|
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control.
It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you.
Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly.
This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here.
Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. |
On August 03 2020 22:47 Vindicare605 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2020 08:25 soul55555 wrote:
Honestly how much Longer will Covid-19 last? Depends on whether we can vaccinate against it or not. There are vaccines currently undergoing trials, in Australia the UK and one other place I can't remember I think Canada. That's going to take months. It's already been a month since I first read about vaccine trials. If the vaccines prove effective it will take more months for them to start being produced. Longer if the countries start bickering over rights and who can develop it, which is definitely going to happen. Once produced it will take several months longer to distribute it to enough people that it stops being a pandemic. My best guess? A year minimum. And Fauci said just last week that because the virus is so contagious, it will probably never actually go away. It will just be infecting smaller and smaller groups of people.
Biontech, who are among the frontrunners for a vaccine right now, are aiming to request approval from the FDA by the end of october. They will most likely start mass producing as early late september if their internal results are promising, meaning they hope to have 300 million doses produced by the end of 2020.
|
On August 03 2020 23:10 LegalLord wrote:
The plateau in reported infection numbers (not just over the weekend but with week-on-week data) seems very much out of sync with the rest of the data and the increasingly alarmed messaging coming from the CDC and from other health officials, even within Trump's inner circle. There's a lot more human firewood yet to be burned through in the US before herd immunity.
The frightening thing about the numbers so far is that as bad as it's been, this is probably with less than 10% of the entire population getting the virus. There's a lot of room for things to get a lot worse, and we're all just being told to pretend like everything is normal, go back to school in the fall, so on and so forth. I'm glad I get to work 95% remote under the current conditions, but I know too many people are operating under a "you don't come to work, you don't eat" ultimatum. We're in desperate need of coordinated action, and not just of the "more stimulus" variety.
If the virus' lethality rate is about 1% and there's 350 million people living in the United States. We need around 70% of people to be infected with the virus to achieve actual herd immunity.
That's 2 million dead. And that's being conservative.
I just want people to keep that in mind whenever the phrase "herd immunity" comes up. Anyone advocating that THAT will be the solution needs to understand what that means.
|
On August 03 2020 23:55 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2020 22:47 Vindicare605 wrote:On August 03 2020 08:25 soul55555 wrote:
Honestly how much Longer will Covid-19 last? Depends on whether we can vaccinate against it or not. There are vaccines currently undergoing trials, in Australia the UK and one other place I can't remember I think Canada. That's going to take months. It's already been a month since I first read about vaccine trials. If the vaccines prove effective it will take more months for them to start being produced. Longer if the countries start bickering over rights and who can develop it, which is definitely going to happen. Once produced it will take several months longer to distribute it to enough people that it stops being a pandemic. My best guess? A year minimum. And Fauci said just last week that because the virus is so contagious, it will probably never actually go away. It will just be infecting smaller and smaller groups of people. Biontech, who are among the frontrunners for a vaccine right now, are aiming to request approval from the FDA by the end of october. They will most likely start mass producing as early late september if their internal results are promising, meaning they hope to have 300 million doses produced by the end of 2020.
Even with that timeline being accurate, that leaves a bunch of unanswered questions. Are they going to share the patent so that other manufacturers can start producing it? If so, who will manufacture it? How will it be distributed, and where first?
That's where my "countries bicker" part of it comes in. This thing doesn't just end once a vaccine is developed there's a lot more to come in 2021.
|
|
|
On August 04 2020 00:00 Vindicare605 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2020 23:55 InFiNitY[pG] wrote:On August 03 2020 22:47 Vindicare605 wrote:On August 03 2020 08:25 soul55555 wrote:
Honestly how much Longer will Covid-19 last? Depends on whether we can vaccinate against it or not. There are vaccines currently undergoing trials, in Australia the UK and one other place I can't remember I think Canada. That's going to take months. It's already been a month since I first read about vaccine trials. If the vaccines prove effective it will take more months for them to start being produced. Longer if the countries start bickering over rights and who can develop it, which is definitely going to happen. Once produced it will take several months longer to distribute it to enough people that it stops being a pandemic. My best guess? A year minimum. And Fauci said just last week that because the virus is so contagious, it will probably never actually go away. It will just be infecting smaller and smaller groups of people. Biontech, who are among the frontrunners for a vaccine right now, are aiming to request approval from the FDA by the end of october. They will most likely start mass producing as early late september if their internal results are promising, meaning they hope to have 300 million doses produced by the end of 2020. Even with that timeline being accurate, that leaves a bunch of unanswered questions. Are they going to share the patent so that other manufacturers can start producing it? If so, who will manufacture it? How will it be distributed, and where first? That's where my "countries bicker" part of it comes in. This thing doesn't just end once a vaccine is developed there's a lot more to come in 2021.
Of course they are not going to share their patent. They are a business after all, not a charity. They do however work with Pfizer in the US and Fosun Pharma in China, so they will be able to produce up to a billion doses by the end of 2021. As to how and where the vaccine will be distributed, most nations have prearranged deals with several pharmaceutical companies, so you can bet your ass these nations will have a clause in their contract ensuring they will be among the first to receive their doses. Biontech already has deals with the UK for 30 million, the US for 100 million (with option for 500 million more later on) and Japan for 120 million doses.
So I'm not disagreeing with you, Covid-19 will last until late next year easily, I do however expect it to disappear in most of the richer countries by next spring or maybe summer, depending on how many of the vaccines currently being developed actually work.
|
On August 03 2020 23:55 Vindicare605 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2020 23:10 LegalLord wrote:
The plateau in reported infection numbers (not just over the weekend but with week-on-week data) seems very much out of sync with the rest of the data and the increasingly alarmed messaging coming from the CDC and from other health officials, even within Trump's inner circle. There's a lot more human firewood yet to be burned through in the US before herd immunity.
The frightening thing about the numbers so far is that as bad as it's been, this is probably with less than 10% of the entire population getting the virus. There's a lot of room for things to get a lot worse, and we're all just being told to pretend like everything is normal, go back to school in the fall, so on and so forth. I'm glad I get to work 95% remote under the current conditions, but I know too many people are operating under a "you don't come to work, you don't eat" ultimatum. We're in desperate need of coordinated action, and not just of the "more stimulus" variety. If the virus' lethality rate is about 1% and there's 350 million people living in the United States. We need around 70% of people to be infected with the virus to achieve actual herd immunity. That's 2 million dead. And that's being conservative. I just want people to keep that in mind whenever the phrase "herd immunity" comes up. Anyone advocating that THAT will be the solution needs to understand what that means.
Wasn't the "real" letality around 0.2% ?
With 20/20 hindsight, makes me wonder if there should have been be a program to get young people infected/isolated and flushed back into society.
|
On August 04 2020 03:02 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2020 23:55 Vindicare605 wrote:On August 03 2020 23:10 LegalLord wrote:
The plateau in reported infection numbers (not just over the weekend but with week-on-week data) seems very much out of sync with the rest of the data and the increasingly alarmed messaging coming from the CDC and from other health officials, even within Trump's inner circle. There's a lot more human firewood yet to be burned through in the US before herd immunity.
The frightening thing about the numbers so far is that as bad as it's been, this is probably with less than 10% of the entire population getting the virus. There's a lot of room for things to get a lot worse, and we're all just being told to pretend like everything is normal, go back to school in the fall, so on and so forth. I'm glad I get to work 95% remote under the current conditions, but I know too many people are operating under a "you don't come to work, you don't eat" ultimatum. We're in desperate need of coordinated action, and not just of the "more stimulus" variety. If the virus' lethality rate is about 1% and there's 350 million people living in the United States. We need around 70% of people to be infected with the virus to achieve actual herd immunity. That's 2 million dead. And that's being conservative. I just want people to keep that in mind whenever the phrase "herd immunity" comes up. Anyone advocating that THAT will be the solution needs to understand what that means. Wasn't the "real" letality around 0.2% ? With 20/20 hindsight, makes me wonder if there should have been be a program to get young people infected/isolated and flushed back into society. is half a million an acceptable number? when does it become ok to just let it run its course?
|
|
|
On August 04 2020 03:02 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2020 23:55 Vindicare605 wrote:On August 03 2020 23:10 LegalLord wrote:
The plateau in reported infection numbers (not just over the weekend but with week-on-week data) seems very much out of sync with the rest of the data and the increasingly alarmed messaging coming from the CDC and from other health officials, even within Trump's inner circle. There's a lot more human firewood yet to be burned through in the US before herd immunity.
The frightening thing about the numbers so far is that as bad as it's been, this is probably with less than 10% of the entire population getting the virus. There's a lot of room for things to get a lot worse, and we're all just being told to pretend like everything is normal, go back to school in the fall, so on and so forth. I'm glad I get to work 95% remote under the current conditions, but I know too many people are operating under a "you don't come to work, you don't eat" ultimatum. We're in desperate need of coordinated action, and not just of the "more stimulus" variety. If the virus' lethality rate is about 1% and there's 350 million people living in the United States. We need around 70% of people to be infected with the virus to achieve actual herd immunity. That's 2 million dead. And that's being conservative. I just want people to keep that in mind whenever the phrase "herd immunity" comes up. Anyone advocating that THAT will be the solution needs to understand what that means. Wasn't the "real" letality around 0.2% ?
Sounds dubious... I think NYC had 20% estimated infection with death of 0.2% of the entire population? 1% sounds a lot more in line with what we've seen.
|
forgot about the hurricane in Florida, prob had an impact on data collection
|
Somewhere around 1% seems like a reasonable early estimate. It's enough that forcing herd immunity.
First estimates of long term costs are starting to come out:
You're looking at a few thousand dollars in healthcare costs per person due to covid if you infect the population. It's not just the immediate costs in productivity, healthcare overload, deaths etc. Long term, it affects people trhough organ damage pretty dramatically. Quality of Life suffers a lot if chores make you out of breath.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-fallout-insight/long-term-complications-of-covid-19-signals-billions-in-healthcare-costs-ahead-idUSKBN24Z1CM
Bruce Lee of the City University of New York (CUNY) Public School of Health estimated that if 20% of the U.S. population contracts the virus, the one-year post-hospitalization costs would be at least $50 billion, before factoring in longer-term care for lingering health problems. Without a vaccine, if 80% of the population became infected, that cost would balloon to $204 billion.
|
On August 04 2020 03:02 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2020 23:55 Vindicare605 wrote:On August 03 2020 23:10 LegalLord wrote:
The plateau in reported infection numbers (not just over the weekend but with week-on-week data) seems very much out of sync with the rest of the data and the increasingly alarmed messaging coming from the CDC and from other health officials, even within Trump's inner circle. There's a lot more human firewood yet to be burned through in the US before herd immunity.
The frightening thing about the numbers so far is that as bad as it's been, this is probably with less than 10% of the entire population getting the virus. There's a lot of room for things to get a lot worse, and we're all just being told to pretend like everything is normal, go back to school in the fall, so on and so forth. I'm glad I get to work 95% remote under the current conditions, but I know too many people are operating under a "you don't come to work, you don't eat" ultimatum. We're in desperate need of coordinated action, and not just of the "more stimulus" variety. If the virus' lethality rate is about 1% and there's 350 million people living in the United States. We need around 70% of people to be infected with the virus to achieve actual herd immunity. That's 2 million dead. And that's being conservative. I just want people to keep that in mind whenever the phrase "herd immunity" comes up. Anyone advocating that THAT will be the solution needs to understand what that means. Wasn't the "real" letality around 0.2% ? With 20/20 hindsight, makes me wonder if there should have been be a program to get young people infected/isolated and flushed back into society.
A large-scale antibody study conducted in Spain estimated IFR (infection fatality rate, which is what you had in mind) to be about 1%.
https://english.elpais.com/society/2020-05-14/antibody-study-shows-just-5-of-spaniards-have-contracted-the-coronavirus.html?fbclid=IwAR2y1YIjfLsEezXOqqyy69SQmEMB-LlILU0WpI_b9AXuGEQbTpMrPjvWxw0
There were similar studies (smaller in scale) in France and the UK and they also gave IFR of roughly 1%. An analysis by Worldometers estimated the IFR for NYC at 1.4%. Even if it's overestimated, the IFR for this disease is more likely to be closer to 1% than 0.2%, from what I've read so far.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-rate/?fbclid=IwAR0UZkH3wpiJca-2oexOZbYMaZSuwPw3gNRVUToUl07syZq1EC5XCv2uNzs
|
On August 04 2020 03:05 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2020 03:02 GoTuNk! wrote:On August 03 2020 23:55 Vindicare605 wrote:On August 03 2020 23:10 LegalLord wrote:
The plateau in reported infection numbers (not just over the weekend but with week-on-week data) seems very much out of sync with the rest of the data and the increasingly alarmed messaging coming from the CDC and from other health officials, even within Trump's inner circle. There's a lot more human firewood yet to be burned through in the US before herd immunity.
The frightening thing about the numbers so far is that as bad as it's been, this is probably with less than 10% of the entire population getting the virus. There's a lot of room for things to get a lot worse, and we're all just being told to pretend like everything is normal, go back to school in the fall, so on and so forth. I'm glad I get to work 95% remote under the current conditions, but I know too many people are operating under a "you don't come to work, you don't eat" ultimatum. We're in desperate need of coordinated action, and not just of the "more stimulus" variety. If the virus' lethality rate is about 1% and there's 350 million people living in the United States. We need around 70% of people to be infected with the virus to achieve actual herd immunity. That's 2 million dead. And that's being conservative. I just want people to keep that in mind whenever the phrase "herd immunity" comes up. Anyone advocating that THAT will be the solution needs to understand what that means. Wasn't the "real" letality around 0.2% ? With 20/20 hindsight, makes me wonder if there should have been be a program to get young people infected/isolated and flushed back into society. is half a million an acceptable number? when does it become ok to just let it run its course?
Acknowledging reality is acceptable. Sanctimonius posturing on lockdown isn't.
The AVERAGE death rate for this disease is 80 years old.
Perpetual lockdowns, keeping kids out of schools for over a year and infinite money printing will result in more death and misery than the disease itself. Reality must be considered.
|
On August 04 2020 05:36 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2020 03:05 Gorsameth wrote:On August 04 2020 03:02 GoTuNk! wrote:On August 03 2020 23:55 Vindicare605 wrote:On August 03 2020 23:10 LegalLord wrote:
The plateau in reported infection numbers (not just over the weekend but with week-on-week data) seems very much out of sync with the rest of the data and the increasingly alarmed messaging coming from the CDC and from other health officials, even within Trump's inner circle. There's a lot more human firewood yet to be burned through in the US before herd immunity.
The frightening thing about the numbers so far is that as bad as it's been, this is probably with less than 10% of the entire population getting the virus. There's a lot of room for things to get a lot worse, and we're all just being told to pretend like everything is normal, go back to school in the fall, so on and so forth. I'm glad I get to work 95% remote under the current conditions, but I know too many people are operating under a "you don't come to work, you don't eat" ultimatum. We're in desperate need of coordinated action, and not just of the "more stimulus" variety. If the virus' lethality rate is about 1% and there's 350 million people living in the United States. We need around 70% of people to be infected with the virus to achieve actual herd immunity. That's 2 million dead. And that's being conservative. I just want people to keep that in mind whenever the phrase "herd immunity" comes up. Anyone advocating that THAT will be the solution needs to understand what that means. Wasn't the "real" letality around 0.2% ? With 20/20 hindsight, makes me wonder if there should have been be a program to get young people infected/isolated and flushed back into society. is half a million an acceptable number? when does it become ok to just let it run its course? Acknowledging reality is acceptable. Sanctimonius posturing on lockdown isn't. The AVERAGE death rate for this disease is 80 years old. Perpetual lockdowns, keeping kids out of schools for over a year and infinite money printing will result in more death and misery than the disease itself. Reality must be considered.
And no one wants that. I have no idea why you guys constantly come up with that.
What you need is one real lockdown, for about two months, to kick the disease down, and then some restrictions and social distancing for a long time.
The US failed their first lockdown by ending it too quickly due to shitty political leadership. So they need a real one now. Or they accept that they stay a hotbed of disease until (if) a vaccine exists.
|
Reports in Ontario estimate (stratefied statistics done) that 1% of the population (14,5 M) were infected with covid 19. At least 6% of those infected died. This is pretty scary. However, it is important to analyse the situation based on age, social status and ethnicity (different races have different tolerances based on the virus... it's a gene thing) and see if you can find any correlation or trends.
|
On August 04 2020 05:36 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2020 03:05 Gorsameth wrote:On August 04 2020 03:02 GoTuNk! wrote:On August 03 2020 23:55 Vindicare605 wrote:On August 03 2020 23:10 LegalLord wrote:
The plateau in reported infection numbers (not just over the weekend but with week-on-week data) seems very much out of sync with the rest of the data and the increasingly alarmed messaging coming from the CDC and from other health officials, even within Trump's inner circle. There's a lot more human firewood yet to be burned through in the US before herd immunity.
The frightening thing about the numbers so far is that as bad as it's been, this is probably with less than 10% of the entire population getting the virus. There's a lot of room for things to get a lot worse, and we're all just being told to pretend like everything is normal, go back to school in the fall, so on and so forth. I'm glad I get to work 95% remote under the current conditions, but I know too many people are operating under a "you don't come to work, you don't eat" ultimatum. We're in desperate need of coordinated action, and not just of the "more stimulus" variety. If the virus' lethality rate is about 1% and there's 350 million people living in the United States. We need around 70% of people to be infected with the virus to achieve actual herd immunity. That's 2 million dead. And that's being conservative. I just want people to keep that in mind whenever the phrase "herd immunity" comes up. Anyone advocating that THAT will be the solution needs to understand what that means. Wasn't the "real" letality around 0.2% ? With 20/20 hindsight, makes me wonder if there should have been be a program to get young people infected/isolated and flushed back into society. is half a million an acceptable number? when does it become ok to just let it run its course? Acknowledging reality is acceptable. Sanctimonius posturing on lockdown isn't. The AVERAGE death rate for this disease is 80 years old. Perpetual lockdowns, keeping kids out of schools for over a year and infinite money printing will result in more death and misery than the disease itself. Reality must be considered. Always fun to try and argue with a strawman.
No one is talking pertetual lockdowns, no one is talking about keeping schools closed for a year, no one is talking about infinite money printing (tho isn't the US already doing that even without a crisis?).
If the US had done a proper lockdown and enforced it in the first place, the lockdown would be over by now and schools would be open, but they didn't.
If the US went into a proper lockdown now and enforced it it would be able to open up in a few months (Schools in the Netherlands were closed for ~4 months).
The rest of the world has already done this and managed to open back up, tho there are some concerns about a 2nd wave.
The notion of some in the US to keep insisting that its impossible to do after everyone has already done it is just another amazing example of 'American exceptionalism'.
|
|
|
Looking at the New York numbers the median age of death is probably closer to 70 than 80. Still quite high, but you're going to have many not-so-elderly adults die from this. Noting that younger people are less likely to die in general by at least an order of magnitude, it's not surprising that they are less likely to die from this specific cause in the same relative proportion.
The long-term effects of surviving a serious illness are significant and not to be forgotten as well. Many 15-50 year olds will have disabilities as a result of this. Best not to have the plague spread far and wide out of some notion that things aren't as bad as they obviously are.
|
Median death among those who die of a disease is a terrible, horrible, no good way to gauge public health impact (there's a reason no one has ever tracked the burden of myocardial infarction in various age groups by the median age of those that die of heart attacks). It ignores what types of people get the condition, it ignores the proportion of the population that are that type, it ignores the absolute prevalence of the condition, it ignores the overall amount of deaths...I wasn't sure people would find something worse than ratio-scale effect measures for public health (cough smoking and cardiovascular disease cough) but they seem to have managed it.
|
On August 04 2020 07:25 TheTenthDoc wrote:
Median death among those who die of a disease is a terrible, horrible, no good way to gauge public health impact (there's a reason no one has ever tracked the burden of myocardial infarction in various age groups by the median age of those that die of heart attacks). It ignores what types of people get the condition, it ignores the proportion of the population that are that type, it ignores the absolute prevalence of the condition, it ignores the overall amount of deaths...I wasn't sure people would find something worse than ratio-scale effect measures for public health (cough smoking and cardiovascular disease cough) but they seem to have managed it.
Median death?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
