Merged 2019-nCoV / Corona virus

Status
Not open for further replies.
theprestige said:
I thought the panic was amply justified by the simple facts of the matter.
Click to expand...

I usually have not found panics to be justified because they do not yield effective results.

But I understand: you mean "a strong response"- not a panic...

I am just feeling like being pedantic today. And because so many are panicking.
 
theprestige said:
I thought the panic was amply justified by the simple facts of the matter.
Click to expand...

"Panic" meaning exactly what?

Should they curl up and cry?

Panic is never justified, but it's certainly a time for medical facilities to take measures to overcome what will be a tsunami of sick people.

The virus isn't that dangerous outside the 80+ or already-sick groups, but the sheer numbers will mean health systems will be overwhelmed.

Yes, it's going to kill lots of people, but probably no more than die annually from cardiovascular diseases and not too many people panic about that.
 
Giordano said:
I usually have not found panics to be justified because they do not yield effective results.

But I understand: you mean "a strong response"- not a panic...

I am just feeling like being pedantic today. And because so many are panicking.
Click to expand...

I don’t think it is pedantry. There is a difference between a rational implementation of extreme measures and an irrational haphazard response. Panics are, by their nature, at the very least inefficient and can often be dangerous and stupid,
 
marting said:
Masks used to prevent infection have little affectivity at best but are useful for reducing spreads when worn by infectious people. At least that's the WHO's position and it seems a reasonable one.

The thing is already in the wild in Japan. On the positive side, the normal flu rate in Japan is down considerably.
Click to expand...
It's effectivity, not affectivity and you are wrong. See my posts on the partial protectiveness of masks if used properly.

The WHO and other public health organizations are addressing the panic buying and wearing masks.
 
Roboramma said:
I think one thing in India's favor is that while there may be a lot travel between India and China (and yeah, not because of the shared border), what you didn't have was a lot of Indians going home for Chinese New Year. Singapore, on the other hand, had that issue, I'm guessing. The Indians here would have been more likely to stay, and Chinese who might travel to India for business or leisure, weren't likely to have been doing so during the new year holiday, which is a time when most people spend with their families.

So I think part of the pattern of the spread is related to the customs around Chinese New Year, given that that's when things started to get serious.
Click to expand...
How is India exempt from these customs?

If Chinese workers can start an outbreak in Iran, why is India exempt?



angrysoba said:
Holy inevitable crap!

I'm hearing reports that a woman who was let off the Diamond Princess after the quarantine, has now been found to have the virus.

Unlike the other countries who repatriated those who left the ship, the Japanese passengers have been released back into the wild.

I think we can expect a surge in cases here. Something to look forward to...
Click to expand...
It was the officials in Japan that supported the false claims by the officials on the Diamond Princess that new cases weren't being transmitted aboard the ship. Someone pressured that Japanese infectious disease expert to retract his video.

Now they are stuck, admit they were wrong or let the passengers out and claim they are disease free.

It's an incredibly ignorant short-sighted POV.
 
Dr.Sid said:
Seconds death in Italy, Europe don't want to stay behind. I can see first Czech case next week.
Click to expand...

Czech, mate?

Why there? I can see cases springing up all over the place this coming week, and by the end of it, I'd say we will have a WHO-stated pandemic under way and the number of known cases outside China will be up by at least 300% on the total I'm seeing right now, of 1600.

What I think we're seeing is the result of the high number of asymptomatic and mild symptom cases. It's winter in the NH and colds & 'flu happen all the time in winter and in those mild cases, people haven't been to the doctor, so haven't been tested.

Then a couple of people croak, they're tested and found positive, they test a load of contacts and amazingly find a load of positives. I think Ginger mentioned way back in the thread that pandemics start by severe cases being recognised, and I'm quite sure that's where we are right now.

Given the time frame between infection and death, I reckon this is the week it breaks out all over, and Iran's the guide. If there'd been a lottery for the next country to have deaths, Iran would hardly have made the top 100.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
It's effectivity, not affectivity and you are wrong. See my posts on the partial protectiveness of masks if used properly.
Click to expand...
From the WHO's document on medical masks:
https://www.who.int/publications-de...of-the-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov)-outbreak

Stating:
A medical mask is not required, as no evidence is
available on its usefulness to protect non-sick persons.
However, masks might be worn in some countries
according to local cultural habits

However, they equivocate elsewhere in the same document. They recommend masks be worn by infected people as well as personnel while in the same room.

The WHO and other public health organizations are addressing the panic buying and wearing masks.
Click to expand...

Yes, they are concerned shortages from panic buying will prevent availability where needed hence the statement that a medical mask is not required (unless in a room caring for an infected person). But absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
 
Has anyone seen stats on Diamond Princess infections in two person cabins v single person cabins? When one person gets sick how often does the second person get sick and how delayed is it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom