EPTCoronavirus and You - Page 23
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2591 Posts
| ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4333 Posts
On March 12 2020 12:08 Mohdoo wrote: I feel like you aren't grasping what it means for millions of people to die. If you're just blindly assuming that won't happen, go for it, but no one is going to engage with you with that being a premise. You are welcome to believe as you wish. So why not just say folks 70 and over and those immuno compromised should stay home/isolate as much as possible while the younger who are at very little risk go about their lives normally. I was at a supermarket on the weekend and they were out of toilet rolls, tissues and paper towels.Our society doesn't need this level of panic, if it was Ebola spreading like this sure I'd agree but we're basically shutting down our economy for a bad flu and a dead economy will hurt more people than that. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On March 12 2020 12:17 Salazarz wrote: The fact that we're even having this conversation is pretty shocking to me, people thinking numbers on their charts spreadsheets are more important than actual human lives. A lot of people's livelihoods do depend on a functioning economy and avoiding a total societal shutdown, this isn't just a binary issue of death or life. So there obviously has to be thoughtful consideration of trade-offs between restrictions and harm done to day-to-day activites. Cancelling gigantic sports events is probably justified, shutting down travel between the US and Europe seems ridiculous given that community spread is going to far outpace travel. This is not going to be contained any more, it needs to be managed. | ||
TheEmulator
28090 Posts
On March 12 2020 12:21 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: So why not just say folks 70 and over and those immuno compromised should stay home/isolate as much as possible while the younger who are at very little risk go about their lives normally. I was at a supermarket on the weekend and they were out of toilet rolls, tissues and paper towels.Our society doesn't need this level of panic, if it was Ebola spreading like this sure I'd agree but we're basically shutting down our economy for a bad flu and a dead economy will hurt more people than that. Yea my province in Canada doesn't even have a confirmed case yet and things are already being sold out here. I can understand being prepared for a potential quarantine, but people have really gone overboard. My cousin doesn't want to send his kids to school tomorrow because the NBA season being postponed has got him worried. There's only like 100 cases in our entire country atm. | ||
|
GoTuNk!
Chile4591 Posts
Rather than discussing what the government should or should not do, of which we have 0 control of, everyone should be taking measures (or in my case preparing) to reduce contact and activities where we expose ourself and/or others to protect other people and contribute our part in making the spread of the disease flatter. I would also strongly advice having a contingency plan in case you/people who live with you/your family get sick. | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
On March 12 2020 12:21 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: So why not just say folks 70 and over and those immuno compromised should stay home/isolate as much as possible while the younger who are at very little risk go about their lives normally. Because if every young/not at risk person acts as a conduit for the disease you fuck over all the people who are at risk. | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On March 12 2020 12:21 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: So why not just say folks 70 and over and those immuno compromised should stay home/isolate as much as possible while the younger who are at very little risk go about their lives normally. I was at a supermarket on the weekend and they were out of toilet rolls, tissues and paper towels.Our society doesn't need this level of panic, if it was Ebola spreading like this sure I'd agree but we're basically shutting down our economy for a bad flu and a dead economy will hurt more people than that. Sure we all get that panic and hording is bad. Nobody said it wasn't. Saying that only vulnerable groups should isolate themselves though is just being clueless about epidemiology. | ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2591 Posts
On March 12 2020 12:30 Nyxisto wrote: A lot of people's livelihoods do depend on a functioning economy and avoiding a total societal shutdown, this isn't just a binary issue of death or life. So there obviously has to be thoughtful consideration of trade-offs between restrictions and harm done to day-to-day activites. Cancelling gigantic sports events is probably justified, shutting down travel between the US and Europe seems ridiculous given that community spread is going to far outpace travel. This is not going to be contained any more, it needs to be managed. If we were willing to take the much smaller hit few months ago and implement proper tracking and quarantine measures originally, we wouldn't even be having this conversation now. I agree that this isn't going to be 'contained' any more at this point, as it's already spread pretty much everywhere, and I also agree that it needs to be managed; but you seem to have a vastly different idea of what 'managing' a disease like this entails than I do. Throwing arms up in the air and lamenting 'the economy' isn't going to do much, and we simply do not have the hospital capacity or the number of doctors and nurses it would take to let things go on as normal and only treat the symptoms as they come. Again, this isn't 'just a flu' -- even adults in good health often need intensive hospital care to get through this. The only reason SK's fatality numbers are as low as they are is due to their excellent medical facilities. | ||
|
Lmui
Canada6213 Posts
My company (office of ~1400 people) cancelled all non-essential work travel last month, and pretty much all travel period this month. I need to bring my laptop home on weekends in case anything happens, and I can't get into the office the next week and a WFH policy is mandated. The personal part though, is that our monthly gathering for cake/donuts/snacks to celebrate milestones was cancelled. Therefore, no donuts, no cake and no free food next week. On a more serious note though, the nonessentials such as restaurants are getting hammered in Vancouver. The most affected are dim sum restaurants from what I see. A few months ago, it was call in, and wait 30 min for a table during peak hours, 1h without a reservation. Now it's go whenever, and you'll get seated immediately. They've probably lost 30% or more of the business they usually see. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23244 Posts
On March 12 2020 12:53 Salazarz wrote: If we were willing to take the much smaller hit few months ago and implement proper tracking and quarantine measures originally, we wouldn't even be having this conversation now. I agree that this isn't going to be 'contained' any more at this point, as it's already spread pretty much everywhere, and I also agree that it needs to be managed; but you seem to have a vastly different idea of what 'managing' a disease like this entails than I do. Throwing arms up in the air and lamenting 'the economy' isn't going to do much, and we simply do not have the hospital capacity or the number of doctors and nurses it would take to let things go on as normal and only treat the symptoms as they come. Again, this isn't 'just a flu' -- even adults in good health often need intensive hospital care to get through this. The only reason SK's fatality numbers are as low as they are is due to their excellent medical facilities. Any chance you can speak to the Chloroquine being distributed there? | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16711 Posts
On March 12 2020 12:42 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: Because if every young/not at risk person acts as a conduit for the disease you fuck over all the people who are at risk. Every year some infectious disease a young person has is spread to an older person whose immune system is compromised. Then, that older person who has less than 5 well functioning major organs dies. There is no replacement for a good immune system. There is no replacement for a healthy heart, lungs, liver, brain, and kidneys. No matter how many regulatory backflips governments perform that can't prevent people of compromised health from dying. Health IS Wealth. | ||
Manifesto7
Osaka27149 Posts
| ||
|
DucK-
Singapore11447 Posts
On March 12 2020 01:35 Bonyth wrote: How are shops looking in the infected countries? Food, water, toilet paper, basic stuff. My mum is freaking out, and I want to have another point of view from other more infected statistically countries. Here in Singapore, initially many people panic bought when the government raised the alert level in the evening last month. Cup noodles, toilet paper, condoms (?!?!) and other essentials were swept off the shelves. The very next morning, ALL shelves were fully stocked as though the panic buying never happened... The reason being that the government requires our major supermarket companies to have a HUGE stockpile in their warehouses for essential items. Once the masses got the message that there's ample supply available, the panic buying ceased. Now our shops are pretty much as per normal. The only thing that's not easily available are sanitisers, face masks etc. But I mentioned earlier in this thread, every household was given 4 masks free by the government. For sanitisers, our shopping centres, offices and even in pretty much every public/private housing apartment block lifts should have 1 bottle for anyone to use freely. | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8657 Posts
On March 12 2020 13:22 Manifesto7 wrote: This thread is not for discussing the merits of culling old people from our society, or debating the morals of such. Please stay on topic with the news of the day and how it is impacting your life. Thanks. how can you discuss the impacts of the virus on your life without discussing the above topics? id be willing to bet that 99% of tlers on this thread dont have the virus themselves. the only way their lives are being impacted by the virus is by how society/governments are reacting to the virus. i for one completely agree that its completely irrational to actively shutdown society and tank the global economy. deciding to negatively impact the livelihood of literally everyone alive on the planet in order to prevent a small percentage of people from contracting a virus that kills an even smaller percentage of people is stupid. its not sensible to assume that governments have the resources to reimburse or compensate people for damages/losses due to the failing economies. the number of businesses that have either closed or simply made employees redundant in recent months in sydney is ridiculous. tell me more about how the government is going to cover for people who have literally lost their entire income. | ||
|
Manifesto7
Osaka27149 Posts
On March 12 2020 13:37 evilfatsh1t wrote: how can you discuss the impacts of the virus on your life without discussing the above topics? id be willing to bet that 99% of tlers on this thread dont have the virus themselves. the only way their lives are being impacted by the virus is by how society/governments are reacting to the virus. i for one completely agree that its completely irrational to actively shutdown society and tank the global economy. deciding to negatively impact the livelihood of literally everyone alive on the planet in order to prevent a small percentage of people from contracting a virus that kills an even smaller percentage of people is stupid. its not sensible to assume that governments have the resources to reimburse or compensate people for damages/losses due to the failing economies. the number of businesses that have either closed or simply made employees redundant in recent months in sydney is ridiculous. tell me more about how the government is going to cover for people who have literally lost their entire income. Because comments like this... There would be a 6 month - year long delay while estates and wills get sorted out, so it'd be a similar effect to just stopping the economy. In the long run, yeah, it'd PROBABLY be better for US society if the elderly controlled less of the wealth proportionally, but we can't know the future and that could be done without you know, having them all die from a preventable illness. ... are not conducive to the topic at hand. If you want to discuss the morality of personal responsibility in a pandemic situation, find another thread. It is beyond the scope of this one. If you have any further questions, feel free to PM me. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16711 Posts
"bringing people in from out of town.. no... that's not going to work". | ||
|
REDBLUEGREEN
Germany1903 Posts
On March 12 2020 13:37 evilfatsh1t wrote: i for one completely agree that its completely irrational to actively shutdown society and tank the global economy. deciding to negatively impact the livelihood of literally everyone alive on the planet in order to prevent a small percentage of people from contracting a virus that kills an even smaller percentage of people is stupid. From current data COVID is both more infectious and deadlier than the Spanish Flu that killed 18-50 million of a world population of 1.9 billion back then. More importantly 20% of cases require hospitalization and once the healthcare system is overwhelmed (already happening in Italy with 12k cases) the fatality rate could quickly rise from the current global 3.5% to something between 3.5 and 20%. Merkel, as the first politician I saw, finally reflected expert opinion and said this virus could infect 60-70% of Germans. The number won't be much different for other countries. You can calculate yourself with a CFR of 3.5% what this means... User was warned for this post. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16711 Posts
On March 12 2020 13:56 REDBLUEGREEN wrote: From current data COVID is both more infectious and deadlier than the Spanish Flu that killed 18-50 million of a world population of 1.9 billion back then. More importantly 20% of cases require hospitalization and once the healthcare system is overwhelmed (already happening in Italy with 12k cases) the fatality rate could quickly rise from the current global 3.5% to something between 3.5 and 20%. Merkel, as the first politician I saw, finally reflected expert opinion and said this virus could infect 60-70% of Germans. The number won't be much different for other countries. You can calculate yourself with a CFR of 3.5% what this means... I question if there is any reliable estimates of the death rate at this early stage. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-51674743 It is PhD-level hard. Even counting cases is tricky. ![[image loading]](https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/581F/production/_111095522_deaths_in_china_v2_x2_640-nc.png) According to the immunologist that works in the lab my mom runs ... she states with a low degree of confidence that it'll kill ~50,000 people in the USA and it is already too late to try and put the toothpaste back in the tube. She says anyone claiming to have good confidence in a death rate is full of shit. She says anyone claiming to have high confidence that the the current measures being undertaken will lower the # of deaths is just role playing or is in the "a little bit of knowledge is dangerous" territory. By way of comparison the swine flu killed up to 17,000 in the USA in 2010. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-flu-usa/swine-flu-has-killed-up-to-17000-in-u-s-report-idUSN1223579720100212 My little informal chat with her rather mirrors the BBC article in the lack of confidence in any estimates of death rates and a lack of confidence in future predictions. If you have no pre-existing health issue your probability of death is very, very low relative to people with health problems. People with cardiovascular issues are the most vulnerable. ![[image loading]](https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/56E0/production/_111104222_death_ratio_v2640-nc.png) Conclusion: if you have a fever stay away from your great grandparents and grandparents and any one who has cardio vascular issues. You don't have to worry about staying away from young children. Young children are not dying from covid-19. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On March 12 2020 13:56 REDBLUEGREEN wrote: From current data COVID is both more infectious and deadlier than the Spanish Flu that killed 18-50 million of a world population of 1.9 billion back then. More importantly 20% of cases require hospitalization and once the healthcare system is overwhelmed (already happening in Italy with 12k cases) the fatality rate could quickly rise from the current global 3.5% to something between 3.5 and 20%. Merkel, as the first politician I saw, finally reflected expert opinion and said this virus could infect 60-70% of Germans. The number won't be much different for other countries. You can calculate yourself with a CFR of 3.5% what this means... You have your data wrong by a magnitude. The Spanish flu killed about 10-20% of the people it infected. This virus has killed about 3% in strongly overwhelmed regions like Hubei or North Italy and appears to kill about ~0.7% or so of people in regions with adequate healthcare. The risk profile is also different in that the Spanish flu killed people with healthy immune systems due to causing cytokine syndrome. On the infectiousness, it's not quite clear but according to the latest WHO reports the main route of infection for covid-19 is symptomatic people which would be a relatively good sign. | ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2591 Posts
On March 12 2020 14:18 JimmyJRaynor wrote: According to the immunologist that works in the lab my mom runs ... she states with a low degree of confidence that it'll kill ~50,000 people in the USA and it is already too late to try and put the toothpaste back in the tube. She says anyone claiming to have good confidence in a death rate is full of shit. She says anyone claiming to have high confidence that the the current measures being undertaken will lower the # of deaths is just role playing or is in the "a little bit of knowledge is dangerous" territory. This sounds like utter nonsense. Both China and South Korea have demonstrated that this disease can be controlled and contained with the right measures. Of course if we keep dragging out feet it'll get to the point where it will indeed be too late to take any meaningful preventative action, it'll also be at that point when we realize that we simply don't have nearly enough hospitals and medical staff to provide the care required. All the numbers on mortality rates of this virus will be completely out the window if the number of patients becomes high enough to overwhelm the existing medical facilities; we're already very close to that point in Italy, and by the looks of it, multiple other countries are set to follow suit. | ||
| ||
