for a vaccine, myself. With twelve-thousand miniatures to paint, I'm afraid that might not be much of a problem.
Of course the experts are wrong (lots of assumptions, table 1 relies way to much on CCP data) but they're doing the best they can with the data they have. So you buy yourself time, improve your data and make better predictions. At the same time you're also improving your capability (both knowledge and resources) to deal with it. Remember its not just a vaccine that needs to be developed its also treatment protocols to improve recovery likelihood. No one has all the perfect answers, you just hope leadership doesn't get stuck in analysis paralysis and makes a large number of good (if imperfect) decisions.
A friend of mine is a nurse in london. He is amazed about how everybody is doing just normal live, and the hospitals are starting to get crowded and surpassed by coronavirus or "patients with pheumonia". And nobody is reacting to that.
I'm really sorry to eard that. I believe at this rate UK will be the new Italy.
The thing that gets me is that there is a double standard. The government tells us to social distance, and yet they do not do it themselves. The officials are practically piled on one another in the press conferences. I can only imagine what they do off camera. Then there is the whole work bit. They hand down edicts that prevent lots of people from working, but they themselves work. I assume that they claim they are doing really important stuff, but everybody elses stuff is not important.
This is not to say that we should not socially distance or take precautions. However, people may have more confidence in what they are told by the government if the govemment follows its own advice.
Some people are too dumb to recognize a 6ft distance. Last night a trucker was trying to deliver to a business next to my apt. Huge truck, wouldn’t fit, and I was worried he was going to hit our cars in street parking area. I went down to talk to him, maintaining a distance... the guy walks right up to me. I ask him to keep 6 feet away. He walks RIGHT next to me again. So I yelled and told him to back the hell off! Once polite, twice are you dense? You don’t know I’m carrying this thing, I don’t know if you are.
I get not panicking. I get still being polite. But if you ARE polite and people still don’t respect the boundaries, how long before politeness ends and safety by any means becomes necessary?
queen_annes_revenge wrote: can someone explain why there would be a resurgence? I understand the principle that no immunity is built, and therefore when measures are relaxed, people will contract it again, but say for example, if you completely quarantined the majority of the population, until late summer, surely those who got the virus would then either be hospitalised, and either die, or pass through, and those who didnt would just not be exposed, so where does the virus stay? surely it has to stay dormant somewhere, but where? if the summer heat and sunlight does kill off a lot of the virus, and no one is really spreading it, surely the vast majority of it will die off?
Basically even in the best case scenario we'll be back to what it was like a few weeks ago with a few infected folk (like the ones who brought it into the country from their skiing holidays, business trips etc) and the whole thing will start off again, building up as it goes and there are bits of the world which we do need to trade with (like Africa) who just aren't in a position to get rid of this so until a vaccine is available it will keep coming back (the big problem being we can't do any sort of on the spot rapid test for infection, and victims are infectious before symptoms show if they have them at all)
on the plus side people, government and medics will be more prepared, there will be more availability of testing and (hopefully) a proportion of the population will now be immune or at least able to deal with the virus faster meaning lower transmission rates
on the minus side there will probably be more infected folk out there than at the start of the crisis so well start a bit further up the curve, medics etc will be exhausted and needing time off, people will be excited to be able to do all the stuff the missed so will mix a lot more than normal, goverments will be desperate to get the economy going again so may drop the ball rather than closing everything off again,
My state shut down all eat-in restaurants yesterday, and I own one. This stinks for my finances. I'm not going to go under or anything, I have an emergency fund that I could live off of for 6-months if neither my wife or I were working, but it took a while to build up and I don't like dipping into it.
I live in Wales, and as of writing this there are 149 confirmed cases and 2 death. Very low compared to other countries, but I'm still glad the UK government has decided to 'lock down' and with lots of places closing, hopefully it will stay low with no further deaths.
I suppose I'm very lucky. Wales is still very rural for the most part, with most of the big cities centered in the south (where I live). However, Cardiff is tiny, and woth these rules in effect, I'm hopeful it doesn't go further.
This is a serious global issue, and I'd advise all dakkanaughts to be safe and sensible.
timetowaste85 wrote: Some people are too dumb to recognize a 6ft distance. Last night a trucker was trying to deliver to a business next to my apt. Huge truck, wouldn’t fit, and I was worried he was going to hit our cars in street parking area. I went down to talk to him, maintaining a distance... the guy walks right up to me. I ask him to keep 6 feet away. He walks RIGHT next to me again. So I yelled and told him to back the hell off! Once polite, twice are you dense? You don’t know I’m carrying this thing, I don’t know if you are.
I get not panicking. I get still being polite. But if you ARE polite and people still don’t respect the boundaries, how long before politeness ends and safety by any means becomes necessary?
Pretty much never. 'By any means' includes they idea of straight up murder to prevent possible infection, and that isn't a reasonable trade.
People are panicking enough as is, violence in the streets isn't a reasonable direction to go by any standard.
...I yelled at somebody. I guess I could have been clearer, but I meant on the grounds of civility. Murder isn’t acceptable. Unless they’re breaking into your home to steal from you. In which case, it’s home defense.
To be perfectly honest, as much as I want to be offended by that (because it is offensive), if you're carrying around a modern pocket computer today that's equipped with GPS and constantly online, you're already being tracked constantly by these entities, and the government has access to that data if it really wants. In 2020, one has to assume they're already doing this. The only way to avoid that at this point is to not carry such a device or use such services unfortunately.
Galas wrote: TBH theres not "the goverment" but your's country goverment.
The US goverment being a bunch of authoritarian wanabees is not an excuse to don't take seriously the issue and the lockdown in other countries.
I'm taking the authoritarian parts very seriously, and it isn't just the US. Israel is doing the same thing, but they also want to text people when standing too close too each other (No touching!). Remember when China was barricading people in their homes?
And how well do you think these lockdowns are going? In Italy, they stopped all prison visits as part of the lockdown, and immediately there were riots in almost all their prisons. Even now, some of the prisons are still in the hands of the inmates, multiple people have died, and a few dozen inmates have escaped. Even when people have no expectations of freedom, to take away what little they do have resulted in unprecedented violence and revolt.
To be perfectly honest, as much as I want to be offended by that (because it is offensive), if you're carrying around a modern pocket computer today that's equipped with GPS and constantly online, you're already being tracked constantly by these entities, and the government has access to that data if it really wants. In 2020, one has to assume they're already doing this. The only way to avoid that at this point is to not carry such a device or use such services unfortunately.
Though the government is absolutely scanning online messages (and are about to pass a law banning end to end encryption because, why not?), there's no reason to believe that the government has real time access to the GPS location of people with phones. There's been cases in the past where the police have used proximity warrants to get a list of all the phones that have come within the range of a crime scene, and the data returned from these warrants is unspecific enough that they then need to get additional warrants to find out the identities of the phone's owners (and even then, there's been serious issues with them arresting people who just rode their bikes past the scene of a robbery). So, even if the government does have access to the GPS information on people's phones, they haven't made that data available outside of a select few. Giving this information to the CDC and people who aren't sneaky spy types presents a serious privacy issue well beyond what could be claimed for national security.
And how well do you think these lockdowns are going? In Italy, they stopped all prison visits as part of the lockdown, and immediately there were riots in almost all their prisons.
Poland had a few people escape the quarantine, quickly apprehended by the police and escorted back to hospital/home. No riots, toilet paper is back in stock. After the initial run on tp and dry goods which lasted 2 days, almost everyone behaves reasonably.
but I'm not surprised Israel and USA of all countries are using this as a chance to enact even more authoritarian policies.I expect Britain to follow in the group of countries claiming to be free and enjoying the taste of the boot.
I have couple decades figured goverments(particularly usa) already track and spy all. No difference. At least i don't live in usa.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sqorgar wrote: there's no reason to believe that the government has real time access to the GPS location of people with phones. There's been cases in the past where the police have used proximity warrants to get a list of all the phones that have come within the range of a crime scene, and the data returned from these warrants is unspecific enough that they then need to get additional warrants to find out the identities of the phone's owners (and even then, there's been serious issues with them arresting people who just rode their bikes past the scene of a robbery). So, even if the government does have access to the GPS information on people's phones, they haven't made that data available outside of a select few. Giving this information to the CDC and people who aren't sneaky spy types presents a serious privacy issue well beyond what could be claimed for national security.
If they aren't now or couldn't already they couldn't with this request either seeing they are asking aggregated(aka group) data from 3rd party. Not real time individual.
And if they aren't doing just what they ask then they could have been doing same thing all the time and no change in situation.
Guess either you didn't read article or are deliberately to stir trouble here
If people just followed the protocols dictated by the medical professionals to limit the spread of the virus, and companies weren’t so worried about the all mighty dollar, the authoritarian measures would not be needed.
When common sense fails, and the people are not taking precautions then the only option is draconian measures and freedoms get removed. If more people had some common sense, and realized how serious this is, then emergency measure wouldn’t be needed. But ignorance and stupidity always win the day.
When ignorance is touted as ‘freedom’ then you’re bound to lose it.
Remember that those that are in power like their money, and love it when economies are robust. Nobody wants what is happening to happen. For those saying that this is nothing to be worried about, I’d like to ask when the last time entire countries have shut their borders completely?
Not in my 47 years have I ever experienced such a thing.
Let that sink in.
If you don’t think this is all that serious, then why are governments basically shutting down their economies to contain COVID19.
In times of emergency, measures are required. This almost like a time of war, except we’re not fighting one another. Once the emergency is lifted, things will return to normal.
This deserves to be taken seriously, and if some people want to continue being idiots and ignore the advice of the experts, then expect to be forced to comply. The solution is simple - don’t be ignorant and take this seriously. Your freedom is not at stake folks, your health and well being is.
Ghool wrote: If you don’t think this is all that serious, then why are governments basically shutting down their economies to contain COVID19.
In times of emergency, measures are required. This almost like a time of war, except we’re not fighting one another. Once the emergency is lifted, things will return to normal.
This deserves to be taken seriously, and if some people want to continue being idiots and ignore the advice of the experts, then expect to be forced to comply. The solution is simple - don’t be ignorant and take this seriously. Your freedom is not at stake folks, your health and well being is.
Stay safe.
Well said. The US government is (finally) taking this very seriously. I think the threat now is for the citizens to take it seriously. Clearlyk some still aren't.
I keep thinking about what the Greatest Generation would do in our shoes.
Hey guys, remember when the UKspent billions on a vaccine for the "pandemic that never was"? "They [WHO] frightened the whole world with the possibility that a major plague was on the way." "Globally, more than 15,000 people died as a result of the H1N1 virus compared to the two to four million deaths that had been predicted by WHO, he said."
Or when the UK spent millions on Tamiflu for a bird flu epidemic? "The antiviral drug Tamiflu was stockpiled from 2006 in the UK when some agencies were predicting that a pandemic of bird flu could kill up to 750,000 people in Britain." "The World Health Organization, which classes Tamiflu as an essential medicine..." - this is the same Tamiflu that is banned in Japan for teenagers because its "neuropsychiatric adverse events" led to children hallucinating, lashing out violently, and committing suicide. Tamiflu is some bad stuff with a really shady history, and countries bought millions of doses of it on the WHO's recommendation based on the fear of a bird flu pandemic which never came. The number of deaths from the H5N1 virus is less than 500 worldwide since 2003.
What about when the US had to incinerate $260 million dollars worth of expired Swine flu vaccine? "Federal officials defended the huge purchase as a necessary risk in the face of a never-before-seen virus. Many health experts had feared the new flu could be the deadly global epidemic they had long warned about, but it ended up killing fewer people than seasonal flu." "Swine flu turned out not to be as deadly as was first feared. About 12,000 deaths have been attributed to it - or roughly a third of the estimated annual deaths from seasonal flu."
It is important to note that the WHO has been wrong every single time they have predicted a doomsday epidemic, by a LOT. And in the past, this has only cost taxpayers millions or even just billions or dollars. But the effect of this panic will be so, so much worse - it has already cost trillions and we are just getting started - and the WHO's track record on being right about worldwide epidemics is pretty much 0%.
Sqorgar wrote: Hey guys, remember when the UKspent billions on a vaccine for the "pandemic that never was"? "They [WHO] frightened the whole world with the possibility that a major plague was on the way." "Globally, more than 15,000 people died as a result of the H1N1 virus compared to the two to four million deaths that had been predicted by WHO, he said."
Or when the UK spent millions on Tamiflu for a bird flu epidemic? "The antiviral drug Tamiflu was stockpiled from 2006 in the UK when some agencies were predicting that a pandemic of bird flu could kill up to 750,000 people in Britain." "The World Health Organization, which classes Tamiflu as an essential medicine..." - this is the same Tamiflu that is banned in Japan for teenagers because its "neuropsychiatric adverse events" led to children hallucinating, lashing out violently, and committing suicide. Tamiflu is some bad stuff with a really shady history, and countries bought millions of doses of it on the WHO's recommendation based on the fear of a bird flu pandemic which never came. The number of deaths from the H5N1 virus is less than 500 worldwide since 2003.
What about when the US had to incinerate $260 million dollars worth of expired Swine flu vaccine? "Federal officials defended the huge purchase as a necessary risk in the face of a never-before-seen virus. Many health experts had feared the new flu could be the deadly global epidemic they had long warned about, but it ended up killing fewer people than seasonal flu." "Swine flu turned out not to be as deadly as was first feared. About 12,000 deaths have been attributed to it - or roughly a third of the estimated annual deaths from seasonal flu."
It is important to note that the WHO has been wrong every single time they have predicted a doomsday epidemic, by a LOT. And in the past, this has only cost taxpayers millions or even just billions or dollars. But the effect of this panic will be so, so much worse - it has already cost trillions and we are just getting started - and the WHO's track record on being right about worldwide epidemics is pretty much 0%.
And what is happening right now has been unprecedented for over 100 years.
For a century, no one in the world has had to deal with a virus of this magnitude.
Would you rather world governments and society in general just carry on because of prior precedent of the WHO being wrong?
What’s riskier? Shutting things down temporarily? Or should we just carry on and let millions possibly die?
I don’t know, I’d rather we’d take precautions. If that means trading billions of dollars over lives, I know which one I’d choose.
cuda1179 wrote: My state shut down all eat-in restaurants yesterday, and I own one. This stinks for my finances. I'm not going to go under or anything, I have an emergency fund that I could live off of for 6-months if neither my wife or I were working, but it took a while to build up and I don't like dipping into it.
What happens with your employees? No, this isn't a prelude to villainizing you, just an honest question.
I can't imagine virtually any small business owner can afford to subsidize employees who literally aren't working.
Sqorgar wrote: Hey guys, remember when the UKspent billions on a vaccine for the "pandemic that never was"? "They [WHO] frightened the whole world with the possibility that a major plague was on the way." "Globally, more than 15,000 people died as a result of the H1N1 virus compared to the two to four million deaths that had been predicted by WHO, he said."
Or when the UK spent millions on Tamiflu for a bird flu epidemic? "The antiviral drug Tamiflu was stockpiled from 2006 in the UK when some agencies were predicting that a pandemic of bird flu could kill up to 750,000 people in Britain." "The World Health Organization, which classes Tamiflu as an essential medicine..." - this is the same Tamiflu that is banned in Japan for teenagers because its "neuropsychiatric adverse events" led to children hallucinating, lashing out violently, and committing suicide. Tamiflu is some bad stuff with a really shady history, and countries bought millions of doses of it on the WHO's recommendation based on the fear of a bird flu pandemic which never came. The number of deaths from the H5N1 virus is less than 500 worldwide since 2003.
What about when the US had to incinerate $260 million dollars worth of expired Swine flu vaccine? "Federal officials defended the huge purchase as a necessary risk in the face of a never-before-seen virus. Many health experts had feared the new flu could be the deadly global epidemic they had long warned about, but it ended up killing fewer people than seasonal flu." "Swine flu turned out not to be as deadly as was first feared. About 12,000 deaths have been attributed to it - or roughly a third of the estimated annual deaths from seasonal flu."
It is important to note that the WHO has been wrong every single time they have predicted a doomsday epidemic, by a LOT. And in the past, this has only cost taxpayers millions or even just billions or dollars. But the effect of this panic will be so, so much worse - it has already cost trillions and we are just getting started - and the WHO's track record on being right about worldwide epidemics is pretty much 0%.
You mean... governments prepare for things before they actually happen? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.
cuda1179 wrote: My state shut down all eat-in restaurants yesterday, and I own one. This stinks for my finances. I'm not going to go under or anything, I have an emergency fund that I could live off of for 6-months if neither my wife or I were working, but it took a while to build up and I don't like dipping into it.
What happens with your employees? No, this isn't a prelude to villainizing you, just an honest question.
Obviously, I can't speak for cuda, but I'd assume the employees would get some sort of unemployment insurance given that their lapse in employment isn't the result of malfeasance or a voluntary break and the length of the layoff is unknown. Probably going to vary state to state.
You mean... governments prepare for things before they actually happen? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.
Incredible. And could you imagine the economic and social damage that might occur if, for example, a government decided to downplay and under-prepare for a potential pandemic?
I’m starting to think about all the self employed and small businesses. I’ve a few friends in the restaurant business, and we’ve got some fantastic places around here that I would be genuinely absolutely gutted to see this virus kill them off.
And what is happening right now has been unprecedented for over 100 years.
For a century, no one in the world has had to deal with a virus of this magnitude.
I've already mentioned multiple times that we had a flu season in 2018 that was much, much worse. There's been, what, 8,800 deaths worldwide attributed to the coronavirus so far (7,200 coming from just three countries)? The 2018 flu has 80,000 deaths attributed to it in the US alone.
100 years? You mean the Spanish Flu, don't you? It is literally impossible for something like the Spanish Flu to hit us like it did in 1918. You'd need a world war with millions of soldiers sitting in trenches pooping in buckets to get the same sort of environmental conditions that caused that one. The influenza virus wasn't even discovered until the 1930s. Turns out that the Spanish Flu isn't even what killed everyone - it was bacterial pneumonia that piggybacked on the flu. The Spanish Flu pandemic was the result of industrialization, poor hygiene, war, and medical ignorance - none of which would apply to a disease spreading today. The fact that Imperial College compared this coronavirus to the Spanish Flu in any way, shape, or form is a shameful act of propaganda.
Would you rather world governments and society in general just carry on because of prior precedent of the WHO being wrong?
I'd want them to be more measured in their responses, and hold the WHO to more evidence-based projections than they have traditionally used in the past. For instance, I'd like to see the WHO factor in climate and environmental factors into their model for worldwide epidemics.
What’s riskier? Shutting things down temporarily? Or should we just carry on and let millions possibly die?
Millions will not die. Not even the WHO is predicting that many deaths
I don’t know, I’d rather we’d take precautions. If that means trading billions of dollars over lives, I know which one I’d choose.
Precautions, sure. Absolutely. But reasonable ones. Not draconian ones.
LMPD to no longer respond to hit and run wrecks, other incidents
Jason Riley and Travis Ragsdale
Mar 17, 2020 Updated 10 hrs ago
LOUISVILLE, Ky., (WDRB) – Louisville Metro Police will no longer respond to several emergency situations, including some burglaries and speeding, according to Louisville Metro Police Chief Steve Conrad.
Conrad said the department will take reports over the phone in many non-violent incidents, to protect officers and the public from spreading the coronavirus.
In addition, police will not be dispatched to public intoxication cases, speeding, illegal parking and loitering, among other incidents.
Conrad said the changes are being made "in the interest of focusing on making sure our officers are able to respond in an emergency situation or life is threatened and to keep them healthy."
The department hasn't seen any increase in officers out sick "with this particular illness," Conrad said, but attendance is being monitored as shifts begin.
Police headquarters, among other buildings, will be closed.
In addition, LMPD officers are no longer allowed to request vacation time.
In a memo written by Conrad on Monday, a “state of emergency” has been declared and only vacation requests already approved for this year will be allowed.
Conrad did not mention the memo at a press conference on Tuesday but said officers will get sick with the virus and the department is taking several precautions to ensure there is enough staffing.
He said he is moving personnel between divisions and using investigative staff to help patrol divisions "where absences are there."
In addition, Conrad said police will be limiting public access to headquarters, division stations and the city's impoundment lot. Visits to the lot and the LMPD property room will now be done by appointment, he said.
In a separate email sent by the assistant director of Louisville Metro Emergency Services as of 7 p.m. on Tuesday, police will not be responding to several types of events:
· Medical alarms, unless there is a known safety issue
· Non-injury accidents
· Hit-and-run accidents
· Disorderly persons
· Intoxicated persons
· Reckless drivers
Conrad did not mention all incidents police are currently not responding to during the press conference.
Copyright 2020 WDRB Media. All Rights Reserved.
Wow.... if that aint a recipie for widespread crime wave i dont know what is. Lets hope the fumb criminals arent that big on reading.
All schools closing uk , my wife and I are nurse and dr respectively, hope the schools stay open for my kids as if not that's one less health worker on certain days.
Also I hope the business owners small and large can just hang on for their employees.
cuda1179 wrote: My state shut down all eat-in restaurants yesterday, and I own one. This stinks for my finances. I'm not going to go under or anything, I have an emergency fund that I could live off of for 6-months if neither my wife or I were working, but it took a while to build up and I don't like dipping into it.
What happens with your employees? No, this isn't a prelude to villainizing you, just an honest question.
Obviously, I can't speak for cuda, but I'd assume the employees would get some sort of unemployment insurance given that their lapse in employment isn't the result of malfeasance or a voluntary break and the length of the layoff is unknown. Probably going to vary state to state.
I think they need to be officially laid off for that to happen. Is that what happened? How does that work exactly? Cuda's the first small business person I actually know IRL (sort of, I guess) to have had to have taken this step.
I also live in Iowa so it would be practical information for other people I know if it happens to them as well.
cuda1179 wrote: My state shut down all eat-in restaurants yesterday, and I own one. This stinks for my finances. I'm not going to go under or anything, I have an emergency fund that I could live off of for 6-months if neither my wife or I were working, but it took a while to build up and I don't like dipping into it.
What happens with your employees? No, this isn't a prelude to villainizing you, just an honest question.
Obviously, I can't speak for cuda, but I'd assume the employees would get some sort of unemployment insurance given that their lapse in employment isn't the result of malfeasance or a voluntary break and the length of the layoff is unknown. Probably going to vary state to state.
I think they need to be officially laid off for that to happen. Is that what happened? How does that work exactly? Cuda's the first small business person I actually know IRL (sort of, I guess) to have had to have taken this step.
I also live in Iowa so it would be practical information for other people I know if it happens to them as well.
From my states unemployment FAQ :
3. Will workers qualify for unemployment benefits if the coronavirus (COVID-19) causes an employer to shut down operations?
Yes. Maryland unemployment benefits are available to individuals who are unemployed through no fault of their own. If an employer must shut down operations and no work is available, individuals may be eligible for unemployment benefits if they meet the monetary criteria and the weekly eligibility criteria.
I'd check with your local state unemployment agency, as it can vary.
My brother works in tourism at a major location in London. He's gone from looking like a best year ever work-wise to just... nothing. People pulling the plug on events as far away as Christmas. There was a major event happening in the summer that has now been canceled. He was planning that for a year, and is now trying to find out if he's going to get any money at all for all that work.
And what is happening right now has been unprecedented for over 100 years.
For a century, no one in the world has had to deal with a virus of this magnitude.
I've already mentioned multiple times that we had a flu season in 2018 that was much, much worse. There's been, what, 8,800 deaths worldwide attributed to the coronavirus so far (7,200 coming from just three countries)? The 2018 flu has 80,000 deaths attributed to it in the US alone.
100 years? You mean the Spanish Flu, don't you? It is literally impossible for something like the Spanish Flu to hit us like it did in 1918. You'd need a world war with millions of soldiers sitting in trenches pooping in buckets to get the same sort of environmental conditions that caused that one. The influenza virus wasn't even discovered until the 1930s. Turns out that the Spanish Flu isn't even what killed everyone - it was bacterial pneumonia that piggybacked on the flu. The Spanish Flu pandemic was the result of industrialization, poor hygiene, war, and medical ignorance - none of which would apply to a disease spreading today. The fact that Imperial College compared this coronavirus to the Spanish Flu in any way, shape, or form is a shameful act of propaganda.
Would you rather world governments and society in general just carry on because of prior precedent of the WHO being wrong?
I'd want them to be more measured in their responses, and hold the WHO to more evidence-based projections than they have traditionally used in the past. For instance, I'd like to see the WHO factor in climate and environmental factors into their model for worldwide epidemics.
What’s riskier? Shutting things down temporarily? Or should we just carry on and let millions possibly die?
Millions will not die. Not even the WHO is predicting that many deaths
I don’t know, I’d rather we’d take precautions. If that means trading billions of dollars over lives, I know which one I’d choose.
Precautions, sure. Absolutely. But reasonable ones. Not draconian ones.
You’ve mentioned a lot of things. That doesn’t mean we’re listening to you over what’s going on in the entire world around us. Look, you’ve studied google. You’ve read Wikipedia. We got it. That doesn’t make you an expert. Say whatever you want, but most of us are smart enough to ignore you and listen to the real experts. Scientists, doctors, the CDC, and even the governments who are working on shutting down the world. You’re welcome to spew whatever you want on here. Just don’t expect any of us to say anything more than “that’s nice”...
So I own a bar in Ohio. All bars have been shut down....I'll be alright, my bar bills are relatively small, and its not like booze or refrigerated beer goes bad quickly. I am however very well hooked into the service industry, most bartenders and wait staff live check to check, this is going to be very very hard on them. Even though I have not fired or officially laid off my staff the rule in Ohio right now is that they may file for unemployment, Ohio has even waived the one week waiting period and the requirement to look for work. I still think its smarter to focus resources on protecting the vulnerable while the rest of us carry on and keep the economy running.....but I don't make those decisions.
From what I understand this is a pretty mild respiratory infection.....unless of course you are in a state of already compromised health, then it gets deadly.
My parents are in their late 80's live on their own (they are not feeble, can still drive and go to the store and such) and are very lonely right now, they also have no idea when they can see their children or grandchildren again......and essentially until there is a vaccine (which looks pretty far off) they will have to stay secluded. If i had contracted the coronavirus at least I could visit them in a few weeks after I recovered and was not a carrier anymore.
Andrew1975 wrote: So I own a bar in Ohio. All bars have been shut down....I'll be alright, my bar bills are relatively small, and its not like booze or refrigerated beer goes bad quickly. I am however very well hooked into the service industry, most bartenders and wait staff live check to check, this is going to be very very hard on them. Even though I have not fired or officially laid off my staff the rule in Ohio right now is that they may file for unemployment, Ohio has even waived the one week waiting period and the requirement to look for work. I still think its smarter to focus resources on protecting the vulnerable while the rest of us carry on and keep the economy running.....but I don't make those decisions.
From what I understand this is a pretty mild respiratory infection.....unless of course you are in a state of already compromised health, then it gets deadly.
My parents are in their late 80's live on their own (they are not feeble, can still drive and go to the store and such) and are very lonely right now, they also have no idea when they can see their children or grandchildren again......and essentially until there is a vaccine (which looks pretty far off) they will have to stay secluded. If i had contracted the coronavirus at least I could visit them in a few weeks after I recovered and was not a carrier anymore.
Good luck to you mate, hope the business holds up and things pass soon. Hope you can hold onto employees too.
Pretty much never. 'By any means' includes they idea of straight up murder to prevent possible infection, and that isn't a reasonable trade.
People are panicking enough as is, violence in the streets isn't a reasonable direction to go by any standard.
It's worth noting that panicked people are rarely reasonable.
Yeah what Marxist Artist said. Really hoping that things work out ok for you Andrew1975. I know a few people in your predicament and my heart really goes out to all you small business owners.
Future War Cultist wrote: I’m starting to think about all the self employed and small businesses. I’ve a few friends in the restaurant business, and we’ve got some fantastic places around here that I would be genuinely absolutely gutted to see this virus kill them off.
Now's the time to, if you've got cash to spare, to get gift cards in place of going out.
Stay home, but if you were planning to go out sometime during the week or weekend, get a giftcard to your favorite places.
In a weird twist to this, it's the opposite where I'm at. We're a shore town and everything's spun down for the winter and early spring. But we've got people coming from all over to stay at their shore homes. So we don't have the capacity to handle them, especially our single, small hospital.
timetowaste85 wrote: You’ve mentioned a lot of things. That doesn’t mean we’re listening to you over what’s going on in the entire world around us. Look, you’ve studied google. You’ve read Wikipedia. We got it. That doesn’t make you an expert. Say whatever you want, but most of us are smart enough to ignore you and listen to the real experts. Scientists, doctors, the CDC, and even the governments who are working on shutting down the world. You’re welcome to spew whatever you want on here. Just don’t expect any of us to say anything more than “that’s nice”...
Believe whatever you want to believe. I'm not trying to pass myself off as an "expert", but there is a very big gulf between an informed opinion and an ignorant one. I've backed up everything I've said with either links, or enough stats and information that you could easily fact check any story or claim that I've shared. If you want to counter ANYTHING I've said, you have the ammunition.
But you aren't addressing anything I've said. You just try to sweep my posts under the rug because they are inconvenient to you. You aren't saying what I'm wrong about or why. You are just claiming that I am wrong because I am not an expert. And if you want to defer to expert opinions, absolutely do so. But I've seen a lot of people misquote the WHO and escalate the perceived danger surrounding this virus well beyond what even the WHO is saying. Suggesting that you will listen to authority and then misquoting and misrepresenting it doesn't reflect poorly on MY position.
And for the record, I'm not (generally) just posting the top google result as my evidence. In early 2018, my family went through a series of medical "adventures" that left me with a seriously skeptical and cynical opinion of modern medicine. Since then, I've read dozens of books, watched hundreds of presentations and talks, and read who knows how many actual studies as I followed up on what I've read. A lot of the stories and facts that I have brought up have been verified through multiple different sources, and I have a rather sizeable list of resources to draw on when making posts. Making these long posts filled with facts and figures is easy for me because I'm not just discovering all this stuff for the first time.
If anything, of all the people that have posted in this thread, my posts have been considerably ahead of the curve in actual details, quotes, and links. By all means, dispute them! I'd love a different (informed) opinion to strengthen my research against. It gives me a direction to research even more, and helps me further learn and educate myself about this subject. But "har har, you use google" is hardly the fitting defense of a reasonable mind.
Sqorgar wrote: Precautions, sure. Absolutely. But reasonable ones. Not draconian ones.
For reasonable precautions to work, the population must respond reasonably.
Instead, humanity insists on remaining human and responding UNreasonably. Thus, we get responses everywhere from hording TP and locking oneself in the bathroom for months on end to people completely ignoring the problem and spreading the virus in a completely uncontrolled and irresponsible manner.
Sometimes draconian is the only way to get the results you need. Why? Consider how stupid the average person can be, and then realize that half the people are actually stupider than that!
It is important to note that the WHO has been wrong every single time they have predicted a doomsday epidemic, by a LOT. And in the past, this has only cost taxpayers millions or even just billions or dollars. But the effect of this panic will be so, so much worse - it has already cost trillions and we are just getting started - and the WHO's track record on being right about worldwide epidemics is pretty much 0%.
I would rather lose a few hundred million dollars than be wrong and lose a few hundred million lives.
Also note that because we've had health scares before that never came to anything for the majority of people; many people don't see the "need" for special measures. Especially as its a disease likened to "a bad cold/flu". If it was spewing blood from your eyeballs and screaming in pain and almost guaranteed death people would react differently.
But its not.
Sometimes draconian measures are needed to make people wake up and take things seriously.
Sqorgar wrote: Precautions, sure. Absolutely. But reasonable ones. Not draconian ones.
For reasonable precautions to work, the population must respond reasonably.
Instead, humanity insists on remaining human and responding UNreasonably. Thus, we get responses everywhere from hording TP and locking oneself in the bathroom for months on end to people completely ignoring the problem and spreading the virus in a completely uncontrolled and irresponsible manner.
Sometimes draconian is the only way to get the results you need. Why? Consider how stupid the average person can be, and then realize that half the people are actually stupider than that!
Here is a good one for you. Myself and my cooworkers *might* have been exposed. However, our superiors are "waiting" for test results to come in before declaring we cannot work and must go home. It will be two days before we know for sure if the possible exposure is COVID-19 or something else like Influenza A/B. So, here I am, sitting at work twiddling my thumbs and mehing away.
I will just add that Medical services for profit are a something our civilization needs to overcome.
Greece: 400 active cases, still only 5 dead, villages in lockdown, emergency sms sent to all by the Government to "stay at home".
Concurrent to other EU states a series of measures to alleviate the business and workers have been announced.
Andrew1975 wrote: My parents are in their late 80's live on their own (they are not feeble, can still drive and go to the store and such) and are very lonely right now, they also have no idea when they can see their children or grandchildren again......and essentially until there is a vaccine (which looks pretty far off) they will have to stay secluded. If i had contracted the coronavirus at least I could visit them in a few weeks after I recovered and was not a carrier anymore.
The coronavirus should naturally drop off as it gets warmer. Coronaviruses, in general, are extremely seasonal, with the highest rates during the first three months of the year, then dropping sharply afterwards to basically nothing during the summer. By the end of April, or even earlier, seclusion will probably not be necessary. The need of a vaccine is in case this virus returns next year.
timetowaste85 wrote: You’ve mentioned a lot of things. That doesn’t mean we’re listening to you over what’s going on in the entire world around us. Look, you’ve studied google. You’ve read Wikipedia. We got it. That doesn’t make you an expert. Say whatever you want, but most of us are smart enough to ignore you and listen to the real experts. Scientists, doctors, the CDC, and even the governments who are working on shutting down the world. You’re welcome to spew whatever you want on here. Just don’t expect any of us to say anything more than “that’s nice”...
Believe whatever you want to believe. I'm not trying to pass myself off as an "expert", but there is a very big gulf between an informed opinion and an ignorant one. I've backed up everything I've said with either links, or enough stats and information that you could easily fact check any story or claim that I've shared. If you want to counter ANYTHING I've said, you have the ammunition.
But you aren't addressing anything I've said. You just try to sweep my posts under the rug because they are inconvenient to you. You aren't saying what I'm wrong about or why. You are just claiming that I am wrong because I am not an expert. And if you want to defer to expert opinions, absolutely do so. But I've seen a lot of people misquote the WHO and escalate the perceived danger surrounding this virus well beyond what even the WHO is saying. Suggesting that you will listen to authority and then misquoting and misrepresenting it doesn't reflect poorly on MY position.
And for the record, I'm not (generally) just posting the top google result as my evidence. In early 2018, my family went through a series of medical "adventures" that left me with a seriously skeptical and cynical opinion of modern medicine. Since then, I've read dozens of books, watched hundreds of presentations and talks, and read who knows how many actual studies as I followed up on what I've read. A lot of the stories and facts that I have brought up have been verified through multiple different sources, and I have a rather sizeable list of resources to draw on when making posts. Making these long posts filled with facts and figures is easy for me because I'm not just discovering all this stuff for the first time.
If anything, of all the people that have posted in this thread, my posts have been considerably ahead of the curve in actual details, quotes, and links. By all means, dispute them! I'd love a different (informed) opinion to strengthen my research against. It gives me a direction to research even more, and helps me further learn and educate myself about this subject. But "har har, you use google" is hardly the fitting defense of a reasonable mind.
Except you keep saying that actual experts are wrong and you're right, every time someone's come up with numbers that disprove yours you ignore them, because of a personal anecdotal experience and "I've read stuff".
Yeah, sorry, no one's gonna take that seriously.
Togusa wrote: I would rather lose a few hundred million dollars than be wrong and lose a few hundred million lives.
Where are you getting a few hundred million lives from? Even the Gates Foundation has only predicted 65 million lives lost in their simulations. The actual death toll will likely be measured in thousands, not millions.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bran Dawri wrote: Except you keep saying that actual experts are wrong and you're right, every time someone's come up with numbers that disprove yours you ignore them, because of a personal anecdotal experience and "I've read stuff".
Yeah, sorry, no one's gonna take that seriously.
I've said their PREDICTIONS were wrong, and I've explained why (not enough testing has led to an extremely biased sample size, simulations and models don't factor in actual real world conditions that could affect the spread of the virus, and their predictions have been hilariously wrong in the past - remember the bird flu pandemic that only killed 150 people?)
It's like this. Scientists predicted that by the year 2020, global temperatures will have risen 6 degrees, 8 million people will have died due to global warming, and the earth will have used up its supply of oil. It's 2020 now, the temperatures have risen by 1 degree and nowhere near 8 million people have died, and gas is still readily available. Does that mean I disagree with man made global warming? Absolutely not. I think it is a serious problem and that working towards sustainable energy is probably the most important thing we could be doing as a species. But the predictions are wrong. They are always wrong. Because they are just predictions that are built on incomplete or overly simplistic models. We should not act on behalf of their urgency and truthiness without something more substantial to go on.
ScarletRose wrote: You mean... governments prepare for things before they actually happen? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.
Which reminds me... Taiwan reacted to CoVid early January, and has only *one* CoVid-related death. It's an island, but everyone's been tested, etc. etc. Of course, you could could say they *weren't* prepared for SARS back in 2003.
Second article discusses how China has successfully shut out Taiwan from global health discussions, including membership in WHO.
Possible 17-year old South Korean death from CoVid. : "A 17-year-old boy who was showing signs of pneumonia died, and health officials entered a post-corona19 sample. ... There were no underlying diseases. ... Group A was confirmed to have undergone X-ray examination of various parts of the lungs that turned white. ... Group A was transferred to Yeungnam University Hospital and conducted genetic tests four times, but it showed a negative response, but one gene test showed positive results. : Korean site: https://www.nocutnews.co.kr/news/5311057
The article doesn't mention causes of death for a patient who seems healthy. The only one I've read about is the cytokine storm, in which the body overreacts with its immunology system. : "Critically important studies emerging from China suggest that for many patients who die of Covid-19, it may be their own immune system, rather than the virus itself, that deals the fatal blow. This is called a cytokine storm." https://www.vox.com/2020/3/12/21176783/coronavirus-covid-19-deaths-china-treatment-cytokine-storm-syndrome
Andrew1975 wrote: My parents are in their late 80's live on their own (they are not feeble, can still drive and go to the store and such) and are very lonely right now, they also have no idea when they can see their children or grandchildren again......and essentially until there is a vaccine (which looks pretty far off) they will have to stay secluded. If i had contracted the coronavirus at least I could visit them in a few weeks after I recovered and was not a carrier anymore.
The coronavirus should naturally drop off as it gets warmer. Coronaviruses, in general, are extremely seasonal, with the highest rates during the first three months of the year, then dropping sharply afterwards to basically nothing during the summer. By the end of April, or even earlier, seclusion will probably not be necessary. The need of a vaccine is in case this virus returns next year.
Togusa wrote: I would rather lose a few hundred million dollars than be wrong and lose a few hundred million lives.
Where are you getting a few hundred million lives from? Even the Gates Foundation has only predicted 65 million lives lost in their simulations. The actual death toll will likely be measured in thousands, not millions.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Bran Dawri wrote: Except you keep saying that actual experts are wrong and you're right, every time someone's come up with numbers that disprove yours you ignore them, because of a personal anecdotal experience and "I've read stuff".
Yeah, sorry, no one's gonna take that seriously.
I've said their PREDICTIONS were wrong, and I've explained why (not enough testing has led to an extremely biased sample size, simulations and models don't factor in actual real world conditions that could affect the spread of the virus, and their predictions have been hilariously wrong in the past - remember the bird flu pandemic that only killed 150 people?)
It's like this. Scientists predicted that by the year 2020, global temperatures will have risen 6 degrees, 8 million people will have died due to global warming, and the earth will have used up its supply of oil. It's 2020 now, the temperatures have risen by 1 degree and nowhere near 8 million people have died, and gas is still readily available. Does that mean I disagree with man made global warming? Absolutely not. I think it is a serious problem and that working towards sustainable energy is probably the most important thing we could be doing as a species. But the predictions are wrong. They are always wrong. Because they are just predictions that are built on incomplete or overly simplistic models. We should not act on behalf of their urgency and truthiness without something more substantial to go on.
You're nitpicking, and you know it. 100 million or 1 million, doesn't matter. I'd rather lose the money than lives.
Somehow people got it stuck in their heads that younger adults are borderline immune because most of the fatalities were from the elderly in China. And it does seem that the risk is lower, but some ARE getting seriously ill, and many others may be spreading it.
Even our former denier-in-chief is warning younger adults to fething play ball now.
I second this and glad someone else is posting.
Think whatever you want about JR but the guy he is interviewing is legit. You can read up on his credentials.
All in all resonable advice and certainly not a doomsday prophecy for covid but a good reality check.
"The Rome-based institute has examined medical records of about 18% of the country’s coronavirus fatalities, finding that just three victims, or 0.8% of the total, had no previous pathology. Almost half of the victims suffered from at least three prior illnesses and about a fourth had either one or two previous conditions."
"More than 75% had high blood pressure, about 35% had diabetes and a third suffered from heart disease."
"The average age of those who’ve died from the virus in Italy is 79.5. As of March 17, 17 people under 50 had died from the disease. All of Italy’s victims under 40 have been males with serious existing medical conditions."
gorgon wrote: Somehow people got it stuck in their heads that younger adults are borderline immune because most of the fatalities were from the elderly in China. And it does seem that the risk is lower, but some ARE getting seriously ill, and many others may be spreading it.
Even our former denier-in-chief is warning younger adults to fething play ball now.
Yeah. Just focusing on elderly ignoring the younger people dying and hospitalizing. Yeah just half the hospitalized are non elderly. No problem whatsoever. Especially when once health service capacity runs over those hospitalized younger people are going to be in trouble.
"The Rome-based institute has examined medical records of about 18% of the country’s coronavirus fatalities, finding that just three victims, or 0.8% of the total, had no previous pathology. Almost half of the victims suffered from at least three prior illnesses and about a fourth had either one or two previous conditions."
"More than 75% had high blood pressure, about 35% had diabetes and a third suffered from heart disease."
"The average age of those who’ve died from the virus in Italy is 79.5. As of March 17, 17 people under 50 had died from the disease. All of Italy’s victims under 40 have been males with serious existing medical conditions."
Edit: My intent was not to ask this person to stop posting all together. I apologize and am removing my post. My only hope is that we can stop things from escalating into further arguing and eventual thread lock.
Future War Cultist wrote: I’m starting to think about all the self employed and small businesses. I’ve a few friends in the restaurant business, and we’ve got some fantastic places around here that I would be genuinely absolutely gutted to see this virus kill them off.
Do you think they or another service do delivery for these local places? We have a few places on our end that use a third-party delivery service to get orders to self-isolating families. From what I understand, the deliveries are a regular thing to help compensate for the lack of people on regular working days. It's keeping business moving to some extent while folks are in self-isolation. A local bookstore on our end is doing delivery as well, albeit without using the third-party service.
"The Rome-based institute has examined medical records of about 18% of the country’s coronavirus fatalities, finding that just three victims, or 0.8% of the total, had no previous pathology. Almost half of the victims suffered from at least three prior illnesses and about a fourth had either one or two previous conditions."
"More than 75% had high blood pressure, about 35% had diabetes and a third suffered from heart disease."
"The average age of those who’ve died from the virus in Italy is 79.5. As of March 17, 17 people under 50 had died from the disease. All of Italy’s victims under 40 have been males with serious existing medical conditions."
Look, we get it. You think its blown out of proportion and not a big deal and everyone is over reacting. We get it.
You are not going to convince anyone here that you are right any more than they are going to convince you.
Please stop before you get the thread locked, shouldn't be too much to ask. We know your feelings on the subject.
This is utterly bizarre to me. The man is posting results of study. You picked the wrong post to attempt to bully him out of the thread.
I mean, really? Good news is good news and "no, 100 million deaths isn't guaranteed" is good for people to hear. Not bad.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Anyone have information about the actual pandemic to share, or are we stuck on faux-politics?
I heard on Radio 4, which is nearly the voice of God for seriously minded British people, that China is estimated to have saved 30,000 deaths by switching off their factories. So with 8,000 dead of Covid-19, they are actually gaining.
This thread really highlights now there can and are many people who simply not particularly well versed in the philosophy of science, the nature of statistical analysis, the limits of inductive reasoning, among numerous other things, like scale effects, second-order effects and so on. And granted, all of that stuff is not easy, not intuitive, and not something there is really much of a point of many people to learn. That being said, even some people in the medical, or scientific fields might not have the best grasp on them either, but they are likely to be at least marginally better informed about them, on average.
But all that is partly built in the manner in which we practice science. It is not perfect. It does not ever grant certainty. But, if you think that common sense, intuition or extremely limited research grants one the same confidence interval as large data sets, cleverly applied, well, you are really not likely to have much of a case, in general. To take a stance that something is a binary, as in, either is certain, or is totally unknown, is just a false dichotomy. Which is why, to think that since no one can be certain of the exact numbers at any given moment, that a common sense, under-informed (because every single person in the thread is under-informed, me certainly included) is just as useful as the stance of those who have access to more data, more robust manners of interpretation and knowledge to apply to that data, is, frankly, pretty brazen and likely to do far more harm than good.
Now, unfortunately, I am not the person well informed enough to explain to you the philosophy of science, or the entire nature of inductive reasoning. But now is really not the time to be playing around with overly skeptical stances and claims when people's lives are very much at risk because action must be taken now, before it is too late, not once we have something like "perfect information" and it would, in fact, be far to late to actually do anything...
NinthMusketeer wrote: Anyone have information about the actual pandemic to share, or are we stuck on faux-politics?
I heard on Radio 4, which is nearly the voice of God for seriously minded British people, that China is estimated to have saved 30,000 deaths by switching off their factories. So with 8,000 dead of Covid-19, they are actually gaining.
Of course it ignores the economic impact.
I was blown away when they showed the images of the CO2 emission reduction after the factories had closed.
On a similar note, the pictures of the canals in Venice now that they aren't being used is pretty amazing as well. They are clear and have fishes and swans now.
For a feel good video, check out the penguins from the Shedd Aquarium in Chicago, they are freaking adorable and appear to be full of wonder lol
Yeah, I read the build up. That's why I was shocked you waited until he retreated to quoting the experts and the facts and the latest information and literally nothing else to tell him to stop.
Because you absolutely told him to stop. Apparently he not only is not allowed to post skepticism or criticism, but even data from the health officials. Since, again, that is literally all he did when you told him to stop.
Togusa wrote: I would rather lose a few hundred million dollars than be wrong and lose a few hundred million lives.
Yes. Regardless of the specifics on the numbers, the economy will recover, and usually pretty fast.
Losing a great deal of lives (with a great many more living with the fallout, such as scarred lungs) isn't going to be as easy to spring back from.
Scrabb wrote: You picked the wrong post to attempt to bully him out of the thread.
I have pretty abjectly disagreed with him, but I do agree we should not be attempting to suppress his opinion. For all we know, he's going to turn out to be totally right in 3 months. I mean, I hope he is! The alternatives are horrifying.
IronWarLeg wrote: For a feel good video, check out the penguins from the Shedd Aquarium in Chicago, they are freaking adorable and appear to be full of wonder lol
My favorite so far was the penguins going down the stairs on the way to explore (not the Shedd, but similar).
"The Rome-based institute has examined medical records of about 18% of the country’s coronavirus fatalities, finding that just three victims, or 0.8% of the total, had no previous pathology. Almost half of the victims suffered from at least three prior illnesses and about a fourth had either one or two previous conditions."
"More than 75% had high blood pressure, about 35% had diabetes and a third suffered from heart disease."
"The average age of those who’ve died from the virus in Italy is 79.5. As of March 17, 17 people under 50 had died from the disease. All of Italy’s victims under 40 have been males with serious existing medical conditions."
The issue here being that a huge number of people have such conditions, it seems that people in perfect health are relatively robust, but almost any pre-existing condition appears to monstrously magnify the mortality rate out of all proportion to more common seasonal viruses. Italy just saw its highest single day death count of almost 500 people, increasing their total Covid19 deaths by 1/6th in a day.
Sporogar seems to ignore the fact that even though the 2018 flu season was ‘way worse’, countries weren’t devastating their own economies and shutting their borders because of it, and yet, here we are.
Yeah. That 2018 flu was way worse. As was SARS. Or MERS. Or any previous illness that has spread. I’m being sarcastic.
At this point, if anyone doesn’t understand the gravity of the situation, they never will.
Unfortunately even Italy is still in early stages of infection as I understand it so it's likely things will get much worse before they better.
Hopefully my un educated guess is wrong and things improve quickly.
I have an Italian colleague from the North of Italy who is unable to return home who is terrified for his family.
Togusa wrote: I would rather lose a few hundred million dollars than be wrong and lose a few hundred million lives.
Yes. Regardless of the specifics on the numbers, the economy will recover, and usually pretty fast.
Losing a great deal of lives (with a great many more living with the fallout, such as scarred lungs) isn't going to be as easy to spring back from.
Scrabb wrote: You picked the wrong post to attempt to bully him out of the thread.
I have pretty abjectly disagreed with him, but I do agree we should not be attempting to suppress his opinion. For all we know, he's going to turn out to be totally right in 3 months. I mean, I hope he is! The alternatives are horrifying.
IronWarLeg wrote: For a feel good video, check out the penguins from the Shedd Aquarium in Chicago, they are freaking adorable and appear to be full of wonder lol
My favorite so far was the penguins going down the stairs on the way to explore (not the Shedd, but similar).
To your second point, I have edited my posts, as they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
As for the penguins,
I loved that one too, some were all about going down the stairs and some weren't sure lol.. I really liked the one of the bonded pair roaming around the aquarium domes and the desk spaces
But all that is partly built in the manner in which we practice science. It is not perfect. It does not ever grant certainty. But, if you think that common sense, intuition or extremely limited research grants one the same confidence interval as large data sets, cleverly applied, well, you are really not likely to have much of a case, in general. To take a stance that something is a binary, as in, either is certain, or is totally unknown, is just a false dichotomy. Which is why, to think that since no one can be certain of the exact numbers at any given moment, that a common sense, under-informed (because every single person in the thread is under-informed, me certainly included) is just as useful as the stance of those who have access to more data, more robust manners of interpretation and knowledge to apply to that data, is, frankly, pretty brazen and likely to do far more harm than good.
That's just it, we (generic we, not Dakka) don't have large high confidence datasets. Even the experts right now are underinformed , their guesses are just a little more educated than others. What do you do when the data sucks, the best you can and have the capability to adjust as more data comes in. I personally think the actions being taken are more right than not but I understand where Sqorgar is coming from, I just have a different risk tolerance.
PS. He's not going to be the one to get the thread locked, it will be on the people venomously attacking him for daring to have a different opinion, because that's all anyone has right now are opinions.
Vaktathi wrote: The issue here being that a huge number of people have such conditions, it seems that people in perfect health are relatively robust, but almost any pre-existing condition appears to monstrously magnify the mortality rate out of all proportion to more common seasonal viruses.
Look, I'm about to bail out of this thread as it is getting a little mean and a little personal, but I do want to say one thing before I go...
99% of the deaths in Italy had underlying conditions. That's as close as you can get to an absolute correlation. 75% of them had high blood pressure. 25% had diabetes. 25% had heart disease. All three of these can be treated (even cured) with proper diet and exercise - as opposed to taking drugs that only treat the symptoms. 50% of the people who died had three or more(!) underlying conditions. China has a high blood pressure problem, with it being poorly managed, and responsible for 2.3 million deaths a year. 1 in 3 adults in China has high blood pressure. 56% of Italian men between 35 and 79 have high blood pressure.
What if the best way to reduce mortality is not to destroy our society in an effort to control the virus, but to simply better treat the underlying conditions that make it lethal? It would have strong benefits outside of the coronavirus too. Or what if it is related to the drugs they take for these conditions? What if the real culprit is a popular blood pressure medication? Maybe what we need most is to change how we treat high blood pressure, diabetes, and heart disease?
cuda1179 wrote: My state shut down all eat-in restaurants yesterday, and I own one. This stinks for my finances. I'm not going to go under or anything, I have an emergency fund that I could live off of for 6-months if neither my wife or I were working, but it took a while to build up and I don't like dipping into it.
What happens with your employees? No, this isn't a prelude to villainizing you, just an honest question.
I can't imagine virtually any small business owner can afford to subsidize employees who literally aren't working.
Sorry for the belated response. My employees can file for unemployment and can basically get fast tracked to get a check. Ironically, it looks like they will be getting unemployment checks before our next payroll was scheduled.
What if the best way to reduce mortality is not to destroy our society in an effort to control the virus, but to simply better treat the underlying conditions that make it lethal? It would have strong benefits outside of the coronavirus too. Or what if it is related to the drugs they take for these conditions? What if the real culprit is a popular blood pressure medication? Maybe what we need most is to change how we treat high blood pressure, diabetes, and heart disease?
What ifs are great, but do you have time to research IF the popular blood medication is the issue when people are dying? Maybe research that once you stop the pandemic, instead of coming to a solution that yes, BloodPressureDrug 1 was to blame on top of a pyramid of corpses that'd make the Aztecs blush?
Vaktathi wrote: The issue here being that a huge number of people have such conditions, it seems that people in perfect health are relatively robust, but almost any pre-existing condition appears to monstrously magnify the mortality rate out of all proportion to more common seasonal viruses.
Look, I'm about to bail out of this thread as it is getting a little mean and a little personal, but I do want to say one thing before I go...
99% of the deaths in Italy had underlying conditions. That's as close as you can get to an absolute correlation. 75% of them had high blood pressure. 25% had diabetes. 25% had heart disease. All three of these can be treated (even cured) with proper diet and exercise - as opposed to taking drugs that only treat the symptoms. 50% of the people who died had three or more(!) underlying conditions. China has a high blood pressure problem, with it being poorly managed, and responsible for 2.3 million deaths a year. 1 in 3 adults in China has high blood pressure. 56% of Italian men between 35 and 79 have high blood pressure.
What if the best way to reduce mortality is not to destroy our society in an effort to control the virus, but to simply better treat the underlying conditions that make it lethal? It would have strong benefits outside of the coronavirus too. Or what if it is related to the drugs they take for these conditions? What if the real culprit is a popular blood pressure medication? Maybe what we need most is to change how we treat high blood pressure, diabetes, and heart disease?
Would be interesting to see that level of detail for another country, is there a M/F breakdown in the data ?
Here's the thing though, even if changing how we treat high blood pressure is the best long term solution it would not be a viable near term remedy and too many people would likely die in the next couple of months of course that goes back to the crap data we have on what likely is...
Vaktathi wrote: The issue here being that a huge number of people have such conditions, it seems that people in perfect health are relatively robust, but almost any pre-existing condition appears to monstrously magnify the mortality rate out of all proportion to more common seasonal viruses.
Look, I'm about to bail out of this thread as it is getting a little mean and a little personal, but I do want to say one thing before I go...
99% of the deaths in Italy had underlying conditions. That's as close as you can get to an absolute correlation. 75% of them had high blood pressure. 25% had diabetes. 25% had heart disease. All three of these can be treated (even cured) with proper diet and exercise - as opposed to taking drugs that only treat the symptoms. 50% of the people who died had three or more(!) underlying conditions. China has a high blood pressure problem, with it being poorly managed, and responsible for 2.3 million deaths a year. 1 in 3 adults in China has high blood pressure. 56% of Italian men between 35 and 79 have high blood pressure.
What if the best way to reduce mortality is not to destroy our society in an effort to control the virus, but to simply better treat the underlying conditions that make it lethal? It would have strong benefits outside of the coronavirus too. Or what if it is related to the drugs they take for these conditions? What if the real culprit is a popular blood pressure medication? Maybe what we need most is to change how we treat high blood pressure, diabetes, and heart disease?
I wont argue with you about the fact there a re bucketload of morons who don't look after themselves. However my generation is certainly doing much better thanks to better education, scientific knowledge and living condition.
BUT some people have circumstances such as genetics, old age, and working 2 jobs while looking after children meaning so they basically cant really look after themselves. And those are the weakest in our society. And a society is only ever measured in my eyes in how it looks after its weakest, the vulnerable and the old. My dad is 65, is diabetic(bad family genetics) and has a chronic poulminary condition from years working int he coal industry. Certainly should be looking after himself and ive been trying to et him to change... But if some snot nosed snotdribble decides this isint serious because it cant hurt THEM, but could ppssibly kill my dad, and goes around spreading not caring, how am I suppose to view such a person?
The retirement age is steadily increasing so it would be nice for people to actually live out some decorum of retirement and not die of covid or other such things.. otherwise whats the point? They have earned it through years of labour. We should do everything in our power to try and not put them at risk. Do you not agree?
And if we are going to go full dystopia, and shift our social norm to the fact that the citizen is only a corporate meat robots and consumers so feth them because money is god, how long does this last? People need some sort of safety plan/systems of control to keep or whats the point? We are monkeys with gunpowder. Its back to the strong taking what they can and the weak suffering what they must.
Just look at what happened in the past when there were even slight disruption to complex societies in the form of fuel shortages. Its paramount this is controlled. Like it as not a possibly futile plan is better than no plan.
Vaktathi wrote: The issue here being that a huge number of people have such conditions, it seems that people in perfect health are relatively robust, but almost any pre-existing condition appears to monstrously magnify the mortality rate out of all proportion to more common seasonal viruses.
Look, I'm about to bail out of this thread as it is getting a little mean and a little personal, but I do want to say one thing before I go...
99% of the deaths in Italy had underlying conditions. That's as close as you can get to an absolute correlation. 75% of them had high blood pressure. 25% had diabetes. 25% had heart disease. All three of these can be treated (even cured) with proper diet and exercise - as opposed to taking drugs that only treat the symptoms. 50% of the people who died had three or more(!) underlying conditions. China has a high blood pressure problem, with it being poorly managed, and responsible for 2.3 million deaths a year. 1 in 3 adults in China has high blood pressure. 56% of Italian men between 35 and 79 have high blood pressure.
What if the best way to reduce mortality is not to destroy our society in an effort to control the virus, but to simply better treat the underlying conditions that make it lethal? It would have strong benefits outside of the coronavirus too. Or what if it is related to the drugs they take for these conditions? What if the real culprit is a popular blood pressure medication? Maybe what we need most is to change how we treat high blood pressure, diabetes, and heart disease?
You keep saying "Had" as if the problem in Italy or China is over. Watch the video I linked on the previous page, this entire thing is just beginning. As for your "ThEm GoVeRmEnTs Is CoMin" junk, well, that's just like your opinion, man.
Vaktathi wrote: The issue here being that a huge number of people have such conditions, it seems that people in perfect health are relatively robust, but almost any pre-existing condition appears to monstrously magnify the mortality rate out of all proportion to more common seasonal viruses.
Look, I'm about to bail out of this thread as it is getting a little mean and a little personal, but I do want to say one thing before I go...
99% of the deaths in Italy had underlying conditions. That's as close as you can get to an absolute correlation. 75% of them had high blood pressure. 25% had diabetes. 25% had heart disease. All three of these can be treated (even cured) with proper diet and exercise - as opposed to taking drugs that only treat the symptoms. 50% of the people who died had three or more(!) underlying conditions. China has a high blood pressure problem, with it being poorly managed, and responsible for 2.3 million deaths a year. 1 in 3 adults in China has high blood pressure. 56% of Italian men between 35 and 79 have high blood pressure.
What if the best way to reduce mortality is not to destroy our society in an effort to control the virus, but to simply better treat the underlying conditions that make it lethal? It would have strong benefits outside of the coronavirus too. Or what if it is related to the drugs they take for these conditions? What if the real culprit is a popular blood pressure medication? Maybe what we need most is to change how we treat high blood pressure, diabetes, and heart disease?
I mean, ideally those conditions would be better taken care of. However, as the virus is out in the world as it is, it has to be reacted to as a reflection of those current conditions. Attempting to emergency fix all high blood pressure cases (and their myriad of causes) in the world at once in order to stop Covid19 isn't a realistic option, and with the breadth of conditions being cited, it looks like we can either focus on the one common high mortality factor or chase a gazillion widespread multifaceted and non-communicative medical conditions.
cuda1179 wrote: My state shut down all eat-in restaurants yesterday, and I own one. This stinks for my finances. I'm not going to go under or anything, I have an emergency fund that I could live off of for 6-months if neither my wife or I were working, but it took a while to build up and I don't like dipping into it.
What happens with your employees? No, this isn't a prelude to villainizing you, just an honest question.
I can't imagine virtually any small business owner can afford to subsidize employees who literally aren't working.
Sorry for the belated response. My employees can file for unemployment and can basically get fast tracked to get a check. Ironically, it looks like they will be getting unemployment checks before our next payroll was scheduled.
Thanks. Good to hear they are not totally in the lurch.
Orlanth wrote: UK rise infection rates is similar to that elsewhere in Europe outside Italy. There is little difference.
The wise go with what virologists and epidemiologists say, I do, hopefully so do you. The problem is various virologists and epidemiologists say different things and do not agree. We can make our own minds up as to which expert is more likely to be right, and can logically differ.
Now must compound this with media attention which highlights the path not taken. In the UK herd immunity is questioned, in Italy lockdown is questioned. In both countries the media is saying not enough is being done.
Nobody knows which is the best route forward, there are too many variables.
However flip flopping between contrary poliicies is likely to be the worse option.
Pick a sound contingency and stick with it.
Except you don't. Actual experts who aren't his underlings called the de Spaffle plan 'a parody' - this alone should give you a pause and rethink moment.
Soundbyte occur when the press listen. If the government tried a different tack different 'actual experts' would make other soundbyte worth comments which the press would lap up.
The herd immunity plan is exceptionally stupid for three reasons - first, because because it doesn't give a damn about disease spread and tens of thousands who will die as a result. The point of lockdown is not stopping the spread, it's slowing it down so hospitals can manage things. There is already death triage going on in Italy even with lockdowns - think for a second, how much worse it will be in UK with far greater sick numbers? It's literally condemning people to die. Easily preventable death, at that, just because you piled so much work on doctors there were no resources left for most of the patients..
First the government wants to isolate vulnerable persons sop yes the have concerned themse,lves over disease spread. Fuirthermore they are aware the disease would spread anyway.
Second you have the wrong idea of lockdown, it is not to slow the spread but to stop it, only it leaves a reservoir of uninfected people to be quickly infected as soon as lockdown ends, which it has to because other problems will compound. It is a very short term strategy unless you invent a whole nuew distribution network to service the isolated, or if everyone has prepared stocks. Truth makes a mockery of lockdown. Only a handful of societies have long term isolation stocks. Isolated small communities like the Falkland Islands do, Switzerland does as a long term strategem, and ifs IIRC the only country with this level of civic preparedness, also Mormons do as it is a tenet of their faith to have a years supply of food in the house. So Salt Lake City will be ok for long term isolation. However European countries, get real. Lockdown is the actual public salve, it is an action that makes governments look attentive and buys a bit of time at the expense of telling the populace to assume the position.
Third the Uk has not got far greater sick numbers. France, under lockdown has overtaken infection and death statistics even under lockdown and so has Germany. Lockdown isn't working. Very possibly because if you lockdown everyone the only people who will be able to cope as subsistence farmers, preppers and the first weave of panic buyers. Everyone else is fethed and has to sneak out in order to get supplies. Isolation looks like it might work right now because larders are not empty yet, these are very early days. Give it a week and lockdown will collapse completely because the vast majority of the population will be hungry and out of food. The UK is the only country I know of that has a staged plan to try and avoid lockdown and its inevitable ticking clock to supply breakdown..
Second, because Covid, unlike what Murdoch media say, is not harmless. It damages the lungs of people who survive it - opening them wide open to subsequent bacterial and fungal infections. This not only will add tens of billions to healthcare costs down the road, it will add to number of deaths, even if said deaths are seemingly not work of Covid (and will add to dumb crowing "flu/cold/whatever is more dangerous" when the primary reason why these will soon become deadlier is because Covid broken the ground, so to speak).
The dynamics of the virus remain true whatever strategem you prefer, lockdown no lockdown, people will get the virus, and from statistical evidence lockdown isn't making a difference. Why I do not know yet, but I suspect it is because a portion of the population will not care or obey.
Third, and most worrying case - viruses mutate. The more often the more of them there are. Bozo wants to explode their numbers, greatly increasing chance one mutates into something far worse, ready to reap already weakened population. How is that a sane plan? Just look at Spanish flu - terrifying as it was, its first stage was merely an appetizer. It's only when it really got going, it mutated by chance into the second stage that claimed the most victims, thanks to predecessor's work. A year from now, this moment might seem positively rosy compared to what came next. Then again, it might not - but what the Tories are doing right now is pulling at the pin of live grenade. Even if it doesn't go off, the mere idea of doing so is lunacy.
Johnson doesn't want to explode the numbers, by your logic I could argue Macron does, as France has a much higher infection an death rate, by public statistics, despite lockdown. But we both know that isn't true. The delay phase to herd immunity is to isolate the most vulnerable and let the virus run its course otherwise. Also its better to get the bug now before it mutates if that is a problem. If mutation is a problem and if lockdown works there will be nicely mutated extra superbugs ready to pounce on fresh victims when lockdown ends. Is this what you want?
There is a reason why UK choose this, though. It's easy path, allows the PM to do nothing and just blame things at political opponents/poor/virus/foreigners/whatever, all while cutting more funds from the NHS (save for a few token splashes of money that can be quietly withdrawn once press reports these), plus giving a few more tax breaks to the 1%. After all, Singapore on Thames, etc, etc (ignoring the fact the real Singapore went hard into the lockdown, as usual doing exact opposite of what UK politicians say it supposedly did).
It is anything but the easy path. The easy path is doing whatever the press want when they want it to appease the populace. It is how the system in the UK normally operates, however Johnson has the balls to stick to a long term strategy. Contain-Delay-Research-Mitigate.
Is it guaranteed, no, does it not have downsides, no, but coronavirus is a pandemic and a major crisis. any honest pundit, and sadly there are insufficient numbers of those, know that every action is damned if you do damned if you dont. Every option is a trade off and there are no easy answers. The UK was the first western government to admit out the gate that methods will not be entirely successful, some people will die and nothing can be done about that. It was refreshingly honest. I think the government is being well advised by actual experts, but that doesnt mean they are the only experts, and the press still wants its pound of flesh.
Ernestas wrote: I'm not sure about lockdown and why you say it is ineffective. Logically it must be effective, if it is ineffective in German or whatever country it is because people are not following instructions. In Lithuania lockdown is soft as we rely on public awareness to remain isolated, but our streets look absolutely deserted. Companies either lay off people or we work remotely. We had locked down borders, isolated ourselves and we have the least number of cases amongst our neighbours.
If Lithuania like other cold winter countries where isolated communities keep large stocks for long winters. If so, and if you have stuff left you might be ok. But dont judge the 'ecttectiveness' of lockdown by early expereince. Consider it like holding your breath underwater, the first few seconds are easy, but it gets progressively harder.
Please stay away from people if you do get corona. Others might not be in robust health..
QFT. But more to the point he wont know if he hads COVID-19 until about two weeks after infection. So if he wants to go out and get infected, he has a two weeks 'Typhoid Mary' time fething up other people. Intentional infection is top tier bad idea fairy.
Thankfully I am reading this as thoughts from a troubled mind in trying times and not a statement of intent.
Of course, I did not left my house for several days and I avoided visiting my grandmother due to quarantine. The issue with this virus is that if you are healthy or have robust health, you might not even get sick, but still be infectious. My body is acting strange. It is perfectly fine 95% of a time, full of energy, great appetite, etc, but then suddenly I'm feeling hot. I feel like I'm starting to have temperature, I want to drink a lot hot liquids and next hour it is all gone.
Psychosomatic, stress, anything else, also these are not COVID-19 symptoms.
I mentioned earlier I feel a cough coming on when I pass empty supermarket aisles, it brings the virus to my imagination and my body reacts. I deliberatly struggle not to cough so as not to freak out other shoppers.
The funny thing is that I have an allergy which results in runny nose which is one of symptoms. Coughing or sneezing is also part of my allergy. So far allergy seems to be just that which manifested out of nowhere today while being completely absent since Saturday. For me it might be impossible to tell if a virus in me would manifest only very mildly and I would be one of those carriers who have natural resistance to virus.
I would like to say don't worry, but its futile, and COVID-19 is something to be concerned over.
If you feel helpless against the circumstances, pray. Works for me.
Orlanth wrote: Psychosomatic, stress, anything else, also these are not COVID-19 symptoms.
I mentioned earlier I feel a cough coming on when I pass empty supermarket aisles, it brings the virus to my imagination and my body reacts. I deliberatly struggle not to cough so as not to freak out other shoppers
I've been doing the exact same thing. You can only read about the virus for so long before your throat feels scratchy or you feel like you have a fever.
Luckily, after a lifetime in IT, I don't trust anything but metrics and once I take my temperature and see it's normal, I calm down. Even knowing it's psychosomatic, it still feels real.
Missouri's first COVID-19 death happened today in my own hometown. Yikes. It was an elderly person, according to what I've heard.
And yeah, I definitely sympathize on the psychosomatic thing. I felt a bit of a headache earlier today (was afraid it might be the onset of a fever), but it's gone now. I think my brain was playing on my fears or something. Enough to make me worry that I might have to isolate myself, but unless I feel significantly "off" tomorrow I'll probably go to work as normal, as I have not knowingly had any contact with anyone with the virus. Being really tired and stressed (working at a Walmart) probably doesn't help as far as psychological things go either.
I cant help but think that people are being extremely shortsighted on this.
the Bay Area has instituted shelter in place until april 7. I just got an email from work stating my new schedule effective april 8th.
For me, I do not want to be going back until this entire thing has blown over. I dont get why my work isnt planning for the worst. Yeah i get you dont want kids to regress and assuring parents that services will resume soon, but what is worse? Kids regressing or people dying?
Orlanth wrote: Psychosomatic, stress, anything else, also these are not COVID-19 symptoms.
I mentioned earlier I feel a cough coming on when I pass empty supermarket aisles, it brings the virus to my imagination and my body reacts. I deliberatly struggle not to cough so as not to freak out other shoppers
I've been doing the exact same thing. You can only read about the virus for so long before your throat feels scratchy or you feel like you have a fever.
Luckily, after a lifetime in IT, I don't trust anything but metrics and once I take my temperature and see it's normal, I calm down. Even knowing it's psychosomatic, it still feels real.
Hm, I have not had that at all. Snuffles and sneezes but just the same ones I always deal with via allergies.
gorgon wrote: Somehow people got it stuck in their heads that younger adults are borderline immune because most of the fatalities were from the elderly in China. And it does seem that the risk is lower, but some ARE getting seriously ill, and many others may be spreading it.
Yeah, that. The "number of deaths" statistics is misleading. First, it doesn't tell us of the severity of the illness during recovery. Staying home two weeks in bed isn't the same as being in the ICU unit. Second, these numbers don't tell us the number of outbreaks. A family of seven infected in a city in California is not the same as ten different unrelated people infected in different parts of Northern and Southern California.
Anyway, "Despite initial data from China that showed elderly people and those with other health conditions were most vulnerable, young people — from twenty-somethings to those in their early 40s — are falling seriously ill. Many require intensive care, according to reports from Italy and France. The risk is particularly dire for those with ailments that haven't yet been diagnosed.
gorgon wrote: Somehow people got it stuck in their heads that younger adults are borderline immune because most of the fatalities were from the elderly in China. And it does seem that the risk is lower, but some ARE getting seriously ill, and many others may be spreading it.
Yeah, that. The "number of deaths" statistics is misleading. First, it doesn't tell us of the severity of the illness during recovery. Staying home two weeks in bed isn't the same as being in the ICU unit. Second, these numbers don't tell us the number of outbreaks. A family of seven infected in a city in California is not the same as ten different unrelated people infected in different parts of Northern and Southern California.
Anyway, "Despite initial data from China that showed elderly people and those with other health conditions were most vulnerable, young people — from twenty-somethings to those in their early 40s — are falling seriously ill. Many require intensive care, according to reports from Italy and France. The risk is particularly dire for those with ailments that haven't yet been diagnosed.
While undoubtedly young people are falling ill and very ill and perhaps disproportionately so (maybe due to not following advice) I am not convinced by the mr chow article because Bloomberg said they were unable to confirm any of it.
Also Orlanth I have never been so glad to follow your advice , I have a l large stock of food, even growing my own herbs and planted potatoes for later ( hopefully not needed) for my family, the NHS who I work for are actually providing me some meals too. But looking at the shops empty , at only promises to refill , and if they do locusts strip them bare within seconds.
Hopefully your proved wrong and I have a small shopping bills In the future , but if your right.........
Third the Uk has not got far greater sick numbers. France, under lockdown has overtaken infection and death statistics even under lockdown and so has Germany. Lockdown isn't working. Very possibly because if you lockdown everyone the only people who will be able to cope as subsistence farmers, preppers and the first weave of panic buyers. Everyone else is fethed and has to sneak out in order to get supplies. Isolation looks like it might work right now because larders are not empty yet, these are very early days. Give it a week and lockdown will collapse completely because the vast majority of the population will be hungry and out of food. The UK is the only country I know of that has a staged plan to try and avoid lockdown and its inevitable ticking clock to supply breakdown..
I think you misunderstand how the numbers work. French numbers are increasing because confirmed cases are and not because infections are. Due to testing rates, and the long incubation period, confirmed cases will continue to rise long after infections have decreased.
That said, I do agree that hard lockdown is not sustainable in democracies. not for supply reasons, as it's relatively straightforward to permit individuals out to shop once the streets are dead, but because people simply wont do it for a long term without coercion. Even short-term is a struggle. Italian government say ca.40% of people are still moving around freely even after they've issued fines to thousands of people. France was the same for the first 48 hours. We'll see if their fines from yesterday have slowed movement.
nfe wrote: That said, I do agree that hard lockdown is not sustainable in democracies. not for supply reasons, as it's relatively straightforward to permit individuals out to shop once the streets are dead, but because people simply wont do it for a long term without coercion. Even short-term is a struggle. Italian government say ca.40% of people are still moving around freely even after they've issued fines to thousands of people. France was the same for the first 48 hours. We'll see if their fines from yesterday have slowed movement.
Not sustainable in capitalism you mean.
Working from home is a white collar priviledge. Factory workers are still forced to go to work (and now with no public transport and possibly sick) on pain of termination (and following starvation and homelessness) until they test positive, even if their workplace is already known to be compromised. This is the case in Slovenia, certainly the US, and probably almost everywhere.
nfe wrote: That said, I do agree that hard lockdown is not sustainable in democracies. not for supply reasons, as it's relatively straightforward to permit individuals out to shop once the streets are dead, but because people simply wont do it for a long term without coercion. Even short-term is a struggle. Italian government say ca.40% of people are still moving around freely even after they've issued fines to thousands of people. France was the same for the first 48 hours. We'll see if their fines from yesterday have slowed movement.
Not sustainable in capitalism you mean.
Working from home is a white collar priviledge. Factory workers are still forced to go to work (and now with no public transport and possibly sick) on pain of termination (and following starvation and homelessness) until they test positive, even if their workplace is already known to be compromised. This is the case in Slovenia, certainly the US, and probably almost everywhere.
No. I mean in democracies. Even in a post-scarcity anarchic utopia you couldn't keep everyone confined to their homes for months. It does require force that most of us would oppose, or at least be nervous about creating a precedent for.
MiguelFelstone wrote: I kind of feel like an ass complaining about gaming when people losing their lives, jobs, businesses ect but i don't get out of the house often and i was really looking forward to this years escalation league. I've already bought the full army, and we had 4 more months to go
It's okay to be disappointed, so long as you keep it in perspective. My kids were poised to have really fun baseball seasons because reasons, and I'm sad they won't get the chance to have those experiences and memories. Public health is infinitely more important and if this saves lives it's worth it, but I'm still sad for them.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that most of us had some fun plans for 2020 that we won't be able to do. It's part of the collective experience now. In 5 or 10 years time, those of us who are still around will have grim conversations around 2020 as well as some black humour reminiscenses about the odd good times we managed to fit in.
nfe wrote: That said, I do agree that hard lockdown is not sustainable in democracies. not for supply reasons, as it's relatively straightforward to permit individuals out to shop once the streets are dead, but because people simply wont do it for a long term without coercion. Even short-term is a struggle. Italian government say ca.40% of people are still moving around freely even after they've issued fines to thousands of people. France was the same for the first 48 hours. We'll see if their fines from yesterday have slowed movement.
Not sustainable in capitalism you mean.
Working from home is a white collar priviledge. Factory workers are still forced to go to work (and now with no public transport and possibly sick) on pain of termination (and following starvation and homelessness) until they test positive, even if their workplace is already known to be compromised. This is the case in Slovenia, certainly the US, and probably almost everywhere.
utter nonsense.
Mostly it's the stupidity and the whole shtick "but young people just shrugg it off bs".
Infact the later group is so slowed a Kanton had to clean off a promenade on a lake because the morons would just sit outside in larger then allowed groups.
Further, most european countries are not nearly capitalistic enough to actually allow for such a scenario to happen.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
No. I mean in democracies. Even in a post-scarcity anarchic utopia you couldn't keep everyone confined to their homes for months. It does require force that most of us would oppose, or at least be nervous about creating a precedent for.
Aye.
Considering some off my former unit were called upon to get rid of the idiots on the promenade, it does require force. (well force is an overestimation for a bunch in 4 fruit pyjama unarmed militia men but still)
nfe wrote: That said, I do agree that hard lockdown is not sustainable in democracies. not for supply reasons, as it's relatively straightforward to permit individuals out to shop once the streets are dead, but because people simply wont do it for a long term without coercion. Even short-term is a struggle. Italian government say ca.40% of people are still moving around freely even after they've issued fines to thousands of people. France was the same for the first 48 hours. We'll see if their fines from yesterday have slowed movement.
Not sustainable in capitalism you mean.
Working from home is a white collar priviledge. Factory workers are still forced to go to work (and now with no public transport and possibly sick) on pain of termination (and following starvation and homelessness) until they test positive, even if their workplace is already known to be compromised. This is the case in Slovenia, certainly the US, and probably almost everywhere.
utter nonsense.
Mostly it's the stupidity and the whole shtick "but young people just shrugg it off bs".
Infact the later group is so slowed a Kanton had to clean off a promenade on a lake because the morons would just sit outside in larger then allowed groups.
Further, most european countries are not nearly capitalistic enough to actually allow for such a scenario to happen.
I mean, they are right about isolation being a class issue. Poor people aren't being forced out physically to work, but their financial circumstances do dictate that they have to. It's just that removing that still wouldn't keep everyone inside.
Um even in dictatorships you can't keep everyone confined without force. Though they might have an attitude/infrastructure that enables it to last somewhat longer before there's riots/problems arising. Plus they might already have much of the system setup before an outbreak occurs.
Suffice it to say that people will only stay "caged" for so long.
There's also an attitude and experience aspect too. Many modern western democracies have had it good in the post-war periods in terms of diseases so there just isn't the cultural experience and built up behaviours to instantly shift and adapt behaviours. If anything the behaviours we've grown used too through our formative and adult lives have reinforced free movement in the extreme. Plus with family units breaking up and the shutdown of many smaller local services and the growth of supermarkets and major settlement hubs we've basically not just built a system that encourages free movement, but requires it.
nfe wrote: That said, I do agree that hard lockdown is not sustainable in democracies. not for supply reasons, as it's relatively straightforward to permit individuals out to shop once the streets are dead, but because people simply wont do it for a long term without coercion. Even short-term is a struggle. Italian government say ca.40% of people are still moving around freely even after they've issued fines to thousands of people. France was the same for the first 48 hours. We'll see if their fines from yesterday have slowed movement.
Not sustainable in capitalism you mean.
Working from home is a white collar priviledge. Factory workers are still forced to go to work (and now with no public transport and possibly sick) on pain of termination (and following starvation and homelessness) until they test positive, even if their workplace is already known to be compromised. This is the case in Slovenia, certainly the US, and probably almost everywhere.
utter nonsense.
Mostly it's the stupidity and the whole shtick "but young people just shrugg it off bs".
Infact the later group is so slowed a Kanton had to clean off a promenade on a lake because the morons would just sit outside in larger then allowed groups.
Further, most european countries are not nearly capitalistic enough to actually allow for such a scenario to happen.
I mean, they are right about isolation being a class issue. Poor people aren't being forced out physically to work, but their financial circumstances do dictate that they have to. It's just that removing that still wouldn't keep everyone inside.
Atleast here, that is not the case, but then again contrary to other european states the swiss state swims in money due to an actal decentjob at budgetting. Will it affect them, yes, but atm workers are better off then small buisness owners due to how the swiss social security system is set up.
Overread wrote: Um even in dictatorships you can't keep everyone confined without force.
Obviously. The point is that force is much easier to apply in a dictatorial or aggressively authoritarian system.
Depends wholly on the system of state and the position of the military and it's legitimate claim to shut down.
F.e. It's alot more difficult to tell the enfocring arm of the government off if the government is directly you and other citizens. hence why unarmed militia members can go and round up the whole promenade beeing outnumbered without violence.
Also on the sentiment of the population torwards the actions taken.
Overread wrote: There's also an attitude and experience aspect too. Many modern western democracies have had it good in the post-war periods in terms of diseases so there just isn't the cultural experience and built up behaviours to instantly shift and adapt behaviours. If anything the behaviours we've grown used too through our formative and adult lives have reinforced free movement in the extreme. Plus with family units breaking up and the shutdown of many smaller local services and the growth of supermarkets and major settlement hubs we've basically not just built a system that encourages free movement, but requires it.
Hoo boy, yes. I've been browsing the history of vaccines and took a look at American epidemics. The last major one we had was in the 1980's. How many of you were around in the 1980's? Okay, how many of you had multiple sexual partners who were male in the 1980's? No, I'm not saying that none of you did, but, while HIV was a scare (especially when Americans finally noticed that planes and bisexuals existed) it certainly wasn't transmitted as easily as CoVid is. (And, yes, during grade school we had HIV spitting jokes and certain comments towards certain minorities. We'e certainly progressed, since.
For the UK, I could only find mentions of the Spanish Flu, and that was back in 1918. Yes, I'm sure had you started your backlog of miniatures to paint back then you'd still be painting, but most of you didn't exist then. Anyone more familiar with UK history of epidemics please post about a more recent UK epidemic. One major difference between the Spanish Flu and CoVid is that "Young adults between 20 and 30 years old were particularly affected and the disease struck and progressed quickly in these cases." Certainly one of the barriers for the public to take action against CoVid is its perception that it's an old person's disease, reflecting the youth-oriented focus of much of western society. Personally, I think it'll take awhile before CoVid is seen as the poor person's disease, as testing is currently reserved for those who show symptoms, Hollywood entertainers, politicians, and not-exactly-elderly NBA basketball players.
And that was mostly "avoid eating beef" rather than "avoid your fellow man"
And that's the thing, we've not really had a major epidemic where we've had to avoid people for a prolonged period of time. Bird and swine flu were all avoiding animal contact and mostly only impacted the livestock markets. Serious and it caused huge problems, but by and large a countryside problem and one related mostly to animal contact. Foot dips at the entrances and such and people kept on going.
The last major Sars mostly was kept to China and whilst it was scared, the UK felt no real major impact.
So this is the first major outbreak in a very long while. The population just hasn't really got the right attitude, mindset nor past experiences to make them more self aware. It's why you get so many still going out to pubs and not giving into the fear. It does not help that the Media is known to hype things up and I think people have become so used to media hype that it almost has the opposite effect on them - a determination NOT to change their lifestyle and give into the hype.
Of course they all then go out and get toiletpaper because everyone else is and the shelf is getting a "little" bare - BANG - suddenly the shelves are empty and its panic buying. But they still got the shops; want to play their team sports; want to socialise etc...
I also think there's a very big urban-rural divide. I think the Urban areas are seeing a faster impact on the shopping centres and on businesses closing and doing things from home. So the top-down impact is filtering down to them faster. Countryside eh most rural industry is either already work from home or has no option but to turn up at the farm to work etc... Furthermore supermarkets and shops haven't been stripped bare as fast as bigger urban areas. So there's a considerable lag-time to the impact. It's not helped that thus far several rural areas haven't had major outbreaks so after a few days people go "Oh nothing's happening, the world isn't ending - I'm going out for tea" etc...
In a way putting the army on the streets would have an impact in localities where there aren't currently major outbreaks in terms of driving home the message about the seriousness of the situation.
If you feel helpless against the circumstances, pray. Works for me.
He has already visited His plague o'er all the lands (even unto the antipodes). If you are praying for Him to take it back, His form in this area is not very encouraging.
Vaktathi wrote: The issue here being that a huge number of people have such conditions, it seems that people in perfect health are relatively robust, but almost any pre-existing condition appears to monstrously magnify the mortality rate out of all proportion to more common seasonal viruses.
Look, I'm about to bail out of this thread as it is getting a little mean and a little personal, but I do want to say one thing before I go...
99% of the deaths in Italy had underlying conditions. That's as close as you can get to an absolute correlation. 75% of them had high blood pressure. 25% had diabetes. 25% had heart disease. All three of these can be treated (even cured) with proper diet and exercise - as opposed to taking drugs that only treat the symptoms. 50% of the people who died had three or more(!) underlying conditions. China has a high blood pressure problem, with it being poorly managed, and responsible for 2.3 million deaths a year. 1 in 3 adults in China has high blood pressure. 56% of Italian men between 35 and 79 have high blood pressure.
What if the best way to reduce mortality is not to destroy our society in an effort to control the virus, but to simply better treat the underlying conditions that make it lethal? It would have strong benefits outside of the coronavirus too. Or what if it is related to the drugs they take for these conditions? What if the real culprit is a popular blood pressure medication? Maybe what we need most is to change how we treat high blood pressure, diabetes, and heart disease?
The problem with that is, treating and curing these conditions takes months to years at best.
Corona is here NOW, and we need to deal with it NOW.
That doesn't mean dealing with pre-existing conditions more aggressively in the future isn't worth doing; clearly it is. But NOW is not... how do I say this? "Not the most opportune moment..."
While that's good information that some young people without underlying conditions could be more vulnerable (even though most are not, and experience it similar to a cold/flu), I don't think any doctor should be sharing quotes with the media like "nothing short of terrifying" lol. At least, it doesn't seem like the best public health / societal approach...
cuda1179 wrote: My state shut down all eat-in restaurants yesterday, and I own one. This stinks for my finances. I'm not going to go under or anything, I have an emergency fund that I could live off of for 6-months if neither my wife or I were working, but it took a while to build up and I don't like dipping into it.
What happens with your employees? No, this isn't a prelude to villainizing you, just an honest question.
I can't imagine virtually any small business owner can afford to subsidize employees who literally aren't working.
Sorry for the belated response. My employees can file for unemployment and can basically get fast tracked to get a check. Ironically, it looks like they will be getting unemployment checks before our next payroll was scheduled.
Thanks. Good to hear they are not totally in the lurch.
At least not until their unemployment runs out, anyway.
RiTides wrote: While that's good information that some young people without underlying conditions could be more vulnerable (even though most are not, and experience it similar to a cold/flu), I don't think any doctor should be sharing quotes with the media like "nothing short of terrifying" lol. At least, it doesn't seem like the best public health / societal approach...
Seeing how many fools are downplaying it "if you are young you are fine so all restrictions are not needed. They just hurt my bank account" despite evidence to contrary that language is mild. Situation needs to be driven home so even thickest ones get it.
The thing is, yeah. If you are under 60 is very rare that you'll die.
But even then you'll probably end up hospitalized and spent 1-2 weeks on respiratory assistance and will end up with ... I don't know how is it on english. "Secuelas". The damages that a sickness causes in your body that last longer or could be even permanent. And thats the biggest problem. Hospitals just don't have enough space.
does anyone actually know the rates of hospitalisation compared to rates of infected across the age groups? because that imperial college study yesterday had people in the younger age groups at a very low probability of being hospitalised, so saying : you'll probably end up in hospital on respiratory assistance.' is a bit of a push. if anyone has any counter evidence please let me know. I'd also bet that the younger people who are hit harder are likely smokers or vapers, or at least live in passive smoking environments.
Or not. Seems to me like the "it's only X, it's only Y, it's only people who live with X" is wishing upon a star. I'm safe, I'm not X or Y. No one is saying every young person will end up in ICU, but we now have proof that even completely healthy individuals can be hit with it. Just accept no one is safe, and it's up to chance and genetics what happens.
Vulcan wrote: The problem with that is, treating and curing these conditions takes months to years at best.
You think this is the last panic we are going to see? SARS, MERS, bird flu, swine flu - these things hit every other year. And we have flu season every year that kills thousands. If you could do something that would reduce your risk of dying from any of these things, wouldn't you think that was a pretty good deal?
But there are a few things that can really help with stuff like hypertension very quickly. For instance, giving up smoking. Eating yogurt (gut microbacterial will also help fight disease - it is possible that one of the reasons why South Korea has been so successful in fighting this is because of the amount of kimchi they eat). Exercise, even just taking 30 minute walks every other day, will have an almost immediate affect as well. It takes weeks, not months, and given that everybody is going to be on lockdown for a few weeks anyway, what better time to start?
Corona is here NOW, and we need to deal with it NOW.
What about the 2018 flu which killed an estimated 80,000 Americans? That's not worldwide. That's America. And that was a really bad one, but a typical flu season sees highs of about 1,000 people dying per week in America. And news flash, that's with a vaccine (though to be fair, the flu vaccine is not nearly as effective as they would like people to believe - there's some funny math done to arrive at the conclusion that the flu vaccine is 40% effective).
Why are you freaking out now? Because you are in the middle of a media-driven hysteria. Every flu season would seem absolutely terrifying if you saw daily updates for worldwide numbers.
That doesn't mean dealing with pre-existing conditions more aggressively in the future isn't worth doing; clearly it is. But NOW is not... how do I say this? "Not the most opportune moment..."
There's nothing to suggest that this coronavirus will behave any differently than the others we know about, all of which operate seasonally. By the end of April, there should be so few new cases (naturally, without us having to do anything) that everybody is going to stop paying attention. The WHO can't operate under the assumption that this will happen, since COVID19 is essentially a "new virus", and also because nobody really knows why these things are seasonal and hoping for something that we don't understand to happen is going to be seen as doing nothing.
I think it is very likely that it is the way we are treating things like diabetes and hypertension that is leading to a higher mortality rate than there should be. Generally speaking, modern medicine is built upon the premise that if we can control the mechanisms of the body - the hormones, the organs, the nervous system, the circulatory system, etc - then we can not just prevent all sickness, but customize our body. We can make ourselves stronger and faster, end all disease, and even turn men into women. If we have too much cholesterol, we can just take a pill. If we have diabetes, we don't have to give up sugar. We just take a pill to cause our bodies to produce more insulin.
I don't think this belief is necessarily wrong, but I think that we are too ignorant of how complicated the body is and this approach to medicine is creating unintended consequences. Use too much aerosol and now you've got a hole in the ozone. Problem is, we only know that after there is a hole in the ozone. Modern medicine's progress is largely just a history of large scale human experimentation and the disasters that follow (DDT for example). Autism, which has grown every year to the point that it is now 1 in 25 children, is also one of these unintended consequences - but we still don't know what is causing it (seems glyphosate is a contributor, but it still doesn't account for volume nor the steady increase year over year). Autism is going to cost the US more money than it currently has in care and treatment in about 50 years. We need to rethink the assumptions made by modern medicine.
The coronavirus is not the problem. All evidence points to a healthy immune system being able to battle it successfully and easily. The problem is the number of people without a healthy immune system. If we could increase those numbers, we'd greatly lower the mortality rate (and not just of this disease). We still wouldn't be able to help everybody, but the difference made would be enough to release this weird stranglehold this virus seems to hold over the entire world right now.
Is autism "growing", or are we better at spotting it? A LOT of neurodivergence was previously either ignored, lumped together or dismissed, it's been only the last few decades that we've started to properly consider and diagnose those cases.
I do agree with one main point- in the name of profits and convenience we've let too many standards slide, and that is impacting us as a society. But to change that, we'd have to dismantle the whole system, based upon the idea that your body is disposable and secondary to profit.
NCOVID 19, in Italy.https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/
TLDR- 35,713 cases in a little over 1 month. 2,978 dead.
The mortality here is .083.
Thus, in the same population, which has the same culture and underlying health conditions, this is , roughly 7 times more fatal than the flu. If it also infected the 5,290,000 people which the flu did when there was no social distancing or quarantine, the death toll would be 441,117.
This is a massive oversimplification, based on a few layman's calculations. But if being isolated for a month can even just knock a quarter of that mortality off- I'm happy to stay home to help save 100,000 lives.
People are accusing other folks of not taking it seriously enough. Well, back in the fourteenth century during the black death plenty of people decided to party.
Everyone has their own way to respond to stuff like the outbreak. People may choose ways that do not prolong their lifespan, or that of others. This should be no surprise, people smoke and do all sorts of harmful stuff. We all have our reasons.
Your freedom ends where the freedom of others begin. You want to party like it's the decameron? Sure, but remember they decided to seclude themselves, not go pub crawling like a bimbo version of typhoid mary.
Someone told me today that our city’s indoor hockey area could be converted into a morgue. That this is a serious suggestion and probably not hyperbole really hammers home how serious this is.
Future War Cultist wrote: Someone told me today that our city’s indoor hockey area could be converted into a morgue. That this is a serious suggestion and probably not hyperbole really hammers home how serious this is.
Have you ever seen the size of a hospital morgue .? There tiny generally only hold a dozen to 20 people. Also this is rather morose body disposal is an issue as body could still be infected after death and can't just do mass burnings as have to be civilised so burials and cremations take time to organise, hopefully undertakers won't be overwhelmed.
Future War Cultist wrote: Someone told me today that our city’s indoor hockey area could be converted into a morgue. That this is a serious suggestion and probably not hyperbole really hammers home how serious this is.
Have you ever seen the size of a hospital morgue .? There tiny generally only hold a dozen to 20 people. Also this is rather morose body disposal is an issue as body could still be infected after death and can't just do mass burnings as have to be civilised so burials and cremations take time to organise, hopefully undertakers won't be overwhelmed.
They had mentioned on the news that our local mortuaries are limiting funeral services to 10 people but didn't mention any strain from additional Covid-19 deaths fortunately. Obviously Washington State has additional deaths, but not enough to make it to the point of overflowing morgues, so that's fortunate as well
Future War Cultist wrote: Someone told me today that our city’s indoor hockey area could be converted into a morgue. That this is a serious suggestion and probably not hyperbole really hammers home how serious this is.
Have you ever seen the size of a hospital morgue .? There tiny generally only hold a dozen to 20 people. Also this is rather morose body disposal is an issue as body could still be infected after death and can't just do mass burnings as have to be civilised so burials and cremations take time to organise, hopefully undertakers won't be overwhelmed.
They had mentioned on the news that our local mortuaries are limiting funeral services to 10 people but didn't mention any strain from additional Covid-19 deaths fortunately. Obviously Washington State has additional deaths, but not enough to make it to the point of overflowing morgues, so that's fortunate as well
Perhaps I was being a bit extreme , its perhaps a ,local issue in certain areas , but in Italy in Bergamo which has been an epicentre area, they have army trucks taking away corpses.
Future War Cultist wrote: Someone told me today that our city’s indoor hockey area could be converted into a morgue. That this is a serious suggestion and probably not hyperbole really hammers home how serious this is.
Have you ever seen the size of a hospital morgue .? There tiny generally only hold a dozen to 20 people. Also this is rather morose body disposal is an issue as body could still be infected after death and can't just do mass burnings as have to be civilised so burials and cremations take time to organise, hopefully undertakers won't be overwhelmed.
They had mentioned on the news that our local mortuaries are limiting funeral services to 10 people but didn't mention any strain from additional Covid-19 deaths fortunately. Obviously Washington State has additional deaths, but not enough to make it to the point of overflowing morgues, so that's fortunate as well
There has only been a bit more then 100 deaths nation wide... It hasn't even come close to straining the system yet.
Now certain cities in Italy are having to farm out there cremation, because they've have had more then 100 deaths so far (in the city specifically), and that's when you start getting serious.
Cronch wrote:Is autism "growing", or are we better at spotting it? A LOT of neurodivergence was previously either ignored, lumped together or dismissed, it's been only the last few decades that we've started to properly consider and diagnose those cases.
It's actually growing. In 2012, the rate of autism was 1 in 69. In 2014, it was 1 in 59. In those two years, we did not significantly change how we identified autism. Going back to 2000, it was 1 in 150. Today, it is 1 in 40. That's 1 out of every 40 children born 5 years ago now has some form of autism. Children born today have even worse odds, and we won't know for another 5 years just how bad.
Gitzbitah wrote:Sure, let's keep the focus on Italy.
...
Now that sounds really overoptimistic to me, so I went and found a scientific journal too- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971219303285 TLDR 5,290,000 flu cases in Italy. 68,000 deaths, for a mortality of .012.
NCOVID 19, in Italy.https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/
TLDR- 35,713 cases in a little over 1 month. 2,978 dead.
The mortality here is .083.
Yes, and no. The flu is actually multiple viruses (and even multiple diseases, as coronavirus estimatedly makes up between 5%-15% of the cases) which collectively make up a flu epidemic. A very small fraction of those numbers are actually verified cases of influenza. Basically, if you have symptoms of the flu and die, but they don't test you, it is counted as the flu. I'm not sure about this report, but the CDC also believes that the majority of flu cases don't result in doctor's visits, so when they estimate the number of flu cases, they take the number of confirmed flu cases and multiple it by 2.7. Why 2.7? No idea. Honestly, it could be overestimated (we have less flu cases and the mortality rate is higher) or it could be underestimated (mortality rate goes down).
With the coronavirus, we are extremely limited by the amount of testing going on. We basically know everybody who is dying from the disease (or at least have much more accurate accounting of it), but a lack of testing means that we only have a fraction of the number of people who are confirmed with the disease. The mortality rate is one number divided by another. One of these numbers is fairly accurate. The other is under reported by some significance. We can't know that significance without further testing. Basically, we're only testing sick people or communities close to sick people, so we've biased our numbers toward the sick and are not counting anyone with the virus who is not showing symptoms or who successfully fights off the sickness without going to a doctor. Based on testing everybody aboard the Diamond Princess, the number of asymptomatic cases would dwarf the number of sick.
My point is, they use two very different meathodologies to reach these two mortality numbers, so they aren't directly comparable. Even if they were, because testing is limited and biased for the coronavirus, it means that the result is the appearance of a higher mortality rate.
Thus, in the same population, which has the same culture and underlying health conditions, this is , roughly 7 times more fatal than the flu. If it also infected the 5,290,000 people which the flu did when there was no social distancing or quarantine, the death toll would be 441,117.
Ignoring the hyped up mortality rate, it's very possible that the coronavirus is not capable of infecting 5,290,000 people. Like I said, the flu is actually multiple different influenza viruses and multiple diseases. Different diseases spread in different conditions. This diversity gives it a much greater chance of spreading to a significantly larger portion of the population.
This is a massive oversimplification, based on a few layman's calculations. But if being isolated for a month can even just knock a quarter of that mortality off- I'm happy to stay home to help save 100,000 lives.
45% of the people who died in Italy from the coronavirus had 3 or more pre-existing conditions (hypertension, diabetes, heart disease, renal issues, respiratory issues, etc) and the average age of the people who died were 79.5 years old. It appears that the diabetes connection is the damage done to the kidneys and lungs by the advancement of diabetes and not the disease itself. Diabetes cuts about 9 years off the average life expectancy of the average 50 year old. High blood pressure equally cuts your life expectancy by 5 years. The life expectancy of an adult male in Italy is 80.5. If you are an 80 year old man with high blood pressure and diabetes, you are already WAY ahead of the curve.
Realistically, you aren't saving 100,000 lives. Not for very long, anyway.
So your solution is that society should ignore the virus, send everyone back to work/school/etc and let the chips fall where they may? If you are old and have pre-existing conditions tough luck mate, sucks to be you?
petrov27 wrote: So your solution is that society should ignore the virus, send everyone back to work/school/etc and let the chips fall where they may? If you are old and have pre-existing conditions tough luck mate, sucks to be you?
We'll be feeling the effects of closing school/work/etc for decades. Entire industries are at risk. This will have an unprecedented effect on the GDP and affect international trade, and could very send us into another depression. We're losing freedom and privacy that we may never get back (we've still got the patriot act almost twenty years after 9.11).
But yeah, let's focus on the 80 year old smoking diabetics with hypertension who probably won't survive another half decade even without a virus. That's totally where our priorities should be.
petrov27 wrote: So your solution is that society should ignore the virus, send everyone back to work/school/etc and let the chips fall where they may? If you are old and have pre-existing conditions tough luck mate, sucks to be you?
Welcome the dystopia hyper-individualism made, where human life and compassion have no value "as long as I got mine".
I'm all for being a heartless hyper-individualist and letting all the old people die because I have the empathy level of a peanut, but it bears mentioning that 20% of hospitalizations for coronavirus are occurring in people aged 20-44, and about 40% are between ages 20 and 54, so yknow - maybe letting the virus run rampant because you're a dogmatic adherent of a contrarian ideology that prioritizes economics and abstract conceptualizations of freedom over healthy living isn't a good idea, the healthcare system would still be overwhelmed one way or another, and it would be more than just 70 and 80 year old short-timers with complications dying at that point.
chaos0xomega wrote: I'm all for being a heartless hyper-individualist and letting all the old people die because I have the empathy level of a peanut, but it bears mentioning that 20% of hospitalizations for coronavirus are occurring in people aged 20-44, and about 40% are between ages 20 and 54, so yknow - maybe letting the virus run rampant because you're a dogmatic adherent of a contrarian ideology that prioritizes economics and abstract conceptualizations of freedom over healthy living isn't a good idea, the healthcare system would still be overwhelmed one way or another, and it would be more than just 70 and 80 year old short-timers with complications dying at that point.
but... but... an ob/gyn was wrong once, therefore all medical professional are wrong about everything!
For those in the U.K. suffering at the hands of selfish hoarders, I’ve been finding village convenience stores pretty good for stock levels.
Likewise dedicated Butchers and Greengrocers etc.
Yes they’re inherently pricier than the giants due to economy of scale, but they’re arguably better quality. Plus, there’s the added bonus of putting money in the hands of local businesses
We have a traditional butchers who sets us up every Christmas. Can't stress enough how good they are.
Also, there's one thing that's been really getting me down about this (apart from the deaths). My grandad died the day after new years, and it was to be gran and grandad's 60th wedding anniversary. As a tribute I'd done a portrait of them together, and I was supposed to show it last weekend. But obviously that can't happen now. Don't know when or if it'll happen actually.
That doesn't mean dealing with pre-existing conditions more aggressively in the future isn't worth doing; clearly it is. But NOW is not... how do I say this? "Not the most opportune moment..."
There's nothing to suggest that this coronavirus will behave any differently than the others we know about, all of which operate seasonally. By the end of April, there should be so few new cases (naturally, without us having to do anything) that everybody is going to stop paying attention. The WHO can't operate under the assumption that this will happen, since COVID19 is essentially a "new virus", and also because nobody really knows why these things are seasonal and hoping for something that we don't understand to happen is going to be seen as doing nothing.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: For those in the U.K. suffering at the hands of selfish hoarders, I’ve been finding village convenience stores pretty good for stock levels.
Likewise dedicated Butchers and Greengrocers etc.
Yes they’re inherently pricier than the giants due to economy of scale, but they’re arguably better quality. Plus, there’s the added bonus of putting money in the hands of local businesses
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: For those in the U.K. suffering at the hands of selfish hoarders, I’ve been finding village convenience stores pretty good for stock levels.
Likewise dedicated Butchers and Greengrocers etc.
Yes they’re inherently pricier than the giants due to economy of scale, but they’re arguably better quality. Plus, there’s the added bonus of putting money in the hands of local businesses
The supermarkets are starting to struggle under the strain, reduced opening hours already, stream lining of product lines, and that's before we are even near peak virus time.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: For those in the U.K. suffering at the hands of selfish hoarders, I’ve been finding village convenience stores pretty good for stock levels.
Likewise dedicated Butchers and Greengrocers etc.
Yes they’re inherently pricier than the giants due to economy of scale, but they’re arguably better quality. Plus, there’s the added bonus of putting money in the hands of local businesses
The supermarkets are starting to struggle under the strain, reduced opening hours already, stream lining of product lines, and that's before we are even near peak virus time.
It says, "yeah, well, all of these things might help slow down CV-19 but it is not going to evaporate on its own."
It doesn't say "anyone who thinks summer is going to save us from this pandemic is a smooth brain troll."
Maybe you're just being overzealous as atonement for your 3/16/20 self:
Togusa wrote: People need to clam their tits. This is no worse than seasonal flu. I couldn't even buy any fething hot pockets at the store because some people came in and bought them all.
. There is ZERO evidence that this will go away with warmer weather. This poster must be a troll trying to get yuks for himself. Ignorant.
Did you read through that link completely? Because it was nothing but speculation.
"So the first problem with this myth is that we don’t know whether those coronaviruses, which go by the evocative names like OC43, HKU1, 229E, and NL63, are good analogies for this virus."
"For some viruses, we have evidence for which factors are most important, for others, we have to extrapolate."
"For coronaviruses, the relevance of this factor is unknown."
"Few children have been identified as cases. This may mean they do not get easily infected and don’t do much transmitting. Or it may mean only that they don’t get severe symptoms when they are infected, and transmit nonetheless. Or something in between."
"It is possible that the condition of the average person’s immune system is systematically worse in winter than summer."
"Even seasonal infections can happen “out of season” when they are new."
"For the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, we have reason to expect that like other betacoronaviruses, it may transmit somewhat more efficiently in winter than summer, though we don’t know the mechanism(s) responsible."
Look, the truth of the matter is that scientists don't actually know why viruses act seasonally. They've tried to identify different factors that they believe would affect seasonality, and while some tests have shown some relationship, for the most part, they can't fully explain the phenomenon. This article was basically written from an alarmist perspective of "it might do this, it might not. Don't just assume things will work out okay" - which is fine, but it is hardly fact-based evidence that it won't dissipate during the summer.
The only bit of halfway convincing argument in that entire thing is that novel viruses (ones new to the general public) may not behave like its brethren. I'm not sure I buy the idea that this is due to people being unfamiliar with the virus alone. That feels like a wholly unconvincing argument when we can track COVID19 across a hundred different countries and see the rate of infection is completely different in spread and severity. Environment seems to have a non-trivial effect.
According to the Institute of Human Virology, they found that all the cities that experienced the most significant outbreaks of the virus all existed in the same narrow climate band with an average temperature of 41F to 52F and humidity of 47% to 79%. According to their laboratory tests, they've found that the coronavirus spreads most easily at a temperature of 39F and a humidity of 20% to 80%.
“Through this extensive research, it has been determined that weather modeling could potentially explain the spread of COVID-19, making it possible to predict the regions that are most likely to be at higher risk of significant community spread in the near future,”
“I think what is important is that this is a testable hypothesis,”
It's important to point out that this is a hypothesis (one that should be proven right or wrong fairly quickly), but the identification of the worst outbreaks happening in the same climate band is pretty strong evidence. What this means is not that the virus will disappear completely, but if climate is a strong indicator of where it will be the worst, this area will increasingly move north as the temperature rise.
I don't think most people are particularly worried about the light cases of coronavirus going around. They are worried about being the next Wuhan or the next northern Italy. They are worried about hospital beds being overrun and turning stadiums into makeshift morgues. If you can look at the climate and see where this is most likely to happen, we can target our resources to how best to serve those most in danger.
Cronch wrote: Your freedom ends where the freedom of others begin. You want to party like it's the decameron? Sure, but remember they decided to seclude themselves, not go pub crawling like a bimbo version of typhoid mary.
Yes, some fictional characters secluded themselves, but plenty of people of that time did not. Flagellants crucified themselves in the streets. Some people ran around partying. Can't say I recommend it myself.
. There is ZERO evidence that this will go away with warmer weather. This poster must be a troll trying to get yuks for himself. Ignorant.
Did you read through that link completely? Because it was nothing but speculation.
"So the first problem with this myth is that we don’t know whether those coronaviruses, which go by the evocative names like OC43, HKU1, 229E, and NL63, are good analogies for this virus."
"For some viruses, we have evidence for which factors are most important, for others, we have to extrapolate."
"For coronaviruses, the relevance of this factor is unknown."
"Few children have been identified as cases. This may mean they do not get easily infected and don’t do much transmitting. Or it may mean only that they don’t get severe symptoms when they are infected, and transmit nonetheless. Or something in between."
"It is possible that the condition of the average person’s immune system is systematically worse in winter than summer."
"Even seasonal infections can happen “out of season” when they are new."
"For the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, we have reason to expect that like other betacoronaviruses, it may transmit somewhat more efficiently in winter than summer, though we don’t know the mechanism(s) responsible."
Look, the truth of the matter is that scientists don't actually know why viruses act seasonally. They've tried to identify different factors that they believe would affect seasonality, and while some tests have shown some relationship, for the most part, they can't fully explain the phenomenon. This article was basically written from an alarmist perspective of "it might do this, it might not. Don't just assume things will work out okay" - which is fine, but it is hardly fact-based evidence that it won't dissipate during the summer.
The only bit of halfway convincing argument in that entire thing is that novel viruses (ones new to the general public) may not behave like its brethren. I'm not sure I buy the idea that this is due to people being unfamiliar with the virus alone. That feels like a wholly unconvincing argument when we can track COVID19 across a hundred different countries and see the rate of infection is completely different in spread and severity. Environment seems to have a non-trivial effect.
According to the Institute of Human Virology, they found that all the cities that experienced the most significant outbreaks of the virus all existed in the same narrow climate band with an average temperature of 41F to 52F and humidity of 47% to 79%. According to their laboratory tests, they've found that the coronavirus spreads most easily at a temperature of 39F and a humidity of 20% to 80%.
“Through this extensive research, it has been determined that weather modeling could potentially explain the spread of COVID-19, making it possible to predict the regions that are most likely to be at higher risk of significant community spread in the near future,”
“I think what is important is that this is a testable hypothesis,”
It's important to point out that this is a hypothesis (one that should be proven right or wrong fairly quickly), but the identification of the worst outbreaks happening in the same climate band is pretty strong evidence. What this means is not that the virus will disappear completely, but if climate is a strong indicator of where it will be the worst, this area will increasingly move north as the temperature rise.
I don't think most people are particularly worried about the light cases of coronavirus going around. They are worried about being the next Wuhan or the next northern Italy. They are worried about hospital beds being overrun and turning stadiums into makeshift morgues. If you can look at the climate and see where this is most likely to happen, we can target our resources to how best to serve those most in danger.
That's my point. They DONT KNOW, which means you stating that it will go away just like others have in the past is not based on any fact.
By the end of April, there should be so few new cases (naturally, without us having to do anything) that everybody is going to stop paying attention.
Directly from your post. You are saying that it WILL, when YOU do not know. So, stop. Fortunately the Government and population aren't listening to people like you and are instead taking this seriously.
"An increase of just one degree Celsius and 1% relative humidity increase substantially lower the virus's transmission..."
In applying the paper's findings to the forecast temperatures and humidity, the authors concluded that the arrival of summer and rainy seasons in the Northern Hemisphere can "effectively reduce the transmission of COVID-19,"...
"With much of the U.S. forecast to see higher-than-normal temperatures in March and April, according to AccuWeather meteorologists, there is a chance that the virus could eventually "burn itself out,"...
"If such temperature increases do occur, the paper's R value findings suggest that the U.S. will see a far lower transmission rate by the summer than the country is currently seeing in March."
"The transmission of viruses can be affected by a number of factors, including climate conditions (such as temperature and humidity), population density and medical care quality," the researchers said. "Therefore, understanding the relationship between weather and the transmission of COVID-19 is key to forecast the intensity and end time of this epidemic."
I don't engage in these discussions to be right or act superior. This is just a subject that I am intensely interested in, and somewhat well read about. I honestly don't know where the hostility is coming from. For the life of me, I can't figure out why a dissenting opinion is so threatening to someone else. With that said, this backs up everything I've been saying, so I hope this vindicates me against claims of being "full of gak" or a "troll trying to get yuks for himself". Or "taking a piss". Or "trying to start gak".
Togusa wrote:I'm assuming he/she is either trying to start gak, or taking the piss. Either way, I don't suffer the ignorant.
The poster made their stance pretty clear in the post at the top of the page:
Sqorgar wrote:
petrov27 wrote: So your solution is that society should ignore the virus, send everyone back to work/school/etc and let the chips fall where they may? If you are old and have pre-existing conditions tough luck mate, sucks to be you?
We'll be feeling the effects of closing school/work/etc for decades. Entire industries are at risk. This will have an unprecedented effect on the GDP and affect international trade, and could very send us into another depression. We're losing freedom and privacy that we may never get back (we've still got the patriot act almost twenty years after 9.11).
But yeah, let's focus on the 80 year old smoking diabetics with hypertension who probably won't survive another half decade even without a virus. That's totally where our priorities should be.
So, it is a Utilitarian sort of stance, that economic interests are the first and foremost. It might have been, initially and intermittently, framed as a critique of the scientific method and the limits and nature of inductive reasoning, but, since the poster just goes on the invoke both scientific studies and use inductive reasoning in their own argument, there really isn't much of substance there.
Id say you could make an educated prediction that warmer temperatures will slow this virus, in correlation to all others in its family. If I were a gambler I'd say the odds were in favour of that happening.
I don't know the science though.. I always thought colds and flu generally hit worse in winter because the cold lowered immune systems somewhat, whilst simultaneously providing a better environment for those virus? I assumed the science behind it was known?
Sqorgar wrote: It's actually growing. In 2012, the rate of autism was 1 in 69. In 2014, it was 1 in 59. In those two years, we did not significantly change how we identified autism. Going back to 2000, it was 1 in 150. Today, it is 1 in 40. That's 1 out of every 40 children born 5 years ago now has some form of autism. Children born today have even worse odds, and we won't know for another 5 years just how bad.
Your conclusion isn't actually backed up by your data. Growing diagnosis rates don't automatically mean that cases are increasing, just that more of them are being identified. As the meme says, Pluto wasn't discovered until the 1930's... but it was sure as hell still out there before that.
While diagnosis methods may not have changed in that time, what has been changing is society's awareness and acceptance of the autism spectrum. So while your statistics certainly could point to an increasing number of kids with autism, they could just as likely point to more parents getting their kids tested. We would need more data to know either way.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Id say you could make an educated prediction that warmer temperatures will slow this virus, in correlation to all others in its family. If I were a gambler I'd say the odds were in favour of that happening.
I don't know the science though.. I always thought colds and flu generally hit worse in winter because the cold lowered immune systems somewhat, whilst simultaneously providing a better environment for those virus? I assumed the science behind it was known?
I'd speculate it has nothing to with temperature so much as longer days and stronger sunlight, as UV light is a well known and excellent disinfectant. Where a virus might hang around on say a keypad on a door or cashpoint (ATM) for up to 3 days now, I suspect that would be much less in strong sunlight.
Plus, IIRC, there's something about rhinovirus where it prefers a slightly lower temp than our core body offers, so colder weather gives it opportunity to reproduce in our nasal passages that spend more time than usual at cooler temperatures than in the summer. But that may be apocryphal.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: I don't know the science though.. I always thought colds and flu generally hit worse in winter because the cold lowered immune systems somewhat, whilst simultaneously providing a better environment for those virus? I assumed the science behind it was known?
The science is not known. Basically, there's a bunch of different theories that have some evidence backed by laboratory experiments, but ultimately, none of them fully explain it. It's likely a combination of all these things, or there could be a certain X factor that nobody has figured out yet.
petrov27 wrote: So your solution is that society should ignore the virus, send everyone back to work/school/etc and let the chips fall where they may? If you are old and have pre-existing conditions tough luck mate, sucks to be you?
We'll be feeling the effects of closing school/work/etc for decades. Entire industries are at risk. This will have an unprecedented effect on the GDP and affect international trade, and could very send us into another depression. We're losing freedom and privacy that we may never get back (we've still got the patriot act almost twenty years after 9.11).
But yeah, let's focus on the 80 year old smoking diabetics with hypertension who probably won't survive another half decade even without a virus. That's totally where our priorities should be.
Yes, you're absolutely right. Our priorities should lie with the life of a human being over the financial systems which are there to service us, not the other way around.
There's a lot of moaning about horders (which is fair enough especially for the almost totally unnessesary to horde toilet paper),
but what a lot of folk haven't grasped is that a lot of people, anybody over 70, anybody with an appropriate health condition (like respiratory problems, heart problems, kidney problems, immune system problems etc) have been told they need to stay indoors for the forseable future (or at least 12 weeks) so there is a significant chunk of the population who do need to stock up with a lot of stuff
insaniak wrote: Your conclusion isn't actually backed up by your data. Growing diagnosis rates don't automatically mean that cases are increasing, just that more of them are being identified. As the meme says, Pluto wasn't discovered until the 1930's... but it was sure as hell still out there before that.
While diagnosis methods may not have changed in that time, what has been changing is society's awareness and acceptance of the autism spectrum. So while your statistics certainly could point to an increasing number of kids with autism, they could just as likely point to more parents getting their kids tested. We would need more data to know either way.
Hmm... This would be a little off topic, but since you are a mod, I guess I'll answer you.
I have seen a study which measured proximity of autistic diagnoses to see if there was a social connection between the increased rate of autism diagnoses. It's been a while, but I believe the study said that there was a social element to it (kids are more likely to be diagnosed with autism if they were closer to another kid diagnosed with it), though they could not rule out the possibility of a shared environmental element (which would also partially explain why autism diagnoses clump together). So I can't say for certain that the reason for some of the increase isn't diagnostic or social. But the incidence rate has quadrupled in the past twenty years and up about 6,250% (not a typo) from 1980.
Autism was identified 70 years ago by a guy named Dr. Kanner, who said it was “a behavior pattern not known to me or anyone else theretofore.” The idea that autism is like Pluto and always around would mean that we'd see an increase of autism diagnoses for adults - that is, once we know how to find Pluto, we should be able to find all the Plutos that we missed before. But that's not really the case. There's not an increasing number of older Plutos out there, but there are an increasing number of younger ones (even compared to only a year earlier).
They did a study to determine if the incidence rate could due to changes in diagnosis criteria.
"It also revealed that no more than 56 percent of the estimated 600-to-700 percent increase, that is, less than one-tenth of the increased number of reported autism cases, could be attributed to the inclusion of milder cases of autism."
Beyond that, autism isn't the only neurological disorder that is on the increase among children. Stuff like ADD, Tourettes, siezures, narcolepsy, asthma, food allergies, and so on are all on the rise. There's been studies linking neurodevelopmental disorders (like autism) to the proximity of pesticides (like glyphosate) during pregnancy. While the increase in incidence was only about 15% (if I remember correctly) and can't explain the entire autism epidemic, it does suggest that environmental causes can and have increased the incidence rate.
Side note: I recently learned that when autistic children get high fevers, they get "better" - more alert, social, and communicative . Many parents describe it as getting their child back, or seeing what their child would've been like without autism. As absolutely bizarre as that is, it might indicate that autism can actually be reversed or at least reduced somewhat, and it may not be a permanent lifelong disability. Research is still ongoing, but I just thought that was worth sharing. The Fever Effect doesn't appear to be that well known.
Sqorgar wrote: We'll be feeling the effects of closing school/work/etc for decades. Entire industries are at risk. This will have an unprecedented effect on the GDP and affect international trade, and could very send us into another depression. We're losing freedom and privacy that we may never get back (we've still got the patriot act almost twenty years after 9.11).
Yahbut, if I understand your post correctly, if we don't close down schools and workplaces, our hospital systems will be overwhelmed (they're already so in some parts of the US) and, obviously, those sick will not be working, anyway.
Closing work spaces, unfortunately, looks to be a case of YMMV. Some companies, such as those with work-from-home procedures already in place, will be less affected. Also, some employers, such as Gamestop, are ignoring the warnings, and telling employees to work. Essential services, like groceries, are currently exempt from US orders to stop working. Even without orders to close, consumers are reducing non-essential services, such as air travel, so supply-and-demand is already affecting the economy, at least in the short-term.
"An increase of just one degree Celsius and 1% relative humidity increase substantially lower the virus's transmission..."
In applying the paper's findings to the forecast temperatures and humidity, the authors concluded that the arrival of summer and rainy seasons in the Northern Hemisphere can "effectively reduce the transmission of COVID-19,"...
"With much of the U.S. forecast to see higher-than-normal temperatures in March and April, according to AccuWeather meteorologists, there is a chance that the virus could eventually "burn itself out,"...
"If such temperature increases do occur, the paper's R value findings suggest that the U.S. will see a far lower transmission rate by the summer than the country is currently seeing in March."
"The transmission of viruses can be affected by a number of factors, including climate conditions (such as temperature and humidity), population density and medical care quality," the researchers said. "Therefore, understanding the relationship between weather and the transmission of COVID-19 is key to forecast the intensity and end time of this epidemic."
I don't engage in these discussions to be right or act superior. This is just a subject that I am intensely interested in, and somewhat well read about. I honestly don't know where the hostility is coming from. For the life of me, I can't figure out why a dissenting opinion is so threatening to someone else. With that said, this backs up everything I've been saying, so I hope this vindicates me against claims of being "full of gak" or a "troll trying to get yuks for himself". Or "taking a piss". Or "trying to start gak".
Only problem with that study is it relies on questionable data, would be interesting to see a more up to date study from other countries data.
Given I live in a warmer clime I have my fingers crossed but doing nothing until then is still to risky IMO.
Sqorgar wrote: It's actually growing. In 2012, the rate of autism was 1 in 69. In 2014, it was 1 in 59. In those two years, we did not significantly change how we identified autism. Going back to 2000, it was 1 in 150. Today, it is 1 in 40. That's 1 out of every 40 children born 5 years ago now has some form of autism. Children born today have even worse odds, and we won't know for another 5 years just how bad.
Your conclusion isn't actually backed up by your data. Growing diagnosis rates don't automatically mean that cases are increasing, just that more of them are being identified. As the meme says, Pluto wasn't discovered until the 1930's... but it was sure as hell still out there before that.
While diagnosis methods may not have changed in that time, what has been changing is society's awareness and acceptance of the autism spectrum. So while your statistics certainly could point to an increasing number of kids with autism, they could just as likely point to more parents getting their kids tested. We would need more data to know either way.
Or widening the standard of what's included under the umbrella term 'autism,' which is what largely happened.
It has happened in several areas, including PTSD.
Pluto, ironically, fell victim to the opposite case: narrowing the technical definition.
r_squared wrote: Yes, you're absolutely right. Our priorities should lie with the life of a human being over the financial systems which are there to service us, not the other way around.
I acknowledge you as a morally superior person. Consider your virtue signaled.
But over here in the real world, things are more complicated. Let's say there are two people who need a liver transplant. One is a 20 year old female with her whole life ahead of her and one is a bedridden 80 year old alcoholic. Is the decision of who gets the liver not as obvious to you as it is to me?
A prolonged lockdown would kick us so hard in the recession that our grandchildren will feel it. It will affect every single person in the country. Already, thousands of people have been fired from the service industry and we haven't even technically started a lockdown yet. Who's gonna pay for their unemployment? Most places have a hiring freeze on right now. When will they be able to get jobs again? I guess they could work at Amazon warehouses...
The stock market has wiped out many people's retirement funds - and a lot of them won't be around long enough to see it rebound and come back. Who knows how this will affect them if they need that money for healthcare? There's several industries which are already on the verge of collapse, and local businesses don't have the capital to go several months without income. Many of those unemployed people won't have jobs to come back to.
Isolation is literally considered a form or torture, and the effect on the mental health of people asked to spend a month or longer away from other human contact will be measured in depression and suicide. And with all this will come an increase in crime. And all this for a disease that has taken less lives than the seasonal flu?
It isn't that I don't feel bad for the bedridden 80 year old alcoholic, but if I have to choose who to give the liver to, I'm going to give it to the person with a future, who might have kids one day, and who might survive more than a few more years with it.
Just came back from the drive thru pharmacy. My wife’s medications (treating her respiratory condition) have gone up tremendously since January, up to $250 and over $900 each month, after insurance and manufacturer’s coupons, up from $10 and $400 after coupons. Mine went up to $250 after coupon, up from $10. These price hikes were mostly caused by the manufacturer, as our insurance did not change.
She was planning to try alternatives, and I was planning to start taking my meds every other day, but the middle of the Covid19 pandemic seems like a bad time to start messing with respiratory medication.
I really hope this pandemic leads to real changes in how we handle preventative care and its accessibility.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: Just came back from the drive thru pharmacy. My wife’s medications (treating her respiratory condition) have gone up tremendously since January, up to $250 and over $900 each month, after insurance and manufacturer’s coupons, up from $10 and $400 after coupons. Mine went up to $250 after coupon, up from $10. These price hikes were mostly caused by the manufacturer, as our insurance did not change.
She was planning to try alternatives, and I was planning to start taking my meds every other day, but the middle of the Covid19 pandemic seems like a bad time to start messing with respiratory medication.
I really hope this pandemic leads to real changes in how we handle preventative care and its accessibility.
Price gouging during an emergency is illegal, except for medication. Sigh.
I'm sorry to hear that has happened, that is awful.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: Just came back from the drive thru pharmacy. My wife’s medications (treating her respiratory condition) have gone up tremendously since January, up to $250 and over $900 each month, after insurance and manufacturer’s coupons, up from $10 and $400 after coupons. Mine went up to $250 after coupon, up from $10. These price hikes were mostly caused by the manufacturer, as our insurance did not change.
She was planning to try alternatives, and I was planning to start taking my meds every other day, but the middle of the Covid19 pandemic seems like a bad time to start messing with respiratory medication.
I really hope this pandemic leads to real changes in how we handle preventative care and its accessibility.
Price gouging is acceptable in the US as long as a corporation is the one doing it.
It’s a lot better for us than for a lot of Americans. We have pretty good insurance, and once we hit our out-of-pocket maximum the cost won’t be much of an issue any more.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Id say you could make an educated prediction that warmer temperatures will slow this virus, in correlation to all others in its family. If I were a gambler I'd say the odds were in favour of that happening.
I don't know the science though.. I always thought colds and flu generally hit worse in winter because the cold lowered immune systems somewhat, whilst simultaneously providing a better environment for those virus? I assumed the science behind it was known?
I'd speculate it has nothing to with temperature so much as longer days and stronger sunlight, as UV light is a well known and excellent disinfectant. Where a virus might hang around on say a keypad on a door or cashpoint (ATM) for up to 3 days now, I suspect that would be much less in strong sunlight.
Plus, IIRC, there's something about rhinovirus where it prefers a slightly lower temp than our core body offers, so colder weather gives it opportunity to reproduce in our nasal passages that spend more time than usual at cooler temperatures than in the summer. But that may be apocryphal.
Ah yeah I totally forgot about uv. Hopefully that will help us here too.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: of course, but saying, everyone is going to be hospitalised, is just the other end of the scale.
Not all certainly. But so far about 10-20% potients and in holland half the ICU patients are not the elderly in most risk. And what happens to those young people in ICU when they don't GET into ICU? (at which point zero elderly gets into ICU either short of being president or prime minister)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
spaceelf wrote: People are accusing other folks of not taking it seriously enough. Well, back in the fourteenth century during the black death plenty of people decided to party.
Everyone has their own way to respond to stuff like the outbreak. People may choose ways that do not prolong their lifespan, or that of others. This should be no surprise, people smoke and do all sorts of harmful stuff. We all have our reasons.
And when your choices result in death of others and harm to society it's the duty of goverment to step in. There's reason we don't allow people to slaughter people with assault rifles just for fun either.
That doesn't mean dealing with pre-existing conditions more aggressively in the future isn't worth doing; clearly it is. But NOW is not... how do I say this? "Not the most opportune moment..."
There's nothing to suggest that this coronavirus will behave any differently than the others we know about, all of which operate seasonally. By the end of April, there should be so few new cases (naturally, without us having to do anything) that everybody is going to stop paying attention. The WHO can't operate under the assumption that this will happen, since COVID19 is essentially a "new virus", and also because nobody really knows why these things are seasonal and hoping for something that we don't understand to happen is going to be seen as doing nothing.
r_squared wrote: Yes, you're absolutely right. Our priorities should lie with the life of a human being over the financial systems which are there to service us, not the other way around.
I acknowledge you as a morally superior person. Consider your virtue signaled.
But over here in the real world, things are more complicated. Let's say there are two people who need a liver transplant. One is a 20 year old female with her whole life ahead of her and one is a bedridden 80 year old alcoholic. Is the decision of who gets the liver not as obvious to you as it is to me?
A prolonged lockdown would kick us so hard in the recession that our grandchildren will feel it. It will affect every single person in the country. Already, thousands of people have been fired from the service industry and we haven't even technically started a lockdown yet. Who's gonna pay for their unemployment? Most places have a hiring freeze on right now. When will they be able to get jobs again? I guess they could work at Amazon warehouses...
The stock market has wiped out many people's retirement funds - and a lot of them won't be around long enough to see it rebound and come back. Who knows how this will affect them if they need that money for healthcare? There's several industries which are already on the verge of collapse, and local businesses don't have the capital to go several months without income. Many of those unemployed people won't have jobs to come back to.
Isolation is literally considered a form or torture, and the effect on the mental health of people asked to spend a month or longer away from other human contact will be measured in depression and suicide. And with all this will come an increase in crime. And all this for a disease that has taken less lives than the seasonal flu?
It isn't that I don't feel bad for the bedridden 80 year old alcoholic, but if I have to choose who to give the liver to, I'm going to give it to the person with a future, who might have kids one day, and who might survive more than a few more years with it.
--> You have no idea about the consequences yet.
--> you have no idea about potential effects on the market yet.
--> You would sacrifice x ammount of people for a bit of money. Having no idea about potential rebounds through things like historically happened with the "New Deal" or other such instruments.
--> You also assume the "Greater Good" for people with pensions etc is more important then the whole society .
--> Most tyranical systems claim to do things for the "Greater good" including but not limited to the Extreme right wing Nazis to the Terrorregimes of socialist countries to military dictatorships "protecting" from socialist countries. That is a dangerous clause to invoke there lad.
--> Utilitariansim gives you the ilusion of actual decision making based on rationale, let me ask you do you know what happens when x / y surivives? No? then how can you decide?
--> Utilitarianism ALLWAYS has underlying ethics. Even your exemple has, therefore you enter again into subjectivity, scuse me that is not the way to go forwards.
--> Further, the virus damages the lungs, follow sickness will damage the economy and health of the people more throughly if let unchecked and most certainly longterm.
--> further , the vast to be expected losses through overcrowding of the medical system will lead to casualities that were not necessary, and will seriously disrupt local and national live even moreso then anything else. Disrupting the chains of transport which are as off yet thankfully still working.
So again: not only are you in your OWN logical system not coherent or complete enough to form an actual argument, but are also complaining about "virtue signalers".
tneva82 wrote: Don't bother. He's just thinking his own pocket. He would rather see billions die if that means his own bank account stays same or grows.
No that doesn't bother me, (yes that sounds callous, well actually it bothers me partially) what bothers me more is: HE says he is for his own pocket and that of his fellow non endangered workers and yet lacks the farsight to actually realize that this WILL have longstanding consequences and is therefore not even correct in the aplication of utilitarianism.
Well, the good news is even if they declare essential work only, my job is sticking around. We've just heard from our customers that around a dozen of our autoclaves are currently being used in labs doing direct coronavirus research, and I'm on call 24/7 with several of the other engineers just in case they need technical support or a spare part.
Also, amusingly, I turned on the radio this morning to this:
"-10,000 guardsmen have already been deployed to assist with the Coronavirus response with 10,000 more expected to be mobilized next week."
"That's not NEARLY ENOUGH! SEND IN THE NEXT WAVE! FOR THE TRUMPEROR!!!!!!!"
the_scotsman wrote: Well, the good news is even if they declare essential work only, my job is sticking around. We've just heard from our customers that around a dozen of our autoclaves are currently being used in labs doing direct coronavirus research, and I'm on call 24/7 with several of the other engineers just in case they need technical support or a spare part.
Also, amusingly, I turned on the radio this morning to this:
"-10,000 guardsmen have already been deployed to assist with the Coronavirus response with 10,000 more expected to be mobilized next week."
"That's not NEARLY ENOUGH! SEND IN THE NEXT WAVE! FOR THE TRUMPEROR!!!!!!!"
Well trump is behind us in terms of mobilization
I am only waiting for my turn to shoo away morons in groups outside.
r_squared wrote: Yes, you're absolutely right. Our priorities should lie with the life of a human being over the financial systems which are there to service us, not the other way around.
I acknowledge you as a morally superior person. Consider your virtue signaled.
But over here in the real world, things are more complicated. Let's say there are two people who need a liver transplant. One is a 20 year old female with her whole life ahead of her and one is a bedridden 80 year old alcoholic. Is the decision of who gets the liver not as obvious to you as it is to me?
A prolonged lockdown would kick us so hard in the recession that our grandchildren will feel it. It will affect every single person in the country. Already, thousands of people have been fired from the service industry and we haven't even technically started a lockdown yet. Who's gonna pay for their unemployment? Most places have a hiring freeze on right now. When will they be able to get jobs again? I guess they could work at Amazon warehouses...
The stock market has wiped out many people's retirement funds - and a lot of them won't be around long enough to see it rebound and come back. Who knows how this will affect them if they need that money for healthcare? There's several industries which are already on the verge of collapse, and local businesses don't have the capital to go several months without income. Many of those unemployed people won't have jobs to come back to.
Isolation is literally considered a form or torture, and the effect on the mental health of people asked to spend a month or longer away from other human contact will be measured in depression and suicide. And with all this will come an increase in crime. And all this for a disease that has taken less lives than the seasonal flu?
It isn't that I don't feel bad for the bedridden 80 year old alcoholic, but if I have to choose who to give the liver to, I'm going to give it to the person with a future, who might have kids one day, and who might survive more than a few more years with it.
Clearly, all relevant experts within both the scientific/medical sector and financial/government sector have weighed their options, analyzed the benefits and impacts of staying open for business vs going into a recession due to a quarantine, and they have chosen....WRONG. ONLY SPORGAR, PERSON WITH ANIMATED SQUID AVATAR ON A 40K FORUM, KNOWS THE CORRECT COURSE!
Once this is over I'm sure you'll get a red phone in your den so world leaders can call you for advice. I'm sure you've got all the same information that they do, after all, you've got so much great info already about how.....something....not saying vaccines of course....but....something....is causing more autism.
the_scotsman wrote: Well, the good news is even if they declare essential work only, my job is sticking around. We've just heard from our customers that around a dozen of our autoclaves are currently being used in labs doing direct coronavirus research, and I'm on call 24/7 with several of the other engineers just in case they need technical support or a spare part.
Also, amusingly, I turned on the radio this morning to this:
"-10,000 guardsmen have already been deployed to assist with the Coronavirus response with 10,000 more expected to be mobilized next week."
"That's not NEARLY ENOUGH! SEND IN THE NEXT WAVE! FOR THE TRUMPEROR!!!!!!!"
Well trump is behind us in terms of mobilization
I am only waiting for my turn to shoo away morons in groups outside.
I just forgot that we had a branch of the military that would technically be called "Guardsmen." it had me double-taking.
I'm sorry, I often get that impression from media and people in general. Though, funnily enough I do agree with authorities on this matter. Even if I'm not concerned about this pandemic myself, I do see need for quarantine in order not to overwhelm health system and give it few more weeks of breathing room.
Though, I'm concerned more about price of this all. Our economy already are feeling two weeks quarantine. If it is going to be extended for a whole month? I do not think it is worth the price. People are already getting restless in their homes, you would need an army to somewhat control people when they will have bright, warm spring to spend quarantined. In addition, all nations take up massive loans to compensate for massive economical hit.
I do believe that somewhat of hybrid model is ought to be a best. Quarantine should be dropped when situation will start getting better and from that point, we should pursue only social quarantine to isolate most susceptible groups.
I smoke Rollies, as they’re far cheaper. And a few less nasties in the baccy, as it’s not dried etc.
As for the fitness? I’m surprisingly OK in that regard, considering I don’t ever really exercise on purpose. Commute usually involves around 2.5k of walking five days a week. And whilst WFH, Pokemon Go gives me enough incentive for a healthy wander.
Duskweaver wrote: On a lighter note, the Youtube algorithm has apparently become self-aware and is laughing at us. Here's what it suggested to me this morning:
I tell you they will come for us , the algorithms i tell yees!!!!!
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Ah the joys of being stupid enough to smoke, and having little to do. Means you smoke more. Leads to a tight chest.
you could pretend for a second you'd have to pay swiss prices on cigs that scares that nonsense right out of you.
Might actually be the time to give up,
Every three packs you don't smoke is a licence to buy a pack of GW models.
We'll swamp your smoke for bones! Plastic bones....
Three? Damn I'm glad I don't live in Europe. Or are our gw prices that much higher over here?
Wait...how...how much does a pack of cigarettes cost?
Am I having a Bluth moment where I'm just like "I dunno, five dollars?" and it's actually like 20 dollars? I legitimately do not know, never smoked in my life.
rolls down hill, maybe disbanding the NSC pandemic response wasn't a great idea.
