Page 6 of 15 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415 LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 288

Thread: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

  1. #101
    ggggtotalwarrior's Avatar hey it geg
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    5,200

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    I honestly think we’re going to see waves of this in terms of deaths/infections/etc. in countries that aren’t clearly lying about their information like China has. Look at what China did trying to open up certain public industries only to close them a day later because it was clear things were still absolute despite the government maintaining that things were much better. Economic pressure and people/governments trying to force a premature return to public life when the virus starts to slow down but hasn’t been completely eradicated will give us at least a second or third wind of renewed increased infection rates IMO. People are so desperate to pretend things are alright that they’ll get complacent, or think that if they haven’t been infected yet they never will be and they will start to take risks before we are out of the clear.
    Rep me and I'll rep you back.

    UNDER THE PATRONAGE OF THE KING POSTER AKAR

  2. #102
    Ludicus's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    13,065

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    , factor is hospitalization rate... A disease can not be measured simply by how many people it kills.
    Yep. As I said before, and as the Imperial College study has pointed out, suppression prevents health systems from being overwhelmed. That's what we are trying to doing right now. One thing is certain, all advanced economies will suffer a deep recession.Anyway, I'm not an economist.
    A final word.
    My "dolce far niente" is becoming to an end after a close contact with an infected nurse. I'm emerging from my 14 days quarantine. As far as I know, we have 4 colleagues under intensive care treatment, and 140 in quarantine. This is really nothing, compared to Spain, Italy or the US- for now. I don't work inside our ICU. Anyway, we have stopped doing elective surgeries-when possible (in my case, microsurgery), to preserve beds...waiting for the tsunami.
    See you in a few days.Stay at home, behave properly, don't kill each other, life is too short. (j/k)
    Il y a quelque chose de pire que d'avoir une âme perverse. C’est d'avoir une âme habituée
    Charles Péguy

    Every human society must justify its inequalities: reasons must be found because, without them, the whole political and social edifice is in danger of collapsing”.
    Thomas Piketty

  3. #103

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ludicus View Post
    Yep. As I said before, and as the Imperial College study has pointed out, suppression prevents health systems from being overwhelmed. That's what we are trying to doing right now. One thing is certain, all advanced economies will suffer a deep recession.Anyway, I'm not an economist.
    A final word.
    My "dolce far niente" is becoming to an end after a close contact with an infected nurse. I'm emerging from my 14 days quarantine. As far as I know, we have 4 colleagues under intensive care treatment, and 140 in quarantine. This is really nothing, compared to Spain, Italy or the US- for now. I don't work inside our ICU. Anyway, we have stopped doing elective surgeries-when possible (in my case, microsurgery), to preserve beds...waiting for the tsunami.
    See you in a few days.Stay at home, behave properly, don't kill each other, life is too short. (j/k)
    But is that really all true? My personal experience has been the US states that practice extreme isolation measures are no better of than states that don't, in fact they are worse off. The state of Michigan did not become the 3rd leading state for coronavirusncases until after the strngent stay at home procedures were implemented. In fact the states with the most stringent controls are the states with the highest number of coronavirus cases. I have seen no real scientific evidence that really proves all these shutdowns work. Do closng all the museums.and libraries really stem the spread of the virus? So far I from what I have seen is no.

  4. #104
    antaeus's Avatar Cool and normal
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cool and normal
    Posts
    5,419

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    But is that really all true? My personal experience has been the US states that practice extreme isolation measures are no better of than states that don't, in fact they are worse off. The state of Michigan did not become the 3rd leading state for coronavirusncases until after the strngent stay at home procedures were implemented. In fact the states with the most stringent controls are the states with the highest number of coronavirus cases. I have seen no real scientific evidence that really proves all these shutdowns work. Do closng all the museums.and libraries really stem the spread of the virus? So far I from what I have seen is no.
    You're forgetting to account for incubation periods. Often shut-downs occur in response to an escalation in case numbers. But because there's an incubation period of weeks, it can take 2 to 3 weeks before evidence measures are working emerges. For example we're only starting to see evidence that Italy's shut down is working now, 3 weeks after it happened.

    Combine this with less stringent and flawed testing in the US, means you're not going to see things flatten off even in the strictest states or cities for a few weeks yet.

  5. #105
    Stario's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Not the CCCP
    Posts
    2,042

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    With COVID19 the price is much steeper compared to flu. When you're comparing COVID19 numbers with flu numbers keep in mind that you're not comparing average or per capita numbers. You're comparing 12 months long data with a month long data.
    Covid-19 has been around since Oct-Nov 2019 (that's 5-6 months) yet its nowhere near the rate of Influenza about 3 to 5 million cases per year of severe illness; around 290,000 to 650, 000 deaths.

    We also know a countries GDP affects health outcomes; there is the real possibility that many people will die as a result of the economy crashing on top of what were already seeing :-<

    We should isolate the over 70's. They have v. high risk- reports from S. Korea suggest over 70's have near 10% mortality rate as opposed to 30-40s group which is running at around 0.1% mortality rate; and the under 20's which is even lower -about 14 days ago reports from S.Korea claimed -0 deaths teens and 20s -(assume here probably under reported- even though seems the risks for healthy under 20's is negligible).
    With that said I also think we should end these draconian 'lock-downs' for the rest of the population (under 60's)/ open business, but keep ban on travel, encourage everyone to take the precautions- hand washing + wearing of face masks in public, encourage those that have recovered to donate blood for use to treat the vulnerable etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ludicus
    to preserve beds...waiting for the tsunami.
    We are still at beginning only just over 5k cases/ 24 deaths (10% of all cases nationally from the Ruby Princess cruise ship alone), bit of a double standard -draconian laws that keep us all locked up/crash the economy, but then the gov goes and does this- these incompetent politicians cannot be trusted IMO.
    Just over 7k ventilators in the next few days. Problem is not enough staff than can use them. So the government has rolled out a national wide training program to get more staff trained. Otherwise all those ventilators will be 'collecting dust' if there is lack of staff that knows how to use them :-<

    Out of curiosity did you get your viral swabs? were you positive for Codiv?

    Quote Originally Posted by antaeus
    You're forgetting to account for incubation periods. Often shut-downs occur in response to an escalation in case numbers. But because there's an incubation period of weeks, it can take 2 to 3 weeks before evidence measures are working emerges. For example we're only starting to see evidence that Italy's shut down is working now, 3 weeks after it happened.
    S. Korea never went into lock-down & they have totally "flatten the curve" more than any other country infact. This show a total 'lock-down' /closing business & 'killing' the economy is not necessary.

    "Behind its success so far has been the most expansive and well-organized testing program in the world, combined with extensive efforts to isolate infected people and trace and quarantine their contacts. South Korea has tested more than 270,000 people, which amounts to more than 5200 tests per million inhabitants—more than any other country except tiny Bahrain. The United States has so far carried out 74 tests per 1 million inhabitants, data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show."

    This is a also a big problem when you only carry out 74 tests per 1 million people such as the US (and missing 99.9% of your population) you really skew your CFR % -in fact it becomes much higher if you only test those 10 patients that happen top get admitted to hospital- if one patient happens to die- u now have a 10% CFR; if 2 happen to get admitted to ICU you now have a scary 20% ICU admission rate.

    But reality if you test the other 99% of your population things would become far less scarier. In the current scenario in the US you are only seeing 0.1% of the cases -most likely also the worst cases- as most people don't come to hospital unless they a feeling fairly 'crook', while the other 99% of the population are undetected (moist likely because most of them are asymptomatic or only show mild symptoms so they don't bother getting tested- and are therefore left out from the CFR % , ICU admission etc. statistics).

    Its like when a lay-person walks into an oncology ward & says 'everyone here in their 40's has cancer" or walking into a Dementia Ward and saying "look at how young these patients are, the majority are in their 60's and all have advanced dementia". See here the lay-person is only seeing the tip of the ice-berg. While the reality is that the majority of 40s, 50s, 60s, even 70s year olds are living a normal healthy life without cancer and/or dementia.
    Last edited by Stario; April 02, 2020 at 10:13 AM.

  6. #106

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Stario View Post
    Covid-19 has been around since Oct-Nov 2019 (that's 5-6 months) yet its nowhere near the rate of Influenza about 3 to 5 million cases per year of severe illness; around 290,000 to 650, 000 deaths.

    We also know a countries GDP affects health outcomes; there is the real possibility that many people will die as a result of the economy crashing on top of what were already seeing :-<

    We should isolate the over 70's. They have v. high risk- reports from S. Korea suggest over 70's have near 10% mortality rate as opposed to 30-40s group which is running at around 0.1% mortality rate; and the under 20's which is even lower -about 14 days ago reports from S.Korea claimed -0 deaths teens and 20s -(assume here probably under reported- even though seems the risks for healthy under 20's is negligible).
    With that said I also think we should end these draconian 'lock-downs' for the rest of the population (under 60's)/ open business, but keep ban on travel, encourage everyone to take the precautions- hand washing + wearing of face masks in public, encourage those that have recovered to donate blood for use to treat the vulnerable etc.
    You can't compare the beginning of an outbreak with an ongoing outbreak. You need to set your time frames right. Plus, you need to get your factors right. You're giving flu numbers at a setting without any precautions. COVID on the other hand is ramping up numbers despite extreme precautions. If you treat COVID as regular flu your healthcare system will collapse as it's already strained.

    If you keep relaxed measures you're merely prolonging the outbreak and hurting the economy for a much longer period.
    The Armenian Issue

  7. #107
    Stario's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Not the CCCP
    Posts
    2,042

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    You can't compare the beginning of an outbreak with an ongoing outbreak. You need to set your time frames right. Plus, you need to get your factors right. You're giving flu numbers at a setting without any precautions. COVID on the other hand is ramping up numbers despite extreme precautions. If you treat COVID as regular flu your healthcare system will collapse as it's already strained.

    If you keep relaxed measures you're merely prolonging the outbreak and hurting the economy for a much longer period.
    I generally disagree with your statement. Firstly, no one is arguing you don't take precautions- we should still encourage such things as good hand-washing, wearing of face mask while in public etc. Secondly, I agree on travel bans also. But the lock-down of business/economy & all individuals (no matter what age/individuals of low risk etc), will cause a bigger problem. It took most economies around 7 years to recover for last GFC.


    Lest use S/Korea as example- S. Korea NEVER went into forced lock-down- kept mainly 'relaxed measures' & they have totally "flatten the curve" more than any other country in fact. This shows an imposed 'lock-down' /closing of business & 'killing' the economy is not necessary.

    I also feel its precisely the opposite, if you relax measures you should in fact speed up infection therefore reach herd immunity quicker as the virus burns itself out-as majority of the population become immune- since 80% of people don't need hospitalisation you would focus on isolating the 20% deemed at risk to 'flatten the curve' (rather than 'blanket lock-downs & closing of business' approach, but rather specific lock-downs - i.e those over 60 and/or individuals with underlying health conditions).

    As a result infection should be over quicker, you can also use those having natural immunity to the virus to treat those that are critical i.e. by giving convalescent plasma of recovered patients, together with certain medications already on the market that are showing somewhat effectiveness- to treat critical patients. You would improve survival rates in the short term (before vaccine becomes available etc), lastly a shorter outbreak would decrease the likelihood of the virus mutating (possibly becoming more deadlier the longer it is around), & finally greatly reduce the strain on the economy. Just an overall better picture in the medium-long run.
    Last edited by Stario; April 02, 2020 at 10:04 AM.

  8. #108

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Stario View Post
    I generally disagree with your statement. Firstly, no one is arguing you don't take precautions- we should still encourage such things as good hand-washing, wearing of face mask while in public etc. Secondly, I agree on travel bans also. But the lock-down of business/economy & all individuals (no matter what age/individuals of low risk etc), will cause a bigger problem. It took most economies around 7 years to recover for last GFC.

    Lest use S/Korea as example- S. Korea NEVER went into forced lock-down- kept mainly 'relaxed measures' & they have totally "flatten the curve" more than any other country in fact. This shows an imposed 'lock-down' /closing of business & 'killing' the economy is not necessary.

    I also feel its precisely the opposite, if you relax measures you should in fact speed up infection therefore reach herd immunity quicker as the virus burns itself out-as majority of the population become immune- since 80% of people don't need hospitalisation you would focus on isolating the 20% deemed at risk to 'flatten the curve' (rather than 'blanket lock-downs & closing of business' approach, but rather specific lock-downs - i.e those over 60 and/or individuals with underlying health conditions).

    As a result infection should be over quicker, you can also use those having natural immunity to the virus to treat those that are critical i.e. by giving convalescent plasma of recovered patients, together with certain medications already on the market that are showing somewhat effectiveness- to treat critical patients. You would improve survival rates in the short term (before vaccine becomes available etc), lastly a shorter outbreak would decrease the likelihood of the virus mutating (possibly becoming more deadlier the longer it is around), & finally greatly reduce the strain on the economy. Just an overall better picture in the medium-long run.
    Relaxed measures is not having no measures. Not enforcing social distances will prolong the pandemic. If a state emergency was declared 2 weeks ago the pandemic would be over today. Koreans have a culture that is very good with discipline. So, let's not use their example for European nations. Please. I prefer herd immunity through vaccines.
    The Armenian Issue

  9. #109
    Stario's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Not the CCCP
    Posts
    2,042

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Infidel144
    According to Walter Ricciardi:
    "“Only 12 per cent of death certificates (of people listed as dying from coronavirus) have shown a direct causality from coronavirus,” said Professor Walter Ricciardi, scientific adviser to Italy’s health ministry.

    “The way in which we code deaths in our country is very generous in the sense that all the people who die in hospitals with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the coronavirus.’’
    Quote Originally Posted by stario
    Something also worth considering (as already stated in this tread), covid-19 is not the primary root cause of death (this is the other real dishonesty here)- in majority of cases it is ongoing chronic heart disease, respiratory disease, obesity, diabetes, cancer etc.
    Quote Originally Posted by Stario
    Yup I totally agree with you Infidel144, the above quote is what I posted a week ago in the other covid-19 threat. Only you said it much clearer with good reference. Rep points for you Mister ヽ(・∀・)ノ

    Quote Originally Posted by Infidel144
    He said while 12 per cent of death certificates have shown a direct causality from coronavirus, the other 88 per cent of deaths had least one comorbidity – and many had two or three. Each year in Italy there are 17,000 deaths from influenza."
    https://www.theaustralian.com.au/wor...522be679fa63c7
    Quote Originally Posted by stario
    WOW 17,000 death from Influenza -imagine how many have both Influenza + Covid-19. With influenza hitting up to 3-5 million each year -adding it to the equation explains why places like Italy are so overwhelmed.
    For example here in Australia we still have 2-3 month until we hit peak influenza season. But that explains why we are only having 20 deaths. Once influenza hits on top of Covid-19 things might be very different.

    But if a patient dies having both influenza + covid-19 & places like John Hopkins Corona virus resource center are reporting it as a Corona virus death -this is real dishonesty :-<
    Sorry need to re-post this conversation I had in another tread (maybe the two threads should be merged- as they are basically identical). I briefly touched on this a few post back on this tread, but basically was ignored. But think its pretty fundamental in the conversation. Particularly since our liberty, our way of life + economy (this will financially ruin a lot of families) are at stake.

    If as according to Prof. Ricciardi, scientific adviser to Italy’s health ministry "Only 12 per cent of death certificates (of people listed as dying from coronavirus) have shown a direct causality from coronavirus...and the rest of the deaths had at least one comorbidity – and many had two or three"... "each year in Italy there are 17,000 deaths from influenza."...

    This means most of the Covid-19 patients could also have Influenza at time of death -for all we know this could be happening in other countries too not just Italy- I know its happening in Australia as I have had access to the records of some covid-19 patients under my care & all of them (the critical ones that required admission), thus far had at least one other comorbidity, & the fact that a patient dying of both Influenza + Covid-19 would also be reported as a Covid-19 death (as seems the case in ITALY), is just plain dishonest + hugely BIASED. :-<
    Last edited by Stario; April 02, 2020 at 11:34 AM.

  10. #110

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    Quote Originally Posted by antaeus View Post
    You're forgetting to account for incubation periods. Often shut-downs occur in response to an escalation in case numbers. But because there's an incubation period of weeks, it can take 2 to 3 weeks before evidence measures are working emerges. For example we're only starting to see evidence that Italy's shut down is working now, 3 weeks after it happened.

    Combine this with less stringent and flawed testing in the US, means you're not going to see things flatten off even in the strictest states or cities for a few weeks yet.
    The reduction after weeks od shutdown might be due to the disease running its course rather than proof the shutdowns really work.

    Seems like you are already making excuses ahead of time for the failure of the shutdown procedures not to show tangible benefits, which iw a bad sign.

    Ans I am not forgetting the incubation period, you haven't read what I wrote before. Because of the incubationn period, by the time the shutdowns are implementated, people may hVe already been exposed and have the disease. In which case the shutdowns are worse than useless, causing a lot of economical and emotional distress for no medical gain.

    The lesson of Italy would seem to be that you don't want to do what Italy did, and that would include the shutdowns.

  11. #111

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    Relaxed measures is not having no measures. Not enforcing social distances will prolong the pandemic. If a state emergency was declared 2 weeks ago the pandemic would be over today. Koreans have a culture that is very good with discipline. So, let's not use their example for European nations. Please. I prefer herd immunity through vaccines.
    That is speculation, we don't know that if a state of emergency had been declare 2 weeks earlier the pandemic would have been over by now. I have yet to see any real, scientific evidence social distancing really works.

    As I have pointed out, because of the long incubation period, large number of people xould have already been exposed before the first symptoms even appeared, so by thetime drastic shutodown measures were enforced it was already too late. A person coming back from China could have infected large numbers in the US before the first symptoms even appeared in China and anyone even knew there was a disease for all we know.

    What I do know is that US states with less stringent measures are usually doing better than the US states with stringent shutdown measures. The US state Michigan, which is number 3 for coronavirus cases in the US, was not number 3 when it implemented its shutdown procedures. It moved up to the number 3 spot only after implementing its shutdown procedures. And other states, which have significantly more coronavirus cases than Michigan when it implemented its shutdown procedures, still have not seen the growth in cotonavirus cases that Michigan has.


    A disease will run its course, and if you implement shutdown procedure long enough, yes you are going to see a decline, but the shutdowns might not have been the cause, just the disease running its natural course. Already I see excuses being prefabricated to explain why shutodwns didn't work, blaming lack of following guidelines rather than admitting their policies didn't work.


    PS - The current shutdown policies are designed to "flatten the curve", i.e. make the coronavirus pandemic last longer, but without the sharp spike in cases that overwhelm the medical facilities. If they work as intended, they will actually make the pandemic last longer.

  12. #112

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    That is speculation, we don't know that if a state of emergency had been declare 2 weeks earlier the pandemic would have been over by now. I have yet to see any real, scientific evidence social distancing really works.

    As I have pointed out, because of the long incubation period, large number of people xould have already been exposed before the first symptoms even appeared, so by thetime drastic shutodown measures were enforced it was already too late. A person coming back from China could have infected large numbers in the US before the first symptoms even appeared in China and anyone even knew there was a disease for all we know.

    What I do know is that US states with less stringent measures are usually doing better than the US states with stringent shutdown measures. The US state Michigan, which is number 3 for coronavirus cases in the US, was not number 3 when it implemented its shutdown procedures. It moved up to the number 3 spot only after implementing its shutdown procedures. And other states, which have significantly more coronavirus cases than Michigan when it implemented its shutdown procedures, still have not seen the growth in cotonavirus cases that Michigan has.

    A disease will run its course, and if you implement shutdown procedure long enough, yes you are going to see a decline, but the shutdowns might not have been the cause, just the disease running its natural course. Already I see excuses being prefabricated to explain why shutodwns didn't work, blaming lack of following guidelines rather than admitting their policies didn't work.

    PS - The current shutdown policies are designed to "flatten the curve", i.e. make the coronavirus pandemic last longer, but without the sharp spike in cases that overwhelm the medical facilities. If they work as intended, they will actually make the pandemic last longer.
    I thought it would be common sense to know that it does work. The more people stay away from each other the less chances a virus will jump from one host to an other. It's pretty self-evident. The fact that this disease shows symptoms a few days later is one reason why general social distancing rules are necessary. When you put in a total lock down you cut off virtually all new cases. Your healthcare system is left to deal with existing cases.

    I'm not sure which states you are comparing specifically. States differ in setup quite drastically. Some are more similar while others couldn't have been any more different. Then of course there are specific factors that are tied to singular incidents. Which state are you comparing Michigan to?

    Currently, as far as I know, there is no country that initiated a total lock down before the virus had widespread penetration into the public. That prompts you to say that maybe it was the disease running its course after the lock downs were initiated. What's funny is that someone saying that there was lack of guideline following is saying that the policy didn't work...

    The current shutdowns are hardly shutdowns. They're trying to attain normal daily routines as much as possible. That's not what I've been advocated. I'm advocating a real state of emergency where the public is confined to their households while they're allowed to fulfill their supply needs either through delivery or organized outings with security forces heavily regulating day to day operations. You do that, basically putting the country in standby, and you can come out of this pandemic quick and clean. It eliminates ambiguity. Businesses can manage that. What's killing businesses is not knowing when the pandemic will blow over.
    The Armenian Issue

  13. #113

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    I thought it would be common sense to know that it does work. The more people stay away from each other the less chances a virus will jump from one host to an other. It's pretty self-evident. The fact that this disease shows symptoms a few days later is one reason why general social distancing rules are necessary. When you put in a total lock down you cut off virtually all new cases. Your healthcare system is left to deal with existing cases.
    True, but a complete lockdown is pretty drastic, and my point is that most of the people could havs already been exposed and infected even before the lockdown was implemented, given that coronavirus has a long period before the first symptoms showed up, in which case the lockdowns are extracting a very high economic cost with little health gain. Is a total closure of museums really doing much to stem thr coronavirus? I don't know.

    I'm not sure which states you are comparing specifically. States differ in setup quite drastically. Some are more similar while others couldn't have been any more different. Then of course there are specific factors that are tied to singular incidents. Which state are you comparing Michigan to?
    Texas for one, Florida for another. Texas has a lot fewer cases despite no state wide lockdown that Michigan has. And the rate of new cases in Texas is far less than Michigan, despite Michgan having a statewide lockdown. Texas today has far more coronavirus cases than Michigan had when Michigsn began its lockdown, yet still isn't seeing the growth in coronavirus as rapid as Michigan. Maybe Texas will become worse than Michigan, but so far it hasn't happened, and if it doesn't, then it suggest these lockdowns are not working.





    Currently, as far as I know, there is no country that initiated a total lock down before the virus had widespread penetration into the public. That prompts you to say that maybe it was the disease running its course after the lock downs were initiated. What's funny is that someone saying that there was lack of guideline following is saying that the policy didn't work...
    Nobody is going to issue a total lockdown before a single case showed up, so saying that guidelines were followed is unrealistic. Exactly how many cases did there need to be befoes you go into total lockdown? How many cases do there need to be to implement a total lockdown? And the guideline of "before it becomes widespread in the public" is just too vague. Unless yountest the entire public, and right now there isn't the capacity, how can you tell if the virus has or has not become widespread in the public?

    You are advocating a total lockdown policy, that has enormous economic and social cost, without any real scientific evidence to back it up.

    As I have said, for all we know by the timethe very first symptom appeared in the US the virus might have already become so widespread the lockdowns were ineffective.


    The current shutdowns are hardly shutdowns. They're trying to attain normal daily routines as much as possible. That's not what I've been advocated. I'm advocating a real state of emergency where the public is confined to their households while they're allowed to fulfill their supply needs either through delivery or organized outings with security forces heavily regulating day to day operations. You do that, basically putting the country in standby, and you can come out of this pandemic quick and clean. It eliminates ambiguity. Businesses can manage that. What's killing businesses is not knowing when the pandemic will blow over.

    You are advocating total lockdown were people are confined to their homes withot showing an real evidence that even the rather drastic lockdowns we have are doing anything to slow the virus. I have never seen all the schools restarants, libraries and stores shutdown the way they are, and yet it hasn't seem to slow the spread of coronavirus. Almost the reverse. The coronavirus spread more rapidly after the lockdowns than before. If you lockdown people into an apartment building where some people have the coronavirus, it seems to me that you pretty much guarantee all those people are gong to get the virus. Flu seasons occurs duirng times when people are spending more time indoors precisely because people are spending more time doors. And since these lockdowns are forcing people ro spend more tine indoors, you could end up spreading the virus more than without the lockdowns.

    And it is admitted these lockdowns are designed merely to flatten the curve, which lengthens the time of the pandemic. If you could lock people in their homes for an entire month or more, and let no one out, and quaratine all infected areas, so no travel in or out of New York, it might work, but I just don't see it very feasible. Bad as the coronavirus is, it is not the Black Death, the death rates are not that high, and actng as if it were is likely to make matters worse. People.are willing to put up with unprecedented levels of shutdown, but if you start treating the coronavirus as worse than the Black Death, people are likely to balk.

  14. #114
    antaeus's Avatar Cool and normal
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cool and normal
    Posts
    5,419

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    The reduction after weeks od shutdown might be due to the disease running its course rather than proof the shutdowns really work.

    Seems like you are already making excuses ahead of time for the failure of the shutdown procedures not to show tangible benefits, which iw a bad sign.

    Ans I am not forgetting the incubation period, you haven't read what I wrote before. Because of the incubationn period, by the time the shutdowns are implementated, people may hVe already been exposed and have the disease. In which case the shutdowns are worse than useless, causing a lot of economical and emotional distress for no medical gain.

    The lesson of Italy would seem to be that you don't want to do what Italy did, and that would include the shutdowns.
    Broken keyboard aside....

    I agree. Shutdowns have been implemented too late. But it is better late than never. Evidence from countries that have managed to contain the outbreak is that social distancing and in particular closure of popular gathering spots does work - most modelling suggests a long term 80% reduction in people movement and interaction. Long term as in at least a month after the last known case. As I said, the 3 week incubation period is not 'making excuses ahead of time for the failure' It is easily evidenced - by looking at results 3 weeks from implementation and comparing it to what is about to happen in places that can't.

    We'll see soon enough what happens when the disease has it's own way when the emerging outbreaks in poorer parts of Africa and India really take hold. When a disease with exponential potential and a 1-5% death rate does to poor countries with almost no health care. What we've seen already is horrifying - and if it doesn't make you pause and take a deep breath you're most likely a sociopath. But what would have happened in Italy and Spain without lockdowns - there are no words. And this is what is set to happen in poorer countries. We can revisit this debate in a few weeks if you like. I wish to hell you're right. But I know you're not at all.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MARENOSTRUM

  15. #115
    Stario's Avatar Domesticus
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Not the CCCP
    Posts
    2,042

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi
    You do know that influenza and covid-19 are different viruses, right? You can easily test the dead and figure out what disease they had. There's no proof of those deaths being attributed to influenza.
    I don't think you understand what I am saying; either that or you simply don't care that a huge 'BIAS' in reporting that exists.

    According to Walter Ricciardi:
    "Only 12 per cent of death certificates (of people listed as dying from coronavirus) have shown a direct causality from coronavirus,” said Professor Walter Ricciardi, scientific adviser to Italy’s health ministry.

    “The way in which we code deaths in our country is very generous in the sense that all the people who die in hospitals with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the coronavirus.’’


    What this means is that only 12% of death from codiv-19 show a direct causality from codiv-19. The other 88% of cases don't show a direct causality.

    Covid-19 & influenza are different viruses- but a single patient can catch them both at the same time & die (yet the death reported is not from Influenza, or a critical head injury suffered in a motor vehicle accident etc. but both deaths would be deemed as covid-19 deaths because both cases were also positive with covid-19).

    This all makes covid-19 look 'way scarier' than it really is. This also poses a serious BIAS in reporting & skews any results we have i.e CFR % etc. Because reality is its not covid-19 that is responsible for the majority of deaths (in 88% of the cases from Italy), the real culprit could just as likely be Influenza or any other virus, injury etc. the patient might have had together with covid-19.


    EDIT:

    I think with all that said, I am not worried about the virus- one can expects/predict that diseases kill people- most people will recover but unfortunately some will die etc. Its the economic fallout I am concerned/scared about.
    We are basically stopping our economy and then restarting it down the track in 6, 9 12 months time (we don't even really know when?!)

    Now all those nice economic stimulus packages; banning landlords from evicting tenants for the next 6 months for unpaid rent ect. is all good, but what happens in 1, 2, 5 years when people are still unemployed etc. This scale of having restarting of our Economy (after completely halting it), is something that we never had to do in modern days. Our Economy is also so much different than it was in the past 70, 80, 90, 100 years ago etc. SO this is a real unknown IMO.
    Last edited by Stario; April 03, 2020 at 07:30 AM.

  16. #116
    EmperorBatman999's Avatar I say, what, what?
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Why do you want to know?
    Posts
    11,891

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    It seems to me that it is simply too late for lockdowns. Maybe they could've worked if countries ordered a two-week holiday (frame it as something positive/leisurely) back in February, but the cat is utterly out of the bag and the lockdowns are a measure too late because they are trying to chase after a two-week delay. Of course, the public would never have taken a lockdown/two-week holiday seriously back then because the numbers weren't yet convincing enough.

    At this point, lockdowns only serve to give people in power a (in my opinion) false sense of control over the situation. They feel that they have to do something, anything, that might make a difference. Politicians need the polling numbers to make themselves seem heroic, and it fulfills in any case the human urge to act on a situation. Yet, the situation is long out of our hands now - who gets sick now, will get sick, inevitably, despite all measures to keep people separated.

    It has been interesting to see that more and more people are getting angry at these lockdowns, and it is rapidly developing opposition. Perhaps the upsurge in public traffic/violations of these quarantines is an expression that you cannot keep people cooped inside over such a long time. Lockdowns are against human nature - we need outside social contact to maintain emotional and mental equilibrium; you cannot take that away from people for so long.

  17. #117
    mishkin's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    15,694
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    Quote Originally Posted by EmperorBatman999 View Post
    It seems to me that it is simply too late for lockdowns. Maybe they could've worked if countries ordered a two-week holiday (frame it as something positive/leisurely) back in February, but the cat is utterly out of the bag and the lockdowns are a measure too late because they are trying to chase after a two-week delay. Of course, the public would never have taken a lockdown/two-week holiday seriously back then because the numbers weren't yet convincing enough.

    At this point, lockdowns only serve to give people in power a (in my opinion) false sense of control over the situation. They feel that they have to do something, anything, that might make a difference. Politicians need the polling numbers to make themselves seem heroic, and it fulfills in any case the human urge to act on a situation. Yet, the situation is long out of our hands now - who gets sick now, will get sick, inevitably, despite all measures to keep people separated.

    It has been interesting to see that more and more people are getting angry at these lockdowns, and it is rapidly developing opposition. Perhaps the upsurge in public traffic/violations of these quarantines is an expression that you cannot keep people cooped inside over such a long time. Lockdowns are against human nature - we need outside social contact to maintain emotional and mental equilibrium; you cannot take that away from people for so long.
    do you have any other idea to prevent the covid from spreading exponentially? I personally have been locked up at home for three weeks, and I will gladly spend another three weeks locked up if that way I avoid dying or killing someone. (40 deaths in my city so far, 1.000 sick)
    Last edited by mishkin; April 03, 2020 at 11:56 AM.

  18. #118
    EmperorBatman999's Avatar I say, what, what?
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Why do you want to know?
    Posts
    11,891

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    Quote Originally Posted by mishkin View Post
    do you have any other idea to prevent the covid from spreading exponentially? I personally have been locked up at home for three weeks, and I will gladly spend another three weeks locked up if that way I avoid dying or killing someone. (40 deaths in my city so far, 1.000 sick)
    My point is that you cannot prevent it anymore. I've been voluntarily staying home for the past three weeks as well with the exception of visiting my girlfriend who lives down the street; in that scenario, I go by foot, avoid the busier roads, and don't encounter anybody except for her and sometimes her housemates. The non-essential stores in my city voluntarily chose to close even before the city mayor stepped in to order it. Traffic both on foot and in cars has been severely reduced for two weeks, despite not actually having a mandated quarantine. Only earlier this week did I decide to go home with my girlfriend to my family in the countryside, but even here, I am doing the same thing - not leaving the house except for the essentials.

    Across the country, traffic has dramatically decreased. I really want to believe that a majority of people obeyed the voluntary advice to stay home and avoid frivolous activities, and I've seen that myself - less traffic in my city, my neighbors in my apartment building also choosing to stay home and only socializing among ourselves; my entire environment has transformed itself without direct government actions. So the voluntary stay-at-home advice has already taken I'm guessing 60% or more Americans out of the equation - there is nowhere to go and nothing to do anymore. The only points of risk are going out for essential business like groceries, and people who work those businesses. You can enforce orders, but it doesn't necessarily eliminate the unavoidable points of risk like those grocery stores or medical centers. The orders may be able to get some people off the street who are going to house parties or doing leisure activities in public spaces, but I'm not convinced this is a major part of the populace, and therefore less of a danger. You cannot possibly get all outside movement down to zero. Yet, as long as some movement is happening, there is risk of spreading the contagion. The situation is outside the control of human intervention.
    Last edited by EmperorBatman999; April 03, 2020 at 12:33 PM.

  19. #119

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    So your solution is to spread it more? I can just point to two states to make this case. Kentucky and Tennessee have relatively similar rural and urban centers and cultures. Kentucky was about three weeks ahead of Tennessee in every decision made from when to shut schools down to when to shut non-essential businesses down to when to order(not advise) people to stay home. Kentucky has 755 cases and Tennessee has 2,869. Kentucky isn't going to just give that relatively low number up. Kentucky Legislature was plotting to cut Andy Beshear's legs out from under him much the same way Wisconsin cut Tony Evers' out from under him and are literally forcing them to have a primary in the middle of this mess. But no. Their republican legislature love the way they have a low CV count and how he declared an emergency early and literally declared price gouging a state crime and has been working with their republican Attorney General to keep that kind of stuff from happening in the middle of this mess.

    Kentucky could've been Tennessee if it wanted to. But you know what. It isn't.
    Last edited by Gaidin; April 03, 2020 at 12:54 PM.
    One thing is for certain: the more profoundly baffled you have been in your life, the more open your mind becomes to new ideas.
    -Neil deGrasse Tyson

    Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable. Let us prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.

  20. #120

    Default Re: COVID-19: A bloody battle or a long war?

    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    True, but a complete lockdown is pretty drastic, and my point is that most of the people could havs already been exposed and infected even before the lockdown was implemented, given that coronavirus has a long period before the first symptoms showed up, in which case the lockdowns are extracting a very high economic cost with little health gain. Is a total closure of museums really doing much to stem thr coronavirus? I don't know.

    Texas for one, Florida for another. Texas has a lot fewer cases despite no state wide lockdown that Michigan has. And the rate of new cases in Texas is far less than Michigan, despite Michgan having a statewide lockdown. Texas today has far more coronavirus cases than Michigan had when Michigsn began its lockdown, yet still isn't seeing the growth in coronavirus as rapid as Michigan. Maybe Texas will become worse than Michigan, but so far it hasn't happened, and if it doesn't, then it suggest these lockdowns are not working.

    Nobody is going to issue a total lockdown before a single case showed up, so saying that guidelines were followed is unrealistic. Exactly how many cases did there need to be befoes you go into total lockdown? How many cases do there need to be to implement a total lockdown? And the guideline of "before it becomes widespread in the public" is just too vague. Unless yountest the entire public, and right now there isn't the capacity, how can you tell if the virus has or has not become widespread in the public?

    You are advocating a total lockdown policy, that has enormous economic and social cost, without any real scientific evidence to back it up.

    As I have said, for all we know by the timethe very first symptom appeared in the US the virus might have already become so widespread the lockdowns were ineffective.

    You are advocating total lockdown were people are confined to their homes withot showing an real evidence that even the rather drastic lockdowns we have are doing anything to slow the virus. I have never seen all the schools restarants, libraries and stores shutdown the way they are, and yet it hasn't seem to slow the spread of coronavirus. Almost the reverse. The coronavirus spread more rapidly after the lockdowns than before. If you lockdown people into an apartment building where some people have the coronavirus, it seems to me that you pretty much guarantee all those people are gong to get the virus. Flu seasons occurs duirng times when people are spending more time indoors precisely because people are spending more time doors. And since these lockdowns are forcing people ro spend more tine indoors, you could end up spreading the virus more than without the lockdowns.

    And it is admitted these lockdowns are designed merely to flatten the curve, which lengthens the time of the pandemic. If you could lock people in their homes for an entire month or more, and let no one out, and quaratine all infected areas, so no travel in or out of New York, it might work, but I just don't see it very feasible. Bad as the coronavirus is, it is not the Black Death, the death rates are not that high, and actng as if it were is likely to make matters worse. People.are willing to put up with unprecedented levels of shutdown, but if you start treating the coronavirus as worse than the Black Death, people are likely to balk.
    Do you really know whether lock downs are not effective? Absolutely not. While it is safe to assume that they're slowing down the spread for sure, as they eliminate paths of transmission all together, you have absolutely no data to suggest that they're not providing even a substantial effect.

    The idea is not to lock everything down at the first sight of a case. There should obviously be a cut off. We can debate at what point that should be, however, we're likely past that point already. Perhaps the first death could be a sufficient cut off.

    No, corona virus is not some T-virus from a Resident Evil movie. Just because people live in the same apartment in condos doesn't mean all of them are guaranteed to get it. It primarily transmits through touch, not air. Flu doesn't just transmit better during times when the weather is bad. Flu prefers cold and dry weather, plus winter is when people go spend time indoors at work, then come home to spend more time at their house. Your analysis at every point in this post is extremely simplistic and misses the real facts of the matter.

    You make it appear as if Michigan initiated widespread shut downs more than two weeks ago before it rose to state with third most cases. The shelter in place order was given on 23rd of March. Any data you look at gives you how it was two weeks ago. You will see whether those shut downs were effective in a week or two, assuming that the shut downs were widely implemented and people took warnings seriously. So, no, you're not seeing anywhere that the virus spread more rapidly after wide spread lock downs were initiated. It defies simple logic to suggest that.

    The fact is, by arguing against total lock downs, you're effectively lengthening the pandemic and hurting business in a manner that they can't plan through. I'm guaranteeing mild but manageable loss, while you're risking everything without a real way to plan through it.

    So, Michigan and Texas. How well is testing being done in both states? How many infected people entered either state from outside sources? Those states have quite different cultures. How do people of those states adhere to social distancing and personal hygiene rules? The fact is timeline have been extended enough to see the effects of this virus in average for these states.
    The Armenian Issue

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •