sothereiwas Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 8 hours ago, justwhoiam said: Mortality rate is calculated not on the overall population, but in the group of people who get infected. That's how you calculate mortality for a disease. 8 hours ago, justwhoiam said: I guess what you're looking for is the rate of people infected in a given population. We can't know that. Exactly. You're saying there is a 10% mortality rate, and then you say mortality rate is computed from deaths (which are known) and infections (which we don't know) and I'm trying to get you to realize the mathematical problem without pointing it out explicitly. The level of hysteria that's starting to display in this thread is troubling. 1
amaysngrace Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 One in three Americans are ordered to lockdown. That’s not media hype, that’s reality. 2
sothereiwas Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 1 minute ago, Marc878 said: Not that I’ve seen. And that’s a pretty broad spectrum. Not speculation or hearsay. Need to define locked down, but we're not under a shelter in place order here. As a side note, I decided to take measures a couple weeks before it was recommended just as a measure of caution, so no, it's not me who will be out murdering elderly people or whatever folks are suddenly fond of accusing me of.
Mrin Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 We lost our first local in our little town to COVID-19 yesterday. 56. Family man. Actually we lost him 10 days ago but the tests _finally_ came back positive for COVID-19 yesterday. Preparing for more. 1
suladas Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 2 hours ago, pepperbird said: I'm just glad our opposition was watching. Our PM tried to enact a far teaching bill that would allow it unilaterally change tax laws and spend funds without approval of the full parliament. This would effectively nullify the voices of the majority, of our citizens, as it's a minority government. It’s disgusting what he’s tried to do. It’s boggled my mind anyone voted for him again, even for a minority. He’s killing the country. If he got it by he would be giving billions away to his crook friends and putting the country in so much debt there would be no chance of getting out.
amaysngrace Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 15 minutes ago, Marc878 said: Not sure where you’re getting your info but everyone around me is in lockdown. I have kids in Illinois, North Carolina and Florida. They are in lockdown as well. Same with a friend in California. All hospitals in the area have delayed surgery etc and are in lockdown as well. Believing in the news media in today’s world is pretty naive. If being informed is naive then what is judging a broad picture from your own limited view? Just wondering. 2
serial muse Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 (edited) 16 minutes ago, sothereiwas said: Exactly. You're saying there is a 10% mortality rate, and then you say mortality rate is computed from deaths (which are known) and infections (which we don't know) and I'm trying to get you to realize the mathematical problem without pointing it out explicitly. The level of hysteria that's starting to display in this thread is troubling. I'd say it's time to wrap the old noggin around the fact that this is not the flu. Let me clear up your mortality rate confusion. The 10%+ mortality rate in Italy is due in large part to the fact that they were overwhelmed with cases of covid-19 relative to the ability for their health care system to treat the patients that required ICU. As we are learning rapidly, people needing to go to the ICU are not restricted to the elderly or immunocompromised. Plenty of young, healthy people are winding up in the ICU now. And we are running short of masks, ventilators and frankly hospital beds to treat them. This is the case in Washington and New York, and will soon be the case elsewhere in the US. That's what drives the mortality rate up, friend. People who might otherwise live will not, because there aren't sufficient resources available to save their lives. Oh, because you really wanted an answer to this. 10% of what? 10% of diagnosed covid-19 cases, of course. Does that mean that there are many more cases that were not diagnosed and likely milder? Sure, of course. Does that mean that millions won't die if we do as you suggest? No! Isn't that fun? They totally will die, a lot of them, because of what I wrote above. Does that help? Please, ask one more time, 10% of what. For heaven's sake. This is a nasty, highly infectious disease - more infectious than the flu, with a longer contagious period before symptoms present, and with a higher rate of infectiousness to boot. The flu infects many more people per year, but that is over a MUCH longer time period, because it is less infectious. So you end up with hospitals NOT overwhelmed and able to treat the more severe cases. Plus, covid-19 is far more damaging to the lungs than the flu. A lot of people who recover will suffer permanent lung damage. I'm talking about the "young" and "healthy" here. This link will delay posting, but it is something that the deniers in here should see. Yellow is lung damage due to covid-19. The flu does not do this to the lungs. Get right with it. Trump can lighten up restrictions all he wants. It won't save the economy, and it won't mean that only old people will die. It is a stupid, greedy, selfish thing to do, and not worthy of the leader of any nation, let alone one so powerful and influential as the USA. Seriously. Wrap your brain around this. It's high time. https://wjla.com/news/local/a-new-perspective-virtual-reality-shows-exactly-how-covid-19-can-damage-the-lungs Edited March 24, 2020 by serial muse 5 2
sothereiwas Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 37 minutes ago, Tamfana said: There are places that are not locked down. Don't keep blaming "the media." I think we can recognize there are places that are not yet locked down and still blame the media.
nittygritty Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 Governor Cuomo has previously made it very clear that he could careless about trying to save human life with his third trimester abortion legalization stance, so why is he being given so much air time??? I’m really sick of listening to politicians exploit the situation. 1
NuevoYorko Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 38 minutes ago, Marc878 said: Not sure where you’re getting your info but everyone around me is in lockdown. I have kids in Illinois, North Carolina and Florida. They are in lockdown as well. Same with a friend in California. All hospitals in the area have delayed surgery etc and are in lockdown as well. Believing in the news media in today’s world is pretty naive. ???? Yes, many people are on lockdown. What folks here are referring to is trumps intentions and the support they are garnering from other republicans in government, like the Lt. Governor of TX. We know of those intentions from trump's words, available to everyone on his Twitter feed and "breifings" (rallies) and those of others who are with him on this evil. Not from "FAKE NEWS." That's an entire subject in and of itself; it's quite frightening how such a large segment of the American public has been successfully conditioned to believe ONLY the words of the most powerful political figure in the country regarding everything: science, economy, medicine, and which sources for information are "approved." Don't get me wrong. It's smart to look at any sources of info with skepticism. But I don't care who the president, Prime Minister, king, whatever is - as soon as they try to control what information the people have - especially in a situation such as this, where there are actual experts available - I am absolutely off board. Speaking of trump's rallies - we now have Barr up there in place of Fauci? 2 1
sothereiwas Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 21 minutes ago, serial muse said: The 10%+ mortality rate in Italy is due in large part to the fact that they were overwhelmed with cases of covid-19 relative to the ability for their health care system to treat the patients that required ICU. I'm not sure how they are computing the figure, but generally it would be total resolved cases (people who have been sick and are not sick, as they are now either dead or recovered) compared to those of that set who are dead. As far as I know (more information welcomed) figures on what the actual total number infected weeks ago in Italy are not based on random or extensive population testing, but are rather based on those who got so sick they came to the hospital for care and were then diagnosed. People who had mild symptoms a month ago and got better are not likely included in the numbers that are being used to compute that 10% fatality rate, as far as I know. Couple that likelihood with the reported fact that a large majority of people who are infected will never display severe symptoms and would thus not have been counted early on, and color me sceptical when it comes to numbers like that meaning what people are believing them to mean. Virtually everyone will be either getting vaccinated or getting this bug eventually most likely, and 10% of us are not likely to die because of it. So yeah, flatten the curve but also be sure we have the money to pay for required care when people inevitably get sick. This is not a case where simply more is better, most likely. 1
Beendaredonedat Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 Wait to y'all see a huge spike in cases now that everyone from around the globe have been mandated to get home. 1 million of them coming back to Canada. 1
Redhead14 Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 4 minutes ago, NuevoYorko said: Speaking of trump's rallies - we now have Barr up there in place of Fauci? Sure, Fauci is America's Wenliang . . .
NuevoYorko Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 46 minutes ago, Marc878 said: Not that I’ve seen. And that’s a pretty broad spectrum. Not speculation or hearsay. Hm. You are very sequestered in your exposure to what's going on in the US. I would think you live sequestered from electronics, if you were not on LS. As of this morning, 25 states have no restrictions at the state level. 10 states have some restrictions according to counties or municipalities. Only 16 have "stay at home" restrictions. This is subject to change hour by hour. 1
Redhead14 Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 49 minutes ago, sothereiwas said: Need to define locked down, but we're not under a shelter in place order here. As a side note, I decided to take measures a couple weeks before it was recommended just as a measure of caution, so no, it's not me who will be out murdering elderly people or whatever folks are suddenly fond of accusing me of. You are advocating keeping the older and high risk people imprisoned for an indefinite period of time while everyone else walks around possibly, even likely, carrying this virus. And every time we do try to go out, we need to restart the incubation period clock and watch to see if we will get sick and die alone. So, yeah, if this is the tactic that ends up being taken, you are complicit by acceptance. The concern for all the poor people who will commit suicide because of financial ruin? Boo hoo. There will be older people, etc. who will commit suicide because of the lack of human contact and not being able to spend time with their families, etc. And, you can say, have others drop stuff off for us, etc. If just half of the people have the this self-centered attitude, that system will become exhausted as well because there won't be enough people who will do that for those affected people.
sothereiwas Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 Just now, NuevoYorko said: Hm. You are very sequestered in your exposure to what's going on in the US. I would think you live sequestered from electronics, if you were not on LS. As of this morning, 25 states have no restrictions at the state level. 10 states have some restrictions according to counties or municipalities. Only 16 have "stay at home" restrictions. This is subject to change hour by hour. I think it probably makes sense for each state to decide, really. Assuming what's best for rural New Mexico will work well for the SF bay area (or vice versa) would be a silly assumption. Within states, perhaps it would be best to restrict certain heavily populated urban centers more, who knows.
NuevoYorko Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 2 minutes ago, sothereiwas said: I think it probably makes sense for each state to decide, really. Assuming what's best for rural New Mexico will work well for the SF bay area (or vice versa) would be a silly assumption. Within states, perhaps it would be best to restrict certain heavily populated urban centers more, who knows. I was responding to the poster who said that they were unaware of any places in the US where there are no restrictions in place.
sothereiwas Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 1 minute ago, Redhead14 said: You are advocating keeping the older and high risk people imprisoned for an indefinite period of time while everyone else walks around I'm not sure I advocated for that, but if I was a high risk person I'd definitely stop going out until the coast is clear. Be aware, we're not stopping this thing by locking everyone down, that's not going to work. If you think it will, someone sold you a bill of goods. Locking everyone down actually EXTENDS the time this bug will be around in exchange for limiting the number who are sick at any given time. As for not being concerned about the economy, disconnect your electricity and stop eating for a couple weeks if you want a preview of what life without a functioning economy would be like. 1 1
Beendaredonedat Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 (edited) 2 minutes ago, sothereiwas said: . Locking everyone down actually EXTENDS the time this bug will be around in exchange for limiting the number who are sick at any given time. Can you cite your source where you got that claim please, I'd like to read it. Edited March 24, 2020 by Beendaredonedat changed "site" to "cite" 1
sothereiwas Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 4 minutes ago, Beendaredonedat said: Can you cite your source where you got that claim please, I'd like to read it. Google 'flatten the curve', the area under the curves will be virtually identical but the shapes differ.
NuevoYorko Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 It's useful for this discussion that people not lose sight of perhaps the ultimate goal of shelter-in-place, which is to manage the spike of cases needing medical care enough that medical care can prepare to meet the demand. Additionally, it would allow medical science opportunities to develop treatments for the sick as well as a vaccine on a timeline where many more people, and society as a whole - including economics - could benefit. 4 1
Redhead14 Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 6 minutes ago, sothereiwas said: I'm not sure I advocated for that, but if I was a high risk person I'd definitely stop going out until the coast is clear. Be aware, we're not stopping this thing by locking everyone down, that's not going to work. If you think it will, someone sold you a bill of goods. Locking everyone down actually EXTENDS the time this bug will be around in exchange for limiting the number who are sick at any given time. As for not being concerned about the economy, disconnect your electricity and stop eating for a couple weeks if you want a preview of what life without a functioning economy would be like. The coast will never be clear until everyone does what's needed to be done! 2
Beendaredonedat Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 1 minute ago, sothereiwas said: Google 'flatten the curve', the area under the curves will be virtually identical but the shapes differ. How does that show me what you have claimed? That claim being . Locking everyone down actually EXTENDS the time this bug will be around
lana-banana Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 (edited) 16 minutes ago, sothereiwas said: I'm not sure I advocated for that, but if I was a high risk person I'd definitely stop going out until the coast is clear. Be aware, we're not stopping this thing by locking everyone down, that's not going to work. If you think it will, someone sold you a bill of goods. Locking everyone down actually EXTENDS the time this bug will be around in exchange for limiting the number who are sick at any given time. As for not being concerned about the economy, disconnect your electricity and stop eating for a couple weeks if you want a preview of what life without a functioning economy would be like. Every single thing about this is wrong. Lockdowns saved China. Lockdowns were critical in South Korea once contact tracing became impossible. Lockdowns will be necessary for Italy to survive. Also, locking everyone down reduces the strain on hospital infrastructure, which is the most critical part of this. About 12-15% of people diagnosed with COVID-19 require hospitalization. That's a huge amount. By ensuring hospital beds remain available at any given time, you massively lower the number of deaths (vs. flooding hospitals with millions at once). And for another thing, the vast majority of people have no idea if they're "high risk". Things like heart conditions and lung problems can and do go lifetimes without being diagnosed. I am what you might call a "centrist Marxist"---i.e. a leftist, probably an ordinary social Democrat or a green party member if you were in Europe---and I've spent a long time complaining about how unfettered capitalism is exploitative and deadly, but I don't think I ever really expected politicians to outright say they'd gladly sacrifice a few million Americans for The Economy(TM). It's still shocking to hear it out loud. It also amuses me that the same people who claim the strongest Americans sacrificed at Normandy, who whine about snowflakes and soft kids these days...would literally rather kill the elderly than stay home for a couple weeks. Edited March 24, 2020 by lana-banana 3 1
sothereiwas Posted March 24, 2020 Posted March 24, 2020 Just now, Beendaredonedat said: How does that show me what you have claimed? That claim being Well, in a chart like this, the horizontal axis is time. The tall curve is without shelter in place, where everyone gets it faster and their case is resolved sooner, but we probably exceed care capacity. The shorter curve is extended along the time axis ... Do I really have to keep going? Ok fine ... Notice that after the tall curve is well tailed off, the shorter curve is actually not tailed off yet? That is showing more cases later than the alternative.
Recommended Posts