COVID-19/Coronavirus thread

[Jerksticks]

54 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/man-coronavirus-had-flu-aint-never-felt-bad-222431727.html

 

Seems like a pretty common frustrating experience....from comments on this particular story.

My 3 year old has had high fevers for 4 days now. We took him to the emergency room and they tested for all flu, and other common coronavirus strains. I took him back to his regular doctor yesterday and asked could he have the covid-19? The doctor said yes he could but they weren't going to test him. They said it's already in the community, it's too late. Now they only test the hospitalized to and only to determine a course of care. I said, but I'm a school teacher, what if I'm exposed and expose others? But they wouldn't budge, wouldn't test him. Meanwhile my little one is still really sick and we have no idea what's going on...

Hang in there man- I hope today is a better day for your little one

[Jenksismyhero]

So, we're canceling/postponing all of these things....how long do we expect this to last? Until a vaccine is created? Which could be 6, 8, 12 months away? This doesn't seem like a workable solution long term. And I still think the economic impact and resulting poverty of shutting down society for 6+ months may be worse than the 1-3% mortality rate that's been discussed.

Anyone catch Joe Rogan's podcast yesterday? He had a top infectious disease doctor on who said something interesting...basically the only real way to stop the spread of this thing is to wait until a large number of people have been exposed/infected. The vast majority of people will build their own immunity to it, and then the infection won't spread anymore. But, that obviously comes with a big cost. 

Not a lot of good options here...

[bmags]

15 minutes ago, Jenksismyhero said:

So, we're canceling/postponing all of these things....how long do we expect this to last? Until a vaccine is created? Which could be 6, 8, 12 months away? This doesn't seem like a workable solution long term. And I still think the economic impact and resulting poverty of shutting down society for 6+ months may be worse than the 1-3% mortality rate that's been discussed.

Anyone catch Joe Rogan's podcast yesterday? He had a top infectious disease doctor on who said something interesting...basically the only real way to stop the spread of this thing is to wait until a large number of people have been exposed/infected. The vast majority of people will build their own immunity to it, and then the infection won't spread anymore. But, that obviously comes with a big cost. 

Not a lot of good options here...

But the point is to slow down the spread to not overwhelm the medical infrastructure.

They aren't advocating permanent shut-in, just that we reduce the current trajectory to allow capacity to build up, testing to build up so that it can be handled.

This isn't going to cure it. Even a vaccine won't cure it, just make it manageable within society.

[he gone.]

Everything follows a pattern here ... 

 

Look to Italy and you'll see what's going to happen in the US. We're just starting the freak out phase. Sports canceled, by Monday/Tuesday you'll see schools canceled for the rest of the year or at least through April/mid-May. Then you'll see travel restrictions throughout the US - so no planes, no traveling -- not just to Europe and international, but around the US. Then about 2 weeks from now you'll see a mandated shut down of all businesses except for grocery stores and pharmacies, etc. This is going to be a shut down through mid-May is my guess. Self-quarantine. I've been to O'Hare and just got back from Vegas for a convention and my company is having us self-quarantine for the next 10 days (at-least). It's about to ratchet up and get real in the US - we've just entered the twilight zone -- and it's only going to get more weird from here. Even myself I'm not sure if i have it -- both my wife and I have been traveling a lot and we're both sick with some sort of flu - fevers, the dry cough you here about, very achy ...  who knows if i have it, not much you can do - i won't be able to get a test - so for now it's just locking down in my house to protect others. i'm personally not concerned - but concerned about the spread to others.

 

The thing I can't stand is when people are like "the flu kills more people" ... and that's the problem with having a president like we do ... politics aside - because that's not what this is about -- his job is to be the PR for the US. Dividing people around a pandemic is not the way to do it. This is actually very serious ... maybe not for 20-60 year olds ... but for others. It's not about how bad Corona is for me or you, it's about curving the spread so that it doesn't get wild. The hospitals aren't equipped for this. We don't have the space or the staff. So it's not about that - self quarantine is about curving the spread. Ultimately there will be a vaccine. Ultimately this will subside, but it's going to be a wild next 6 weeks here and around the world. The ripple effect of companies, supply chains, servicing of debt, jobs, mortgages, etc etc etc. is going to take a LONG time to unravel. We built an economy on extensive leverage that was very suspectible -- almost like a 75 year old with pre-existing conditions - and the Coronavirus is exposing it. There's going to be massive government intervention for this - but ultimately it's thing people arent even thinking about that are going to really creep up over teh next few years because of this ... pension returns, further erosion of the dollar, negative interest rates, etc etc. we're in the upside down world now. 

[StrangeSox]

Yeah the goal is to "Flatten the curve."

We're, what, 6-10 days behind the Italian curve and on an identical trajectory so far? They've run out of hospital beds. That's when you'll see mortality rates climb. And Jenks, 1-3% mortality on an estimated 70-150M infected in this country alone is....millions of dead people in a year. Low end, 1% mortality at 70M is still 700,000 people. If we hit the higher end, 150M and 3%, that is 4,500,000 Americans dead. 

 

Cross your fingers, pray, whatever that things don't get this bad here:

 

Edited March 12, 2020 by StrangeSox

[Balta1701]

27 minutes ago, Jenksismyhero said:

So, we're canceling/postponing all of these things....how long do we expect this to last? Until a vaccine is created? Which could be 6, 8, 12 months away? This doesn't seem like a workable solution long term. And I still think the economic impact and resulting poverty of shutting down society for 6+ months may be worse than the 1-3% mortality rate that's been discussed.

Anyone catch Joe Rogan's podcast yesterday? He had a top infectious disease doctor on who said something interesting...basically the only real way to stop the spread of this thing is to wait until a large number of people have been exposed/infected. The vast majority of people will build their own immunity to it, and then the infection won't spread anymore. But, that obviously comes with a big cost. 

Not a lot of good options here...

The short answer is we dont' know. A vaccine is an 18 month proposition. And while maintaining these measures long-term doesn't seem like an option, neither does having to burn bodies because there is no place to dispose of them. According to the Wall Street Journal, the death rate in Lombardy, Italy is currently standing around 5%. There's probably some asymptomatic people that they're missing, but that's what happens when the hospitals are swamped. 

Worries about 6 months down the road, or an economic stimulus package - all of those are completely the wrong worry right now. To use the appropriate metaphor, when a person has been shot, you don't worry about the infection they may develop a couple days down the road - you deal with the fact that they're bleeding to death.

Watch what is happening in Wuhan. They shut the area down for nearly 2 months. They are gradually starting to reopen factories right now, which will probably trigger other transmission and infection. But, if they keep it at a manageable rate, then the death rate stays down.

We may get lucky and get a reprieve from heat in the summer, but we don't know enough about the bug to say yet. There have also been some unconfirmed reports of people in China getting sick more than once, which could imply that building immunity might be difficult as different strands start to circulate.

There's a reason the stock market plummets every time we get a speech about the economic part of it, because no one wants to hear about that or care about it. That part doesn't matter until you stop the bleeding. Right now, the number of cases is doubling every couple days. We already know that some areas are about to be swamped by cases infected this week, we can't let the whole country have that happen.

[Jenksismyhero]

I get what you're saying and think it's a good practice, but it's also going to have to be over the next year that we do this...really until a vaccine is found and made readily available. It's not just do it for 60 days and then go back to normal, otherwise you just re-open the possibility of a mass infection again. This expert on the podcast was saying that even in China, once the quarantine restrictions are lifted, there's going to be another round of infections. 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

1 minute ago, Jenksismyhero said:

I get what you're saying and think it's a good practice, but it's also going to have to be over the next year that we do this...really until a vaccine is found and made readily available. It's not just do it for 60 days and then go back to normal, otherwise you just re-open the possibility of a mass infection again. This expert on the podcast was saying that even in China, once the quarantine restrictions are lifted, there's going to be another round of infections. 

If you slow the spread right now, significantly, over a three week period you have flattened the curve and spread out the cases over a long enough period of time for the healthcare system to manage it. 

The governement is better off shutting everything down for 2-3 weeks, taking the substantial financial loss that comes with that, and then reopening after the layoff to start the recovery sooner. By delaying action, all you're doing is spreading the losses out over a longer period of time and delaying the recovery. 

[ptatc]

18 minutes ago, bmags said:

But the point is to slow down the spread to not overwhelm the medical infrastructure.

They aren't advocating permanent shut-in, just that we reduce the current trajectory to allow capacity to build up, testing to build up so that it can be handled.

This isn't going to cure it. Even a vaccine won't cure it, just make it manageable within society.

Exactly. There's no way to stop the spreading but taking measures to slow it down and keep it from the most vulnerable population is the goal. It will run its course and in the future will be handled similar to influenza. There will be vaccines, some will get it, some won't . I don't think it will be a "required" one such as meningitis, TDAP and such.

[Jenksismyhero]

2 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

The short answer is we dont' know. A vaccine is an 18 month proposition. And while maintaining these measures long-term doesn't seem like an option, neither does having to burn bodies because there is no place to dispose of them. According to the Wall Street Journal, the death rate in Lombardy, Italy is currently standing around 5%. There's probably some asymptomatic people that they're missing, but that's what happens when the hospitals are swamped. 

Worries about 6 months down the road, or an economic stimulus package - all of those are completely the wrong worry right now. To use the appropriate metaphor, when a person has been shot, you don't worry about the infection they may develop a couple days down the road - you deal with the fact that they're bleeding to death.

Watch what is happening in Wuhan. They shut the area down for nearly 2 months. They are gradually starting to reopen factories right now, which will probably trigger other transmission and infection. But, if they keep it at a manageable rate, then the death rate stays down.

We may get lucky and get a reprieve from heat in the summer, but we don't know enough about the bug to say yet. There have also been some unconfirmed reports of people in China getting sick more than once, which could imply that building immunity might be difficult as different strands start to circulate.

There's a reason the stock market plummets every time we get a speech about the economic part of it, because no one wants to hear about that or care about it. That part doesn't matter until you stop the bleeding. Right now, the number of cases is doubling every couple days. We already know that some areas are about to be swamped by cases infected this week, we can't let the whole country have that happen.

Yeah this expert said this is probably wishful thinking. MERS was a coronavirus that spread easily in the heat of the desert. There's been no study suggesting that heat or seasonal changes have any affect. 

 

[he gone.]

It's just a matter of time until the government steps in and shuts down the stock market.. not the 7, 13, 20% temporary shut downs.. like several week suspension of trade. 

[Balta1701]

1 minute ago, Jenksismyhero said:

Yeah this expert said this is probably wishful thinking. MERS was a coronavirus that spread easily in the heat of the desert. There's been no study suggesting that heat or seasonal changes have any affect. 

 

Now I have to wonder about this guy's expertise. Yes, MERS was a coronavirus that didn't show strong seasonality, but a type of coronavirus can cause the common cold and that has a strong seasonality to it. So the correct answer is "we don't know but we can hope". 

[ptatc]

1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

If you slow the spread right now, significantly, over a three week period you have flattened the curve and spread out the cases over a long enough period of time for the healthcare system to manage it. 

The governement is better off shutting everything down for 2-3 weeks, taking the substantial financial loss that comes with that, and then reopening after the layoff to start the recovery sooner. By delaying action, all you're doing is spreading the losses out over a longer period of time and delaying the recovery. 

I think it would be better in the second scenario. totally shutting everything down will not totally stop it either so its better to keep things going with limiting large groups and taking precautions.

[Balta1701]

3 minutes ago, ptatc said:

I think it would be better in the second scenario. totally shutting everything down will not totally stop it either so its better to keep things going with limiting large groups and taking precautions.

this is what was done in Italy and we already know it completely failed.

[Jenksismyhero]

12 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Now I have to wonder about this guy's expertise. Yes, MERS was a coronavirus that didn't show strong seasonality, but a type of coronavirus can cause the common cold and that has a strong seasonality to it. So the correct answer is "we don't know but we can hope". 

I dunno, seems to be well credentialed. 

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/about-us/cidrap-staff/michael-t-osterholm-phd-mph

[Jenksismyhero]

3 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

 

 

It was also done in China and seems to have been successful though, right?

 

I brought this up the other day - do we really trust anything the Chinese government reports?

[Jack Parkman]

1 minute ago, Jenksismyhero said:

I brought this up the other day - do we really trust anything the Chinese government reports?

Yeah, especially because their coverup led to this clusterfuck in the first place. 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

13 minutes ago, ptatc said:

I think it would be better in the second scenario. totally shutting everything down will not totally stop it either so its better to keep things going with limiting large groups and taking precautions.

The key, as you know, is to flatten the curve. If you decrease the amount of people in public by 80%, you are flattening the curve enough to slow the spread and contain the overworking of hospitals. 

By taking some measures but not all, you aren't doing enough to flatten the curve but the economic impact is just as great if not greater. 

[ptatc]

7 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

this is what was done in Italy and we already know it completely failed.

Different scenarios. This country is far more spread out and can handle it more efficiently. Plus, so far Italy is the only one that has had the issue.

[Jack Parkman]

I don't sound like an idiot or alarmist anymore for suggesting a shutdown days ago now, do I? 

They're continuing to be reactive and that's no good. 

[StrangeSox]

I could be wrong but I think there are ways to independently verify the claims about infection spread and deaths to at least some degree of certainty, and the larger epidemiological community seems to agree that the spread really has slowed significantly in China (and SK, who is testing like crazy).

I don't think we could even accomplish a Wuhan-level lockdown in this country, though.

1 minute ago, ptatc said:

Different scenarios. This country is far more spread out and can handle it more efficiently. Plus, so far Italy is the only one that has had the issue.

How can we handle it more efficiently?

[ptatc]

Just now, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

The key, as you know, is to flatten the curve. If you decrease the amount of people in public by 80%, you are flattening the curve enough to slow the spread and contain the overworking of hospitals. 

By taking some measures but not all, you aren't doing enough to flatten the curve but the economic impact is just as great if not greater. 

This is the goal and everyone is educated guessing on how to do it. I don't think there would be a significant enough difference between the 2. 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

1 minute ago, ptatc said:

Different scenarios. This country is far more spread out and can handle it more efficiently. Plus, so far Italy is the only one that has had the issue.

This 100% is not true.

Italy is one of the only countries testing in mass; the USA has administered 5000 tests total. The US outbreak is likely really bad, but because the country is spread out a lot of communities don't see it first hand yet. 

[ptatc]

Just now, StrangeSox said:

I could be wrong but I think there are ways to independently verify the claims about infection spread and deaths to at least some degree of certainty, and the larger epidemiological community seems to agree that the spread really has slowed significantly in China (and SK, who is testing like crazy).

I don't think we could even accomplish a Wuhan-level lockdown in this country, though.

How can we handle it more efficiently?

By being further a part and having an easier time of it spreading from place to place. In many of the other countries the population is so dense everywhere. The US is spread out pretty well. It will make it easier to keep from spreading.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

1 minute ago, ptatc said:

This is the goal and everyone is educated guessing on how to do it. I don't think there would be a significant enough difference between the 2. 

Fair enough; from most statistical models I've seen, a 2-3 week shutdown would be incredibly beneficial by reducing the public interactions by nearly 80%.