COVID-19/Coronavirus thread

[ptatc]

4 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

Most likely the airlines will have good insurance and just because 4 planes were crashed into buildings doesn’t mean we will have them all go bankrupt if they’re not bailed out repeatedly.

 

I mean, every business should have known that when we elected a completely unprepared executive branch they would replace the CDC leadership and then stick their heads in the sand during an outbreak because the numbers going up would make them look bad, that was just obvious.

The insurance would t be just for this reason. It would be for a variety of things that could cancel the festival, weather, bomb threats etc. That's the idea of insurance. Its for  political reasons. 

[caulfield12]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-airport-screeners-health-workers-045605071.html

[Dick Allen]

I wish they would re open the buster.

i do find it sad that many people are being led to believe that the only people this will really do anything to are the elderly and people with compromised systems. Yeah so what if it kills your grandparents. And the number of people who are walking around with compromised systems is a lot higher than the people who know they have compromised systems. Lies and spin don’t work now. It is time all people demand the truth.

Edited March 8, 2020 by Dick Allen

[ptatc]

1 hour ago, Dick Allen said:

I wish they would re open the buster.

i do find it sad that many people are being led to believe that the only people this will really do anything to are the elderly and people with compromised systems. Yeah so what if it kills your grandparents. And the number of people who are walking around with compromised systems is a lot higher than the people who know they have compromised systems. Lies and spin don’t work now. It is time all people demand the truth.

From what I've read and what they are reporting at the hospital, this is essential true for critical symptoms. Depending on which source you read between 75-85% of the cases are considered mild.  The number of people who contract it will he higher due to it being a new strain and no one will have antibodies in their system to fight it. People who are medically comprised as you stated are the most at risk for severe to critical symptoms. These can be age,cardiac, respiratory  conditions among them.

Have you seen sources that are reporting anything different?

[Dick Allen]

15 minutes ago, ptatc said:

From what I've read and what they are reporting at the hospital, this is essential true for critical symptoms. Depending on which source you read between 75-85% of the cases are considered mild.  The number of people who contract it will he higher due to it being a new strain and no one will have antibodies in their system to fight it. People who are medically comprised as you stated are the most at risk for severe to critical symptoms. These can be age,cardiac, respiratory  conditions among them.

Have you seen sources that are reporting anything different?

It’s the downplaying it like even if you catch it, you’ll be fine. Not all people who think they have no issues, actually have no issues.It is unfortunate politics is playing the biggest role with this. A self proclaimed germaphobe is downplaying this about as much as you can and not for the benefit of the people of this country.

Even if it doesn’t kill you, there is a good chance if you get it you will pass it on to someone. It may kill them or someone they pass it on to. 
I also hope everyone has some good insurance, because you are going to get gouged if you don’t.

Edited March 8, 2020 by Dick Allen

[ptatc]

1 minute ago, Dick Allen said:

It’s the downplaying it like even if you catch it, you’ll be fine. Not all people who think they have no issues, actually have no issues.It is unfortunate politics is playing the biggest role with this. A self proclaimed germaphobe is downplaying this about as much as you can and not for the benefit of the people of this country.

Most will be "fine" if you consider high fever, labored breath and having everything hurt like anyone who has had a true case of the flu. You wont die but it will feel like you want to.

[Dick Allen]

1 minute ago, ptatc said:

Most will be "fine" if you consider high fever, labored breath and having everything hurt like anyone who has had a true case of the flu. You wont die but it will feel like you want to.

But you will probably pass it on, and eventually it will kill someone, because it keeps going.

[ptatc]

2 hours ago, Dick Allen said:

But you will probably pass it on, and eventually it will kill someone, because it keeps going.

True. My point was that fine by their definition sucks.

[caulfield12]

The news about trying to suppress the CDC advice about elderly and those with preexisting conditions NOT taking commercial flights is disheartening.

And while it’s pretty unheard of for teenagers and twenty-somethings to die, there are/were plenty of deaths recorded here in their thirties or forties.

Dr. Li Wenliang, the whistleblowing doctor from our neighborhood, was only 33-34.

If I came back to the US, even with traveller’s insurance...I would quickly be at risk of a medical bankruptcy if I didn’t have enough savings.  Meanwhile, my soon to be 91 year old mother (w/ Alzheimer’s/dementia) is at an assisted living center in Iowa quite similar to the one in Kirkland.  If anything happened to her, I wouldn’t even be able to come home...because I would be quarantined for two additional weeks, even though I have already been asymptomatic for almost seven weeks, without having gone outside once yet. 
 

As noted, the biggest threat is not to any one individual...but quickly passing it on to 2-3 others, and there have been cases where 10-15 critical medical personnel got sick from just a single patient.

Edited March 9, 2020 by caulfield12

[mqr]

2 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

even though I have already been asymptomatic for almost seven weeks, without having gone outside once yet.

Did you have it?

[Jack Parkman]

I'm not particularly worried about this, but maybe I should be. 

It could be simply that it could be much worse than we all think because HCW are going to be dropping like flies(getting sick and not necessarily dying) and there simply isn't enough infrastructure in place to handle what's about to happen. 

It literally seems like the only way to stop the spread of this thing is to shut everything down. 

Edited March 9, 2020 by Jack Parkman

[caulfield12]

9 hours ago, mqr said:

Did you have it?

Nope.  But at least I would have gotten decent food in the hospital.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/08/politics/coronavirus-washington-nursing-home-life-care-center-kirkland-cnntv/index.html

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-coronavirus-proves-enemy-cant-121123555.html

Edited March 9, 2020 by caulfield12

[Jenksismyhero]

We're headed towards a full on global recession thanks to the mass hysteria over a virus that may end up being less lethal than the common flu. Insane. 

Edited March 9, 2020 by Jenksismyhero

[Balta1701]

6 minutes ago, Jenksismyhero said:

We're headed towards a full on global recession thanks to the mass hysteria over a virus that may end up being less lethal than the common flu. Insane. 

The only way this is less lethal than the flu is due to appropriate application of mass hysteria.

[caulfield12]

18 minutes ago, Jenksismyhero said:

We're headed towards a full on global recession thanks to the mass hysteria over a virus that may end up being less lethal than the common flu. Insane. 

The common flu typically runs at a mortality rate of 1/10th of 1%.

The coronavirus has been running at 3-4% consistently here in Wuhan.   If we were as effective as South Korea and Singapore, it MIGHT be closer to 1%.  But we can’t come close to getting a handle on it without testing and isolating clusters and Patient Zeros in each outbreak area.

The numbers in the US are going to be similar to Italy...because of the pressure to work even when ill and the lack of people willing to risk not being charged $1400 USD per test, not to mention attendant hospitalization, which won’t be covered under many health care policies.   Keep in mind, they take two swabs, so two tests and that’s over the course of 2-3 weeks if someone is hospitalized, so that’s a minimum of 5-6 tests over the course of treatment, plus meds.

 

You can argue the denominator (deaths/total verified infections) should be lower due to limited testing, but then 12-14 already died at Kirkland before they could even be tested, so you quickly go from 22 to 34-36 deaths in a simple ststistical adjustment.   You had 3 staffers trying to save 90 elderly because everyone working there was suck or afraid to get sick and expose their family.

 

1) There is no vaccine and won’t be for 12-18 months

2) The average person gives it to 2.6 others

3) Asymptomatic transmission...and potential to get sick again or infect others even with negative or inconclusive tests

4) Transmission can occur over a 14-23 day period

 5) Spread was 4X the rate of SARs in 2002-2003

Edited March 9, 2020 by caulfield12

[Jenksismyhero]

I'm no expert and you've been living in it/reading about it far more than me, but if we have basically no idea how many are infected, with no symptoms or even mild symptoms, any guess as to the actual mortality rate is just that - a guess. Maybe the Wuhan numbers are more reliable, but those stats are still coming from the Chinese government. Not the most trustworthy source. 

I'm not suggesting we act like our asinine President and pretend this thing doesn't exist. But at the same time, shutting down society is a mass-hysteria response that isn't very reasonable. The media hyping this thing up doesn't help either. 

[Jack Parkman]

19 minutes ago, Jenksismyhero said:

I'm no expert and you've been living in it/reading about it far more than me, but if we have basically no idea how many are infected, with no symptoms or even mild symptoms, any guess as to the actual mortality rate is just that - a guess. Maybe the Wuhan numbers are more reliable, but those stats are still coming from the Chinese government. Not the most trustworthy source. 

I'm not suggesting we act like our asinine President and pretend this thing doesn't exist. But at the same time, shutting down society is a mass-hysteria response that isn't very reasonable. The media hyping this thing up doesn't help either. 

Honestly, if they want to contain this thing shutting down society is literally the only way to do it. This thing is in the same virus family as the common cold. Think about how easy it is to get and transmit the cold......and then apply it to something that is probably killing 1-2% of the people that it's infecting. 

If people continue living their lives as normal, this is going to get really bad. Honestly, they should probably shut down major metro areas tomorrow if they want to kill this thing. It's too easily transmissible to not do that. 

If they don't, then more people are going to die than otherwise would, and not just from the coronavirus. This has the potential to overload the healthcare system to the point where there aren't enough healthcare workers to help all of the people who are sick, with any life-threatening ailment whatsoever. 

 

Edited March 9, 2020 by Jack Parkman

[caulfield12]

7 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Honestly, if they want to contain this thing shutting down society is literally the only way to do it. This thing is in the same virus family as the common cold. Think about how easy it is to get and transmit the cold......and then apply it to something that is probably killing 1-2% of the people that it's infecting. 

If people continue living their lives as normal, this is going to get really bad. Honestly, they should probably shut down major metro areas tomorrow if they want to kill this thing. It's too easily transmissible to not do that. 

 

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3074351/coronavirus-can-travel-twice-far-official-safe-distance-and-stay
 

The actual rates for the entire world are 3.5-5.9% (deaths/recovered plus deaths for the higher range, lower ranges is deaths/total cases.)  Even if you go with 3%, that still 30x more dangerous the flu.

 

The coronavirus that causes Covid-19 can linger in the air for at least 30 minutes and travel up to 4.5 metres – further than the “safe distance” advised by health authorities around the world, according to a study by a team of Chinese government epidemiologists.

The researchers also found that it can last for days on surfaces where respiratory droplets land, raising the risk of transmission if an unsuspecting person touches it and then rubs their face and hands.

[Jenksismyhero]

14 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Honestly, if they want to contain this thing shutting down society is literally the only way to do it. This thing is in the same virus family as the common cold. Think about how easy it is to get and transmit the cold......and then apply it to something that is probably killing 1-2% of the people that it's infecting. 

If people continue living their lives as normal, this is going to get really bad. Honestly, they should probably shut down major metro areas tomorrow if they want to kill this thing. It's too easily transmissible to not do that. 

If they don't, then more people are going to die than otherwise would, and not just from the coronavirus. This has the potential to overload the healthcare system to the point where there aren't enough healthcare workers to help all of the people who are sick, with any life-threatening ailment whatsoever. 

 

Shutting down society for weeks on end would destroy the world economically, causing more poverty, death and destruction.

[Balta1701]

29 minutes ago, Jenksismyhero said:

I'm no expert and you've been living in it/reading about it far more than me, but if we have basically no idea how many are infected, with no symptoms or even mild symptoms, any guess as to the actual mortality rate is just that - a guess. Maybe the Wuhan numbers are more reliable, but those stats are still coming from the Chinese government. Not the most trustworthy source. 

I'm not suggesting we act like our asinine President and pretend this thing doesn't exist. But at the same time, shutting down society is a mass-hysteria response that isn't very reasonable. The media hyping this thing up doesn't help either. 

No, it's actually not a guess, because by accident we have a controlled test study. The Diamond Princess cruise ship was tested heavily by countries other than us so in general we know the infection rate - it was about 700 people. There were 7 reported deaths from that cruise ship, with heavy intervention and full availability of medical care.

It might be able to be a little better if you have a less-at-risk population, it could definitely be a lot higher if you run out of medical supplies or hospital beds, but that's a plausibly randomized test study.

[Jenksismyhero]

6 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3074351/coronavirus-can-travel-twice-far-official-safe-distance-and-stay
 

The actual rates for the entire world are 3.5-5.9% (deaths/recovered plus deaths for the higher range, lower ranges is deaths/total cases.)  Even if you go with 3%, that still 30x more dangerous the flu.

 

The coronavirus that causes Covid-19 can linger in the air for at least 30 minutes and travel up to 4.5 metres – further than the “safe distance” advised by health authorities around the world, according to a study by a team of Chinese government epidemiologists.

The researchers also found that it can last for days on surfaces where respiratory droplets land, raising the risk of transmission if an unsuspecting person touches it and then rubs their face and hands.

Most articles i've read says the 3% figure is vastly overestimated. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-06/coronavirus-s-true-lethal-power-still-eludes-disease-experts

Again, the problem is we have no idea what the actual number of infected is, so you can't base mortality rates on only the "known" figure. Even the cruise ship petri dish that we have has a rate of .08% and who knows what kind of medical treatment those people got/are getting.

[Jenksismyhero]

5 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

No, it's actually not a guess, because by accident we have a controlled test study. The Diamond Princess cruise ship was tested heavily by countries other than us so in general we know the infection rate - it was about 700 people. There were 7 reported deaths from that cruise ship, with heavy intervention and full availability of medical care.

It might be able to be a little better if you have a less-at-risk population, it could definitely be a lot higher if you run out of medical supplies or hospital beds, but that's a plausibly randomized test study.

Whats the demographics of the ship? Is it a true representation of the US and other countries globally? Does it have more elderly people (it's a cruise ship, so probably) than the overall population? Were other illnesses going around (again, it's a cruise ship) making people more susceptible to infection? What kind of care are these people given? Is there something more they could have been given in a hospital that isn't available on a ship?

It may well end up being an accurate test study, but it's too premature to say that it is right now. And let's assume it's accurate - that's basically the absolute worst case scenario given the conditions (the confined space of a cruise ship).

[Balta1701]

7 minutes ago, Jenksismyhero said:

Most articles i've read says the 3% figure is vastly overestimated. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-06/coronavirus-s-true-lethal-power-still-eludes-disease-experts

Again, the problem is we have no idea what the actual number of infected is, so you can't base mortality rates on only the "known" figure. Even the cruise ship petri dish that we have has a rate of .08% and who knows what kind of medical treatment those people got/are getting.

This is completely false. 7 people died.  Even if all 3700 people on board were infected, the rate would have been 0.18%, and that ship was tested heavily.

[Jenksismyhero]

sorry, i meant to type .8%. Still way less than 3-5%.

[Balta1701]

Just now, Jenksismyhero said:

Whats the demographics of the ship? Is it a true representation of the US and other countries globally? Does it have more elderly people (it's a cruise ship, so probably) than the overall population? Were other illnesses going around (again, it's a cruise ship) making people more susceptible to infection? What kind of care are these people given? Is there something more they could have been given in a hospital that isn't available on a ship?

It may well end up being an accurate test study, but it's too premature to say that it is right now. And let's assume it's accurate - that's basically the absolute worst case scenario given the conditions (the confined space of a cruise ship).

No it really isn't. It was a confined space, but once lots of people got sick there was rapid intervention and plenty of available medical supplies. That's why we're coming down on you right now - because there are far worse case scenarios building right now.