Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Overread wrote: You know you can get dental work done at the ER and hospital right.
Not here you can’t. The only hospital in the city geared up to do them isn’t doing them.
Try not to stress, I'm pretty sure the fatality rate is low, and that's without the fact you're already treating with antibiotics.
Like I've said before, dad had a dental abscess he had to manage for literally years before it got to a point where he could get it treated permanently, so I think the odds are well in your favour.
It perhaps wouldn't be the worst idea to pick up a digital thermometer (pre Covid I got one off Amazon for about £6) and keep an eye on your temperature if you're really concerned. If it starts to leak, I'd imagine a fever would be one of the first symptoms, and you may not notice a mild fever, especially in the warm weather.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/27 15:02:02
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
It perhaps wouldn't be the worst idea to pick up a digital thermometer (pre Covid I got one off Amazon for about £6) and keep an eye on your temperature if you're really concerned. If it starts to leak, I'd imagine a fever would be one of the first symptoms, and you may not notice a mild fever, especially in the warm weather.
That's a good call. FWC, from a quick look at the NHS website regarding dental abscesses, also keep an eye out for swelling around the eyes or neck (I imagine it probably depends on the location of the abcess but don't hold me to that, I'm not a dentist!) or if you are having difficulty swallowing or breathing. Head to A&E if you get any of that.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/05/27 15:10:59
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Another terrible rash decision taken with no thought. They need to start seriously talking about opening dentists back up soon.
I don't really blame them for being closed- dental work is one of the highest risk things to be doing in the current climate, same as ENT or maxillofacial. A lot of that work is aerosol-generating and involves being right up close to the face too. Emergency stuff is still happening in life-threatening cases, but if someone can be safely managed with antibiotics until the risk of COVID drops, I think that is sensible. Having a dead dentist is less helpful in the long run.
ChargerIIC wrote: If algae farm paste with a little bit of your grandfather in it isn't Grimdark I don't know what is.
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Another terrible rash decision taken with no thought. They need to start seriously talking about opening dentists back up soon.
With a pandemic that spread from air contact person to person I'd wager dentists are probably one of the most highly at risk groups to catch it and also pass it on if they have it. The entire dental process is leaning over your mouth as you breath with their gloved fingers all over your mouth insides. If you've got it you've likely infected all of their gear - masks, gloves, equipment. That's all got to be fully cleaned down or replaced (with proper removal and replacement protocol). Any charts, computers or equipment would likely have to be handled by a second person to avoid casual contamination, which considering many dentists already have someone else to hold other tools in your mouth means potentially three people in the room at once. Now you've got four people in close proximity even if they are wearing masks and gloves and such.
For complex procedures they'll spend as long if not longer directly with you than a hairdresser will. So yep closing them was the right call.
I do agree that they are required and are essential and should reopen when its possible to do so. When the virus spread is low; when there are sensible safguards and methods that they can use and gain access to appropriate quantities of the right kind of PPE. Plus they would need regular testing to ensure that if they or any of their team became infected they can close the practice quickly and communicate the information to their clients swiftly.
It’s so stupid. I was due a regular check up in March, then the lockdown came and because they’re caught with their trousers down over testing, no dentists are open. I was told they’re basically forbidden atm. All I could do was ring my practice, who helped me get the tablets, but that’s all they can do.
And all I can do is monitor it and hope it doesn’t get worst. It’s...not bad really. Hard to notice even. Just frustrating that I can’t get it sorted.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/27 15:17:05
It's the same with haircuts. My fringe got so long I had to take a 60 mile round trip to check I could see to drive properly.
Thoughtless!
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
queen_annes_revenge wrote: Another terrible rash decision taken with no thought. They need to start seriously talking about opening dentists back up soon.
With a pandemic that spread from air contact person to person I'd wager dentists are probably one of the most highly at risk groups to catch it and also pass it on if they have it. The entire dental process is leaning over your mouth as you breath with their gloved fingers all over your mouth insides. If you've got it you've likely infected all of their gear - masks, gloves, equipment. That's all got to be fully cleaned down or replaced (with proper removal and replacement protocol). Any charts, computers or equipment would likely have to be handled by a second person to avoid casual contamination, which considering many dentists already have someone else to hold other tools in your mouth means potentially three people in the room at once. Now you've got four people in close proximity even if they are wearing masks and gloves and such.
For complex procedures they'll spend as long if not longer directly with you than a hairdresser will. So yep closing them was the right call.
I do agree that they are required and are essential and should reopen when its possible to do so. When the virus spread is low; when there are sensible safguards and methods that they can use and gain access to appropriate quantities of the right kind of PPE. Plus they would need regular testing to ensure that if they or any of their team became infected they can close the practice quickly and communicate the information to their clients swiftly.
Also, every dentist who contracts covid due to exposure during routine treatment is a dentist not available for emergency dental work.
So by keeping ordinary practice running you can actually increase the risks for those in need of emergency treatment if the staff are now unavailable to treat them due to being sick.
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
Yeah, the closure of dentists is pretty much inarguable.
The issue was the less than stellar organisation of emergency care provision on the back of that, but it isn't surprising given the rushed nature of everything around the same time.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Azreal13 wrote: Yeah, the closure of dentists is pretty much inarguable.
The issue was the less than stellar organisation of emergency care provision on the back of that, but it isn't surprising given the rushed nature of everything around the same time.
you think you got your trousers down, but imagine you have prepared trousers for such a rainshow and then proceed to just throw it out the proverbial window into a shredder.
That's what happened over here with the pandemie plan, aka pandemic emergency plan, aka the one plan neither the federal nor cantonal gov followed and we therefore had an absolutely avoidable lack of masks and other equipment, if it weren't for the horder military with old stuff we'd been buggered even more....
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
I'm surprised nobody has been trotting out Japan as an example of beating the virus without a lockdown as its been in the news lately. On the surface the numbers look great, only 800-900 dead?? But then....
the deadline for prefectures to submit fatality figures is the fifth day of the second month after -- June 5 for April's numbers, for example. Japan's death counts are always two months behind as a result.
So, if true, Japans big success is based on numbers effective as of March 31st by my understanding. For comparison, at the time the US had 3,774 deaths. Today the US has 100,000, so extrapolating a bit it seems safe to assume that Japan actually has had about 30,000 deaths to date. Be interesting to see the numbers reported on August 5th.
Xenomancers wrote: A prolonged lockdown actually has the potential to cause the virus to kill more people as it ensures there is an active body of people who can transmit the virus. .
You're going to have to explain this one.
A lockdown restricts population movement and population interaction and duration of those interactions. Any infected "pockets" of population should, with the lockdown and self isolation due to infection, remain more isolated and thus reduce the potential spread of the virus to new populations and people. Done right with track and trace so you can put infected (and those who came into contact with infected) into not just lockdown, but full isolation for a few weeks, means that you contain and eliminate the virus spread.
I think the idea is that because we have restricted where people can go it will cause everybody who does go out to go to the same places. Which results in more people being in proximity than they would otherwise. IE: If people would normally go to X, Y , and Z, but during lockdown only Z is open, then everybody will go to Z. Which results in everybody being in 1 place as opposed to 3.
I certainly know at Costco that we've had much higher numbers of people in the store at all times compared to normal. Its like a busy weekend, but every day of the week rather than just on the weekend.
This is just terrible logic and lack of understanding as to how things work. The number of people that will die from coronavirus, in the absence of a vaccine or some effective cure or treatment is X. Lockdowns do not change X, lockdowns change the time it takes to reach X. A lockdown will not increase the number of people who will die from coronavirus - ever - it will only kick those deaths further into the future, with the hope that they can ultimately be avoided by way of the development of a vaccine or treatment before those lottery numbers come up. The simple fact of the matter is that coronavirus will spread through a largely fixed percentage of the population before reaching a herd immunity burnout point regardless of a lockdown, no amount of xenomancer claiming otherwise will change that.
Xenomancers wrote:Literally everything I said is true and from the heart.
From the heart? Maybe. True? Hardly.
Not to mention the fact that this virus DOES NOT KILL people under 60 at a scary rate.
No, it just leaves them alive with horrible damage to their lungs, kidneys, brain, neurological system, heart, vascular system, etc. The impact on coronavirus survivors is absolutely horrendous and has long-lasting implications on their quality of life (and quite likely will result in a significantly decreased lifespan).
For the record, Breitbart is absolute partisan trash. Don't ever link that dumpsterfire in a reply to me again.
This. I refuse to give them a penny of ad revenue from my clicks.
The state had to change the way deaths are reported due to the legal ramifications so now you can die ‘with’ or ‘from’ COVID19, how it should have been from the start.
IMO, as long as the deaths attributed to COVID are lower than the excess mortality total, then I have no concerns about miscounts or overreported totals, if anything everyone is underreporting the actual numbers and the deaths are significantly higher.
A.D. wrote:(it hasn't damaged china's.)
This is mathematically, statistically, and demonstrably false.
3 billion nationalist slaves
China has a pop. of 1.3 billion. Its bad enough that your opinions are abjectly stupid, the least you could do is try to get a couple basic facts right.
Look at what they did to the oil prices which is basically what the dollar is based on.
China has nothing to do with oil prices - thats Russia and Saudi Arabia.
China doesn't rely on exports anymore they import just as much and are now self sufficient. They are already the strongest economy based on productivity.
You clearly don't understand how economies work or what self sufficient means. Chinese economy is still largely export driven, and they are absolutely taking a massive hit to their GDP from all this. Your last bit is patently false, Chinese productivity figures are actually astoshingly low, entire papers and studies have been done trying to figure out how such a low-productivity country can have such a powerhouse economy (hint: its the exports). Heres a good read if you're inclined to, yknow, actually do some basic research: https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/china-low-productivity-superpower
Because a lockdown means low oil demand - tanking the prices. They obviously know lockdowns will be enforced when they send the virus to the west.
Let's face it we are in a cold war.
Considering that China was the first to lockdown, and also massively cut its own oil imports as a result.... and that the main trigger for the drop in oil prices was Saudi Arabia and Russia refusing to cut oil production/actively increasing production despite the drop in supply, I once again have to say that you clearly don't understand what you're talking about.
and I do my own research
doing your own research is meaningless if you don't understand what it is you're researching and derive gakky conclusions from it. Also, no amount of degreees from Google University will ever make your "research" more meaningful or factual than actual expertise. Don't let your ego get the better of you and allow you to believe that your contrarian ideology is more meaningful than expert consensus.
No you're absolutely wrong. China's economy is not based on exports anymore. It was 10+ years ago so you're just a bit behind. Not to worry.
Absolutely wrong. While China has been driving its economic growth through domestic consumption for the past decade, exports still make up about 18% of its GDP (down from about 25% in 2010). I don't care what alternative facts you believe, losing up to 18% of your economic productivity as a result to a decline in exports is still an economic nightmare.
In my view.
Your view is an opinion, not fact. Stop pretending otherwise.
Even this is wrong, while Wuhan got most of the attention, there were a total of 48 cities and four provinces that were put under lockdown orders within the same timeframe, totallying about 500 million people (or in your world, I would guess about 1.75 billion people). Since those orders lifted, several additional cities were put under lockdown (in at least one case for a second time) in response to flareups.
Didn't know Malibu is in new jersey?
not to mention the first pic you post shows an UK cop if i am not mistaken.
Whilest the video looks like the states?
This dude has to be trolling. He just has to be. He has to be like 12 years old, and trolling, theres no other explanation.
Does ANYONE here, know a single person (not a friend of a friend) who has COVID-19?
Yes. Being in New Jersey I know quite a few people personally who were diagnosed with it, several of which were hospitalized, and a couple who died as a result.
The Regulator wrote: it's also that people don't trust vaccines or medical experts.
Thats *their* problem.
Come on Ins that's not the same thing at all. People know the effect of a piece of fabric harnessing their body and can put trust in that. If you don't think that's logical for safety then everyone is going to disagree with you. Injections of liquids that may be deemed as mysterious to an individual is a different matter.
Science knows the effect of injecting said "mysterious liquids" into the human body and you can put trust in that.
As far as seatbelts are concerned, when seatbelt laws became a thing in the 1980s (well, in the US at least) people are argued that "a piece of fabric harnessing their body" was not going to save them and not something they could trust and would cause greater injury to them from arresting their movement to suddenly etc etc etc, so yes its absolutely the same thing.
it's also that people don't trust vaccines or medical experts.
Thats *their* problem.
Adeptus Doritos wrote:
If you can't figure that out? I... you know what, just stay right where you're at. I'm gonna let you experience this, I won't cheat you out of it.
Sounds like the response of someone who doesn't actually have a well formulated argument.
I'm a vet. I've been around long enough to have experimental vaccines thrown at me. And long enough to see some of the guys that were around before me, and what some of those 'mandatory medicines' did to them.
Fortunately (or maybe unfortunately, depending on your perspective), the standards for administration of medication and vaccines to the civilian population is much stricter than it is for the military. The government can literally do things to servicemen and women openly that would outright be illegal if done to the civilian population (or more accurately - would be illegal if they got caught doing it) on the basis of operational necessity. Heres the thing though - by joining the armed forces you tacitly agreed to this, so its inaccurate to say you and your battle buddies were forced to take medication or receive the vaccine, whether or not you were aware of this when you signed on the dotted line is a different story.
I want to know more about the weird pocket in your upper jaw.
The effects of mefloquine are pretty similar to chloroquine and hydroxychloroquiine, in fact some consider mefloquine to be a safer alternative to the other two.
If the reason those pills were administered ever came to pass, you'd probably be glad that you took them despite the side effects.
Neither of these are vaccines, and for the most part most of the side effects were understood when you were told to take them (not so much with the PB pills, but with the mefloquine it sure was), whether they told you this is a different story.
The idea is still the same.
Its not, at all, unless you zoom out and overgeneralize to the point that the distinction between those things loses all meaning and context.
CoALabaer wrote: Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
The funny thing is, quite a few places in the US have gone back to 'normal'. And have been for the last few weeks. We've yet to see a spike at these places.
Exactly, its back to 'normal', not normal. People aren't interacting like they did before the pandemic and the lockdown period made sure the R rate would be kept low. Unless something is going seriously wrong or people stopped caring, there shouldn't be significant spikes (see most of Europe after lockdown). Of course not everyone is sensible and with the weather getting better, we will have to see where this is going.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/27 16:43:15
Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP)
Thats varying shades of incorrect and subject to external factors
Humboldt County, CA for example has seen a spike - mind you the numbers we are talking about there were so low to begin with that a singgle cough could have triggered it. In any case, on a micro scale its a proof-of-concept of what could happen on a macro-scale if things are walked back.
Georgia is seeing an uptick in cases, but not a "spike". This is likely in part due to the fact that the COVID restrictions originally in place in Georgia were lenient to begin with, and only in place for a very short period before being lifted (read: didn't have the full effect of reducing cases to near 0, they were still reporting 505 new cases per day when they reopened, down from a high of 770). Georgia opened prematurely, they were basically still in their initial spike when they reopened, thus in the case of Georgia it doesn't look like they are "spiking" because their baseline was already too high.
As of last week they were back up to 675 cases per day - that would be considered a spike had the lockdown been left in place the way it should have been - going to 675 from 0 is a lot, going to 675 from 505? not so much.
Florida has similar issues, the lockdown measures were half-assed to begin with and weren't in place long enough to make a difference, so the numbers today, relative to the baseline scenario, do not message a "spike" even though they would constitute one in normal circumstances. The Florida situation is even more convoluted by the fact that the lockdowns and restrictions in Florida were not implemented or lifted evenly, Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties were still in lockdown as of last week, various other counties and municipalities have implented their own measures to varying degrees. We can't really look at the data and say "its been x days, no spike, everything is fine" because thats not accurate to the situation, especially when about 30% of the state is still under lockdown/safer at home orders.
You can contrast the graphs on those worldometer links to the ones for states like NJ and NY which show a clear "bend"/flattening of the curve relative to the others and an appreciable and significant impact.
TL;DR - Yes, we are seeing a spike in those places, but the pre-existing conditions in those areas prior to the "renormalization" period mean that the spikes are hidden.
CoALabaer wrote: Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
After some thought, I hope I didn’t sound ‘bitchy’ about dentists. Of course I completely understand the risks and dangers that their profession is going through at the moment. I’m just a little anxious about this bastard brewing away in my mouth.
chaos0xomega wrote: TL;DR - Yes, we are seeing a spike in those places, but the pre-existing conditions in those areas prior to the "renormalization" period mean that the spikes are hidden.
Yes this is the significant difference between lockdown states and states with restrictions. After a lockdown the curve should be able to be kept relatively flat. Of course the problematic thing is if political convenience bleeds into decision making, like when Georgia switched dates around to create a nice looking downward slope of cases, which is just horrific.
Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP)
This is just terrible logic and lack of understanding as to how things work. The number of people that will die from coronavirus, in the absence of a vaccine or some effective cure or treatment is X. Lockdowns do not change X, lockdowns change the time it takes to reach X. A lockdown will not increase the number of people who will die from coronavirus - ever - it will only kick those deaths further into the future, with the hope that they can ultimately be avoided by way of the development of a vaccine or treatment before those lottery numbers come up. The simple fact of the matter is that coronavirus will spread through a largely fixed percentage of the population before reaching a herd immunity burnout point regardless of a lockdown, no amount of xenomancer claiming otherwise will change that.
I don't think this is totally true, or coronavirus would not be putting any strain on health services, only morgues. I agree that lockdowns do not change the number of cases over time, only spreading those cases out.
However, to say there is no affect on the number of deaths implies that healthcare can do nothing to improve the chances of survival for someone with COVID-19, which I think is incorrect. By spreading out the number of cases at any one time, the death rate should be reduced compared to allowing them to just pile in unchecked, because the healthcare resources available to each individual case are greater.
This is most obvious in examples like the hard hit regions of Italy, where the healthcare system was overwhelmed, but even without being overwhelmed the available resources are going to be greater and the level of care will likely be somewhat superior if healthcare systems are further away form breaking point.
If there is no difference to the total number of deaths with a lockdown, then there is zero point in admitting COVID patients to hospital because you are essentially saying the death rate is the same regardless of the level of treatment received.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Future War Cultist wrote: After some thought, I hope I didn’t sound ‘bitchy’ about dentists. Of course I completely understand the risks and dangers that their profession is going through at the moment. I’m just a little anxious about this bastard brewing away in my mouth.
I am sure it is pretty worrying, but antibiotics should contain any infection until you can get it definitively sorted. Although I feel you on metronidazole, the side effects are pretty horrible on your quality of life.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/05/27 17:25:46
ChargerIIC wrote: If algae farm paste with a little bit of your grandfather in it isn't Grimdark I don't know what is.
I don't think he meant that heatlhcare doesn't improve the chances, more that X amount 'would' die to the virus due to their circumstances, but without a lockdown you would have an additional amount dying on top of that due to lack of care, so X+N. If no vaccine is found and the virus continues to spread, a certain number of people would eventually die from it, with or without lockdown.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/05/27 17:30:40
Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP)
Disciple of Fate wrote: I don't think he meant that heatlhcare doesn't improve the chances, more that X amount 'would' die to the virus due to their circumstances, but without a lockdown you would have an additional amount dying on top of that due to lack of care, so X+N. If no vaccine is found and the virus continues to spread, a certain number of people would eventually die from it, with or without lockdown.
I think what you are saying is right- there is a base number that cannot be saved from COVID- which is X- and that lockdowns allow N more cases to be saved through functioning healthcare. But I think that is a lot less ambiguous than what was said originally. Considering the original comment was in support of lockdowns happening, I think it is important to be clear on why lockdowns can improve the situation.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2020/05/27 17:44:03
ChargerIIC wrote: If algae farm paste with a little bit of your grandfather in it isn't Grimdark I don't know what is.
ITT: A lot of chaps advising another chap on how to avoid dying due to lack of dentistry access.
Also ITT: a chap explaining how it's really rather good for national health for the dentists to be shut down, as there is a danger of lack of access to dentists for emergency services if too many dentists are exposed and infected.
Disciple of Fate wrote: I don't think he meant that heatlhcare doesn't improve the chances, more that X amount 'would' die to the virus due to their circumstances, but without a lockdown you would have an additional amount dying on top of that due to lack of care, so X+N. If no vaccine is found and the virus continues to spread, a certain number of people would eventually die from it, with or without lockdown.
I think what you are saying is right- there is a base number that cannot be saved from COVID- which is X- and that lockdowns allow N more cases to be saved through functioning healthcare. But I think that is a lot less ambiguous than what was said originally. Considering the original comment was in support of lockdowns happening, I think it is important to be clear on why lockdowns can improve the situation.
I think the part he was replying to in that quote pyramid was this bit by Xenomancers:
A prolonged lockdown actually has the potential to cause the virus to kill more people as it ensures there is an active body of people who can transmit the virus.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/05/27 17:50:33
Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP)
No no he's saying that X number of people will die without question even if they get current top end medical care.
That value won't go down, however you don't increase it with lockdown. Lockdown doesn't stop that number happening, it instead helps spread it out over a longer period so that you don't go much above it. Because you keep the healthcare system from getting fully overwhelmed and that means those who need critical care get critical care and get the support they need.
The mistake is that X can go down because through the lockdown medical know-how advances. Those who would have died on day 1 might not day on day 100 because of new drugs being used to combat it; because staff know the warning signs and what is going to happen better etc....
X can also go down if you get a vaccine; which means if you can prolong things long enough through lockdown you never reach the full X value.
Even if those who are at risk in group X don't take vaccines (eg allergic) they can at least be saved because the rest of the population is slow exposed and gets the vaccine so there's no carriers to infect others.
But he adds that caveat right here, he argues that if that does not occur the number is unchanged:
chaos0xomega wrote: The number of people that will die from coronavirus, in the absence of a vaccine or some effective cure or treatment is X.
X remaining unchanged is based on the what if of that situation. The 'what if' he is making to demonstrate that X can never increase, only decrease. He is not making the argument that lockdowns don't work to reduce X, he is arguing that in a worst case scenario you never get an increased X with a lockdown.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2020/05/27 18:04:40
Sorry for my spelling. I'm not a native speaker and a dyslexic.
1750 pts Blood Specters
2000 pts Imperial Fists
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
Tomb Kings 1500 points Sekhra (RIP)
This is just terrible logic and lack of understanding as to how things work. The number of people that will die from coronavirus, in the absence of a vaccine or some effective cure or treatment is X. Lockdowns do not change X, lockdowns change the time it takes to reach X. A lockdown will not increase the number of people who will die from coronavirus - ever - it will only kick those deaths further into the future, with the hope that they can ultimately be avoided by way of the development of a vaccine or treatment before those lottery numbers come up. The simple fact of the matter is that coronavirus will spread through a largely fixed percentage of the population before reaching a herd immunity burnout point regardless of a lockdown, no amount of xenomancer claiming otherwise will change that.
I don't think this is totally true, or coronavirus would not be putting any strain on health services, only morgues. I agree that lockdowns do not change the number of cases over time, only spreading those cases out.
However, to say there is no affect on the number of deaths implies that healthcare can do nothing to improve the chances of survival for someone with COVID-19, which I think is incorrect. By spreading out the number of cases at any one time, the death rate should be reduced compared to allowing them to just pile in unchecked, because the healthcare resources available to each individual case are greater.
This is most obvious in examples like the hard hit regions of Italy, where the healthcare system was overwhelmed, but even without being overwhelmed the available resources are going to be greater and the level of care will likely be somewhat superior if healthcare systems are further away form breaking point.
If there is no difference to the total number of deaths with a lockdown, then there is zero point in admitting COVID patients to hospital because you are essentially saying the death rate is the same regardless of the level of treatment received.
While what you said is true, the benefit of the lockdown is already factored in as most/all of the data collected assumes available treatment capacity. We haven't really seen the "true" death toll of coronavirus in the absence of healthcare intervention, because nobody has (yet) had their healthcare system cease functioning in its entirety. Even in Italy where the system was overwhelmed they were still able to maintain a basic level of treatment for the vast majority of patients - while there were preventable deaths as a result of the capacity strain it does not (based on the data I have seen) seem to have resulted in a statistically significant deviation from data collected elsewhere.
I think what you are saying is right- there is a base number that cannot be saved from COVID- which is X- and that lockdowns allow N more cases to be saved through functioning healthcare.
N is largely already factored into X. Our mortality rate/IFR is based on data collected in situations in which (most) patients receive treatment before dying, ergo we cannot really improve on that number, short of a full treatment/cure/vaccine, which is essentially a magic bullet that ends the entire situation and is essentially an external factor to the system in the scenario being described, rather than an internal factor.
Hence the lockdown doesn't really reduce X, unless said magic bullet is identified and utilized - but in that case its not the *lockdown* that is reducing X, its the vaccine or cure. While the lockdown may buy us time to achieve said vaccine/cure, its not a guarantee and not a direct effect of the lockdown itself (though there are strong correlations between the two, basically the longer the lockdown lasts the greater the probability of identifying/developing a vaccine becomes).
Considering the original comment was in support of lockdowns happening, I think it is important to be clear on why lockdowns can improve the situation.
The original comment - i.e. not my comment but the comment that I accused of terrible logic - was *not*, at least by my understanding, in support of lockdowns happening. My comment was in support of lockdowns.
I think the part he was replying to in that quote pyramid was this bit by Xenomancers:
Correct.
The mistake is that X can go down because through the lockdown medical know-how advances. Those who would have died on day 1 might not day on day 100 because of new drugs being used to combat it; because staff know the warning signs and what is going to happen better etc....
No, I addressed that in my post:
it will only kick those deaths further into the future, with the hope that they can ultimately be avoided by way of the development of a vaccine or treatment before those lottery numbers come up.
X remaining unchanged is based on the what if of that situation. The 'what if' he is making to demonstrate that X can never increase, only decrease. He is not making the argument that lockdowns don't work to reduce X, he is arguing that in a worst case scenario you never get an increased X with a lockdown.
This, thank you.
CoALabaer wrote: Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
chaos0xomega wrote: While what you said is true, the benefit of the lockdown is already factored in as most/all of the data collected assumes available treatment capacity. We haven't really seen the "true" death toll of coronavirus in the absence of healthcare intervention, because nobody has (yet) had their healthcare system cease functioning in its entirety. Even in Italy where the system was overwhelmed they were still able to maintain a basic level of treatment for the vast majority of patients - while there were preventable deaths as a result of the capacity strain it does not (based on the data I have seen) seem to have resulted in a statistically significant deviation from data collected elsewhere.
Ok, that is interesting, I was under the impression there were regions that had experienced notably higher death tolls after they'd hit a certain caseload.
It will be interesting to see if the differences are statistically significant once the whole thing has passed and we have a lot more data to compare to.
------
Having thought about it some more, I also totally ignored the morbidity caused by COVID- we will have to wait some time I would think to know what affect the case rate and health service stress has on long term sequelae for COVID survivors.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/27 19:33:22
ChargerIIC wrote: If algae farm paste with a little bit of your grandfather in it isn't Grimdark I don't know what is.
Disciple of Fate wrote: But he adds that caveat right here, he argues that if that does not occur the number is unchanged:
chaos0xomega wrote: The number of people that will die from coronavirus, in the absence of a vaccine or some effective cure or treatment is X.
X remaining unchanged is based on the what if of that situation. The 'what if' he is making to demonstrate that X can never increase, only decrease. He is not making the argument that lockdowns don't work to reduce X, he is arguing that in a worst case scenario you never get an increased X with a lockdown.
Which is false.
Virus needs an active carrier to spread disease. If you've been infected you can't be infected again. What is interesting about this virus is the people spreading the disease mostly and the ones dying from it aren't the same group of people. If you isolated the vulnerable (65+) for 1 month and allowed the non vulnerable to be exposed the virus would literally lose it's ability to spread quickly. 65+ people mostly are retired and live at home or in nursing homes it is fairly easy to execute this plan.
It's easy to miss how this would change X in this situation but I will explain it.
X essentially means number of vulnerable people exposed to the virus and a certain high % of them die. X goes down because the number of carriers over time goes down. Time increases your chance of being exposed to an active carrier because as time passes you come in contact with more people.
Lets say this unnamed 65 year old came in contact with 5 random people in a month but came in contact with 30 random people in 6 months. In my proposed plan the people the later 5 months are less likely to carry the virus because they have already been exposed. This in effect reduces X. When everyone goes on lock down you are not reducing the viruses chance to spread because you keep the potential carrier population large. Once you get to the point where each infected person does not average another infection - the virus dies in a few weeks.
This is how heard immunity works. It would be extremely effective against this virus to because the majority of people who are active and spread the virus will not die from it. Older people and sick people should isolate and protect themselves by all means. Forcing the non vulnerable to isolate literally kills people. ESP due to the fact most will be non symptomatic when they carry it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/27 19:48:04
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
Disciple of Fate wrote: But he adds that caveat right here, he argues that if that does not occur the number is unchanged:
chaos0xomega wrote: The number of people that will die from coronavirus, in the absence of a vaccine or some effective cure or treatment is X.
X remaining unchanged is based on the what if of that situation. The 'what if' he is making to demonstrate that X can never increase, only decrease. He is not making the argument that lockdowns don't work to reduce X, he is arguing that in a worst case scenario you never get an increased X with a lockdown.
Which is false.
Virus needs an active carrier to spread disease. If you've been infected you can't be infected again. What is interesting about this virus is the people spreading the disease mostly and the ones dying from it aren't the same group of people. If you isolated the vulnerable (65+) for 1 month and allowed the non vulnerable to be exposed the virus would literally lose it's ability to spread quickly. 65+ people mostly are retired and live at home or in nursing homes it is fairly easy to execute this plan.
It's easy to miss how this would change X in this situation but I will explain it.
X essentially means number of vulnerable people exposed to the virus and a certain high % of them die. X goes down because the number of carriers over time goes down. Time increases your chance of being exposed to an active carrier because as time passes you come in contact with more people.
Lets say this unnamed 65 year old came in contact with 5 random people in a month but came in contact with 30 random people in 6 months. In my proposed plan the people the later 5 months are less likely to carry the virus because they have already been exposed. This in effect reduces X. When everyone goes on lock down you are not reducing the viruses chance to spread because you keep the potential carrier population large. Once you get to the point where each infected person does not average another infection - the virus dies in a few weeks.
This is how heard immunity works. It would be extremely effective against this virus to because the majority of people who are active and spread the virus will not die from it. Older people and sick people should isolate and protect themselves by all means. Forcing the non vulnerable to isolate literally kills people. ESP due to the fact most will be non symptomatic when they carry it.
Sweden tried this. Sweden failed. It cost them many lives and is still costing them many lives.
Also, there are many conflicting reports about us gaining antibodies to fight off infection a second time. As far as the herd immunity, that mostly works because we have vaccines to back it up. To give us that immunity without having to risk infection. So, that is not how herd immunity works at all.
Heresy World Eaters/Emperors Children 
1750 pts Blood Specters
6000 pts Disciples of Fate
3500 pts Peridia Prime
2500 pts Prophets of Fate
Lizardmen 3000 points Tlaxcoatl Temple-City
