2019-nCoV / Corona virus Pt 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Also, it's not heartless. I know a lot of people who are already dealing with severe anxiety, despair, and depression over this. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a spike in suicides due to social isolation and fear, as well as deaths resulting from lack of exercise and increased overeating due to boredom and stress.
 
xjx388 said:
I think when all is said and done, we will realize that yes, perhaps we overreacted. At that point many people are going to say, "See! All this economic fallout could have been avoided if people didn't panic! Next time this happens, just let it run its course!"

I do understand and support the efforts at social distancing, "flattening the curve," not overwhelming fragile health systems etc. I get it. But at the same time is it actually worth risking a collapse of major economies? I think the answer will end up being, "probably not."

What I do think will be worth it is the hard look we all take at the fragile health system and keeping it supplied and equipped at all times. We will look at a lot of things in our society and I do hope we learn from this experience. I'm not overly optimistic, though.
Click to expand...
What strikes me is that an extraordinary number of countries are more or less on the same page. There's something novel about this feeling that we're all in this together (even as we go to great lengths to promote self-isolation, or semi-isolation). It has grabbed worldwide attention, for sure, and left us without many of the usual entertainments that we sometimes use as distractions from weightier news. I don't think it's healthy to live this way forever, but it is something different from anything I've seen before, and I think it's largely being driven by science and a desire to do the right thing - not blind panic.

The only thing I'm really chafed about is the way hand sanitizer is so ubiquitously unavailable. Well, the shortage of tests in the U.S. while Trump was saying everyone could have a test is also annoying.
 
Doghouse Reilly said:
It's absolutely not worth it, it's insanity. Italy, who has been the hardest hit, has only had ~2000 deaths, and they just released a study showing that 99% of them had prexisting medical conditions. It's crazy to destroy the economy and shut down the world over this. If it were just allowed to run it's course, maybe a quarter million people worldwide would die. Maybe these measures will reduce that by half. The damage to the economy will end up meaning that we valued each of those lives at somewhere between 300-600 million dollars each.

Sorry, but I just don't think that's worth it.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost...ts-in-italy-who-died-had-other-illnesses/amp/
Click to expand...
I agree. The idea that millions will die is flawed. The death percentage used in the models that predict that are too high, as is the percentage of total population that is assumed will catch it. The effects of mitigation efforts and possible anti viral agents are discounted. I don't count the effects of vaccines because they will come too late, at least for this year.
 
Giordano said:
1. The less time they are in the store the less they will cough or sneeze in the store. Coughing or sneezing in the close conditions inside the store is much more risky than in the open air outside the store.

2. More room for people to keep their distances outside than in.
3. Fewer surfaces outside the store for people to touch or sneeze on than inside the store.

4. The wait outside the store should be no longer than if everyone was allowed inside the store at once. People per minute per cash register should be the same.
Click to expand...


This is only helpful if the people in that line outside take advantage of it.

A few days ago one of our local news outlets had somebody at an area Costco (big box type store). They were showing a line which wrapped around the store, waiting for it to open.

There didn't seem to be any attempt to spread out. It looked like a usual line of people waiting to get into any popular venue. All crowded up the same way. Trying to prevent line crashers, I guess.
 
The problem is that it all moved too fast. Eight days ago, Michigan had zero cases.

Rational decisions are not being made. They should have been made, explained, published, all before the first case ever hit the US. That could have happened. It didn't. The announcements about medical production should have been made in February. They weren't. Everything that has happened so far was entirely predictable, but the government was caught flat footed, and that has contributed to the panic.

Even if this degree of social distancing was deemed to be a good idea, it could have been known and, to some extent, prepared for. There would have still been a big economic hit, but it wouldn't have been the shock that it turned out to be.
 
Marcus said:
I agree. The idea that millions will die is flawed. The death percentage used in the models that predict that are too high, as is the percentage of total population that is assumed will catch it. The effects of mitigation efforts and possible anti viral agents are discounted. I don't count the effects of vaccines because they will come too late, at least for this year.
Click to expand...

If you read the paper I have referenced above it shows the death rates for US and UK and the impacts of different mitigating efforts. Also what the probable end game is.
 
casebro said:
uumm, what? Has CV-19 been linked to eating wild life? I thought that was eliminated early on?
Click to expand...
A tale with many twists. The following may be too brief, and will certainly contain errors of one kind or another.

After SARS, there was concern that the culturally acceptable habit of hunting/catching and eating wildlife, of many different species, might one day lead to another SARS (the use of wildlife, including plants, in traditional Chinese medicine is a related, but mostly separate story). And irritation at international criticism that such hunting was leading to extinction of some species.

So wildlife conservation farms - with many different names - were permitted. The intention was to set up a conservation facility where endangered wildlife could be bred, and perhaps one day be released back into the wild (with variations, I think you can find many of these sorts of initiatives in many countries). And some of the wildlife could be culled and sold for aficionados of that meat to eat; long-standing cultural habits die hard.

Not hard to guess at what happened, in many cases: some farms became cover for illegal hunting; the kills from some illegal hunting was “laundered” through otherwise legitimate conservation sanctuaries. Etc.

At the same time, wet markets were supposed to lift their game: controls on slaughter, wildlife banned, hygiene regulations, etc. And some of that did undoubtedly happen. But in far too many cases the local regulators were, or grew, lax. And those at the center, with Xi as leader, seem to have been quite unconcerned .... despite knowing very well what was happening (or what was not happening).
 
The Atheist said:
That can't be emphasised enough.

While the mortality rate is terrible for oldies, it's going to kill lots of younger people through the sheer weight of numbers.

(Not to mention how many young people's operations will be unable to take place - how many liver transplant patients alone will die waiting for hospitals to have the capacity to do the transplant?)



So you should - you're supposed to be in the rugby thread.

Oh wait, there's no rugby.

But do give us a ground report from jolly old RSA - I imagine social distancing in the townships could be a little dodgy.



That's been noted all the way through - I believe 5 April is D-Day for interim results. I already have my chloroquine on order, but don't forget, it't the phosphate and not the sulphate form.



So you damned well should be - this thread has been in front of the curve since the outbreak became news, and if countries had followed the advice in it, we'd be a lot fewer cases and deaths right now. NZ, for instance, would have no cases at all had the government followed my advice and wouldn't need to be spending $12.1 billion (US equivalent would be $1.2 trillion) to keep wage earners afloat.

And yes, I did even pick the sharemarket crash, and did so before anyone else.

Thanks - please keep following: the advice in here might save your, or a family member's life.



No, they're using identical strategies, only China's are a bit more enforced, while SK's are highly co-operative.

Test, isolate, trace.

It's that simple.



I'll miss your contributions & questions.

All the best from the bottom of the planet!
Click to expand...
Thanks.

I’ve got one more (maybe two) to go.
 
Doghouse Reilly said:
The damage to the economy will end up meaning that we valued each of those lives at somewhere between 300-600 million dollars each.
Click to expand...

Not even close - you just got a D for maths.

Even a worst-case scenario will cost the world $20 trillion.

If I take another worst-case scenario, a paltry 10,000,000 lives saved, that would be $2 million each, and we should do a fair bit better than that.

If we try.
 
Planigale said:
If you read the paper I have referenced above it shows the death rates for US and UK and the impacts of different mitigating efforts. Also what the probable end game is.
Click to expand...
We don't know what the death rates are, too many untested and undiagnosed people. Indications are there many undiagnosed people with minimal symptoms. I will go back and read your paper though, not sure until I see it if I have read it yet.
 
Doghouse Reilly said:
Why isn't there more global pressure on China to ban these markets? It seems crazy that so many viruses have cone from these places and yet they're still allowed.
Click to expand...
One reason, as I noted in an earlier post, is that they were at least tightly regulated. On paper.

Since some time in February (not sure of the date), there have been much stricter edicts from Beijing. It remains to be seen how widely the new edicts are adhered to, once life gets back to “normal”.

The general problem remains ... hunting and eating wildlife is certainly not unique to China, and one form or other of wet markets can be found in many places. Too, it’s not just in China that there are wildlife species with viruses which could become zoonotic.
 
Minoosh said:
....
The only thing I'm really chafed about is the way hand sanitizer is so ubiquitously unavailable. Well, the shortage of tests in the U.S. while Trump was saying everyone could have a test is also annoying.
Click to expand...
Maybe add lack of hospital beds to your list. Apparently they are just letting them die at Life Care Center now, no sense transferring them to any hospital.

These additional deaths include: (King County update today)

A woman in her 90s, who died at Life Care Center on 3/6
A woman in her 60s, who died at Life Care on 3/16
A man ins 90s, who died at Life Care on 3/17
A man in his 70s, who died at Life Care on 3/17
A man in his 80s, who died at Life Care on 2/28
Click to expand...

Though I must say, maybe two of those either had DNR orders or maybe they went back and started looking at previous deaths.
 
Last edited:
Meadmaker said:
.....

Even if this degree of social distancing was deemed to be a good idea, it could have been known and, to some extent, prepared for. There would have still been a big economic hit, but it wouldn't have been the shock that it turned out to be.
Click to expand...
Looks like the GOP gutting public health preparedness maybe wasn't such a good idea after all. :rolleyes:
 
JeanTate said:
One reason, as I noted in an earlier post, is that they were at least tightly regulated. On paper.

Since some time in February (not sure of the date), there have been much stricter edicts from Beijing. It remains to be seen how widely the new edicts are adhered to, once life gets back to “normal”.

The general problem remains ... hunting and eating wildlife is certainly not unique to China, and one form or other of wet markets can be found in many places. Too, it’s not just in China that there are wildlife species with viruses which could become zoonotic.
Click to expand...
Take the break you need, I certainly understand why you would do that. Please don't forget to come back. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom