Coronavirus

[cubsfan]

Drop dead Cwericb - I have TONS of respect for the members view, just not yours. There are a bunch of brilliant people here

that hate Trump - totally obvious. And I know you love your echo chamber and hate the dissenting opinions.

 

Sorry to disappoint you.

[ERICOPOLY]

Well orthopa, that’s what I’ve been getting at. They(those you listed and a few others) say a lot, but don’t really say anything either. They just call you names and make up political narratives.

 

Oh, yeah - don't disagree with the CoBF experts here. They have everyone's motivations figured out. And they just love to pile on.

 

You begin with... "They have everyone's motivations figured out"

 

And you follow with... "And they just love to pile on."

 

It struck me as funny.

[orthopa]

“Yep, another Trump guy with his "This is like the flu take". Thank you!”

 

Yes I have noticed that several of the members of “The Trump Can Do No Wrong Cult” have jumped into this conversation to support Trump and his delusional ideas. This “flu” will be all over by Easter, etc, etc.

 

I don’t know if they really don’t understand how serious Covid-19 can get or if they have just drunk the Kool Aid to the extent they have become just as delusional as their cult leader. But it certainly is not helpful to under estimate the effects of this pandemic or to demean those taking realistic steps to stop its spread. And by the way, it is a “pandemic” despite what Mr. Grannis may believe.

 

I wonder what these people will say as the numbers increase?

 

We know the numbers are going to increase don't we? Did anyone say they wont? Whats the point where numbers increased way more then expected? Earlier in the thread when compared to the flu some links posted posited millions of deaths as "this is not the flu." Whats a reasonable cut off in your mind to determine whether or not this was all overblown or underestimated?

 

Personally, I don't think it is overblown at all. I do think it will be easier to answer your question later on as there is more data. I'd want to know the case fatality rate when hospitals are experiencing normal load & when they are full, and a hypothetical R0 where people are behaving normally like it was "just the flu." At the end of this, I think we'll be able to know those numbers.

 

If acting like any other flu projects to 80k-160k deaths when all is said and done then I'd say it was blown way out of proportion. 80k flu deaths in 2018 was the worst year in four decades. And life carried on. I dunno. Choose your proportion. We will be able to plug in the numbers at some point.

 

At the end of this I think we will get to 80k deaths with the entire nation locked down for several months. Italy has 90k confirmed cases and 9k deaths. I think the USA ratio will look similar at the end of this. Our health care quality is nothing special. Currently, we are tacking on 15-20k confirmed cases a day. That should stabilize and go down, but over the next 60-90 days I think it's pretty likely we'll get to 800k cases and 80k deaths all the while under a soft-lockdown scenario. To me that is not overblown, because if we weren't in soft lockdown you could be looking at 10s of millions of cases and single digit millions deaths.

 

For example, here are annual flu numbers. Estimated that 9-45 million people a year get it.

 

> CDC estimates that influenza has resulted in between 9 million – 45 million illnesses, between 140,000 – 810,000 hospitalizations and between 12,000 – 61,000 deaths annually since 2010.

 

I would ask you Orthopa the same question, what would you need to see to say that it's NOT overblown?

 

I think using the flu as your measuring stick is good. What else do we have? Unfortunately we dont have a a soft lock down flu season to compare although you would have to assume the deaths would be lower. Another variable is the flu deaths you cite above are 12,000-61,000 deaths a year WITH a vaccine as well as tamiflu, xofluza.

 

https://covid19.healthdata.org/projections this link guesses 81k deaths with corona.

 

So we have:

 

Flu with 12,000-61,000 deaths with a readily available cheap vaccine, 2 prescription medications, 15 minute rapidly available tests, and no social cooperation

 

                                vs

 

81,000 deaths predicted with no vaccine, no medications, an ill prepared healthcare system, incomplete insufficient testing, nationwide shortages of PPE, sloppy public policy, and a soft lockdown.

 

 

So its vaccine, 2 medications, and rapidly available testing vs a soft lockdown? At first glance looks like the flu could be way more deadly then it is and we have made progress there for sure.

 

EDIT I guess I punt this back to you. It looks reasonable to assume that with an equally effective vaccine and 2 meds we should be on par with the flu right?

[rb]

Honestly, at this point I don't think the actual number of dead matter so much. Economically speaking it doesn't matter at all. I mean maybe it'll be 80k dead in the US. Sure that's nothing. Even if it's 500k dead, long term economically it doesn't matter. It'll be mostly old folk which don't produce much anyway. But even if i pluck 500k out of the work force, I wouldn't get anything more than maybe, at most, a soft quarter.

 

The economic reaction is clearly not linked directly to the number of dead. It's probably more linked to the horror shows that develop as this fucker takes hold.

 

It seems to me that we've been persistently and pervasively too optimistic about the virus. China tried to ignore it initially. Then as it saw it develop clamped down hard. As we now observe, China actually clamped down early. They did so at a great economic cost. Now China is not your bleeding heart, let's save everyone type place. If 1 million have to die to for the economic miracle, then 1 million will die. So why did they do it?

 

Then Italy and Spain ignored it and they turned into horror shows. UK made fun of it and it's about to become a horror show.

 

So looking a weekly mortality monitors we have had years with quite a large number of deaths then this and no one noticed. Is this all an overreaction?

 

Even better question, unless these people croaked at home, how did the hospitals handle his volume of sick/dying people?

If i had to venture a guess. Assuming that these people did not croak at home and we didn't hear health professionals bitching is that some of it is accidents. Seems like spikes happen in the winter, so you figure, more car accidents, chick breaks her neck skiing, dumbass on a snowmobile, etc. For the hospital part I'd say that those people took less time to die. But I'm just an economics/finance/ops guy, not a doctor. Maybe orthopa can tell us why he thinks hospitals were able to handle the volume before and now doctors are bitching.

[Castanza]

Well orthopa, that’s what I’ve been getting at. They(those you listed and a few others) say a lot, but don’t really say anything either. They just call you names and make up political narratives.

 

Oh, yeah - don't disagree with the CoBF experts here. They have everyone's motivations figured out. And they just love to pile on.

 

So far I've gathered this:

 

1. Only Republicans can practice cognitive dissidence.

2. Multiple individuals have now said that regardless of outcome and regardless of hindsight analysis, their approach will still be correct and any rebuttal will be wrong.

3. There is no such things as riding the fence and trying to approach issues/decisions with some amount of skepticism. If you're not 100% with the herd you're a charlatan, denier, etc.

 

 

[orthopa]

"If acting like any other flu projects to 80k-160k deaths when all is said and done then I'd say it was blown way out of proportion."

 

I think what people are missing is that this is not REPLACING the flu, it is in ADDITION to the flu deaths.

 

And 80-160K deaths may not be a big deal to you, but when some of those deaths become you or yours then it is a different story.

 

I hear you, your probably still have trouble sleeping with the latest opioid death data huh? That came out of no where quick too. Horrible exponential growth.

overdose-death-rates.html

overdose-death-rates.html

[undervalued]

https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2018/03/graying-america.html

 

I am going to use the 77mil number for people currently age 65 or older. Based on the model by Lipsitch, 40 to 70% people will get it (https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/the-latest-on-the-coronavirus/). So if 40% (best case scenario) of the 65 yrs old population get coronavirus, then if we use death rate of 15% - we get to about 4.62 million people who will die. Currently we're no where close to that.

[orthopa]

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid#status-of-covid-19

 

Downgraded by the UK Gov. But not reported in the mainstream (to my knowledge), which seems appropriate as it would go someway to destroying all the important missing about isolation and all the efforts being taken by the Gov.

 

Well isn't that counter intuitive? Why do you need to isolate and expend a lot of effort if it is no longer a high consequence infectious disease? This seems like a pretty serious determination.

 

"In the UK, a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) is defined according to the following criteria:

 

acute infectious disease

typically has a high case-fatality rate

may not have effective prophylaxis or treatment

often difficult to recognize and detect rapidly

ability to spread in the community and within healthcare settings

requires an enhanced individual, population and system response to ensure it is managed effectively, efficiently and safely"

 

The UK is sticking their neck out early with this one for sure.

[Castanza]

"If acting like any other flu projects to 80k-160k deaths when all is said and done then I'd say it was blown way out of proportion."

 

I think what people are missing is that this is not REPLACING the flu, it is in ADDITION to the flu deaths.

 

And 80-160K deaths may not be a big deal to you, but when some of those deaths become you or yours then it is a different story.

 

The definition of "Affluenflammation"

[cubsfan]

 

3. There is no such things as riding the fence and trying to approach issues/decisions with some amount of skepticism. If you're not 100% with the herd you're a charlatan, denier, etc.

 

Uh, yeah, that would be the point. If you're not with the herd - pile on the ridicule. No debate allowed.

 

As for you Castanza - stop being so sober and judicious!

[orthopa]

https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2018/03/graying-america.html

 

I am going to use the 77mil number for people currently age 65 or older. Based on the model by Lipsitch, 40 to 70% people will get it (https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/the-latest-on-the-coronavirus/). So if 40% (best case scenario) of the 65 yrs old population get coronavirus, then if we use death rate of 15% - we get to about 4.62 million people who will die. Currently we're no where close to that.

 

Thats only 40% and 15%, project that world wide 675 million people as of 2018 and we have 41 million dead old folks. Looks like that death rate in that population is a bit inflated or we just haven't had enough time yet.

[rb]

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid#status-of-covid-19

 

Downgraded by the UK Gov. But not reported in the mainstream (to my knowledge), which seems appropriate as it would go someway to destroying all the important missing about isolation and all the efforts being taken by the Gov.

 

Well isn't that counter intuitive? Why do you need to isolate and expend a lot of effort if it is no longer a high consequence infectious disease? This seems like a pretty serious determination.

 

"In the UK, a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) is defined according to the following criteria:

 

acute infectious disease

typically has a high case-fatality rate

may not have effective prophylaxis or treatment

often difficult to recognize and detect rapidly

ability to spread in the community and within healthcare settings

requires an enhanced individual, population and system response to ensure it is managed effectively, efficiently and safely"

 

The UK is sticking their neck out early with this one for sure.

No kidding. That was published March 19 - UK confirmed cases = 2.7K. March 27, UK confirmed cases = 14.7K.

 

When I've read the guidance I've thought that there's probably some medical procedural thing that COVID doesn't have to be on that list and I don't know what I'm reading. But the UK has been pretty cavalier with this thing. The NHS is a great system but it actually has less spare capacity than Italy. So I'm thinking that UK is probably the next shit show.

 

But then the UK has this guy:

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/26/tech/dyson-ventilators-coronavirus/index.html

 

... and America has a bunch of guys who like to tweet. So maybe they'll be ok.

[Viking]

"If acting like any other flu projects to 80k-160k deaths when all is said and done then I'd say it was blown way out of proportion."

 

I think what people are missing is that this is not REPLACING the flu, it is in ADDITION to the flu deaths.

 

And 80-160K deaths may not be a big deal to you, but when some of those deaths become you or yours then it is a different story.

 

Clearly I am a simpleton. Are people now looking at low reported results (i.e. low death count) then using that fact to conclude that the response taken (that resulted in the low number) was overdone?

 

So we have a virus. If we do nothing we know we get Wuhan, Iran or Italy. If we test like hell early we get South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong or Singapore. If we screw up the initial response (so we have widespread community transfer on a large scale) we know we have to resort to some sort of lock down like China, Western Europe, US and Canada. (India too?)

 

Lock down slows the spread but takes about 2 weeks to start to impact the numbers. And even so, it likely takes another couple of weeks to see total confirmed case numbers really start to decline.

 

For example, are people suggesting that as we see the numbers in Washington State start to turn down in the next couple of weeks (and the death count does not mushroom higher) that that is proof that the lock down as implemented was way overdone and the issue was ‘blown way out of proportion’?

[Liberty]

https://overcast.fm/+GfeK4jvqY

 

 

Interview (podcast) with dr Scott Gottlieb.

[Liberty]

 

“ Researchers found that washing hands more than 10 times daily was 55 percent effective in stopping virus transmission while wearing a mask was more effective at 68 percent.”

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/27/health/us-coronavirus-face-masks.html

[orthopa]

"If acting like any other flu projects to 80k-160k deaths when all is said and done then I'd say it was blown way out of proportion."

 

I think what people are missing is that this is not REPLACING the flu, it is in ADDITION to the flu deaths.

 

And 80-160K deaths may not be a big deal to you, but when some of those deaths become you or yours then it is a different story.

 

Clearly I am a simpleton. Are people now looking at low reported results (i.e. low death count) then using that fact to conclude that the response taken (that resulted in the low number) was overdone?

 

So we have a virus. If we do nothing we know we get Wuhan, Iran or Italy. If we test like hell early we get South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong or Singapore. If we screw up the initial response (so we have widespread community transfer on a large scale) we know we have to resort to some sort of lock down like China, Western Europe, US and Canada. (India too?)

 

Lock down slows the spread but takes about 2 weeks to start to impact the numbers. And even so, it likely takes another couple of weeks to see total confirmed case numbers really start to decline.

 

For example, are people suggesting that as we see the numbers in Washington State start to turn down in the next couple of weeks (and the death count does not mushroom higher) that that is proof that the lock down as implemented was way overdone and the issue was ‘blown way out of proportion’?

 

I think a better way to look at it is that social distancing/lockdown started 6 days ago in Washington and the deaths went from 52 on 3/14 to 175 total now. Stay at home order was on 3/22 and essential services was on March 15, as a result we should just be seeing the results now and the growth should slow down ever more so now.  I would have expected much much more by now. Wouldnt you?

 

52 to 175 deaths total over a period of 2 weeks? And according to this estimate the death numbers should turn up not down (change state to Washington). Your expecting them to decrease?

 

https://covid19.healthdata.org/projections

[Castanza]

FWIW:

 

Differing opinions from doctors.

 

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=793985471088619&id=100014315194592&_rdr

 

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=793945707759262&id=100014315194592&_rdr

[orthopa]

"If acting like any other flu projects to 80k-160k deaths when all is said and done then I'd say it was blown way out of proportion."

 

I think what people are missing is that this is not REPLACING the flu, it is in ADDITION to the flu deaths.

 

And 80-160K deaths may not be a big deal to you, but when some of those deaths become you or yours then it is a different story.

 

Clearly I am a simpleton. Are people now looking at low reported results (i.e. low death count) then using that fact to conclude that the response taken (that resulted in the low number) was overdone?

 

So we have a virus. If we do nothing we know we get Wuhan, Iran or Italy. If we test like hell early we get South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong or Singapore. If we screw up the initial response (so we have widespread community transfer on a large scale) we know we have to resort to some sort of lock down like China, Western Europe, US and Canada. (India too?)

 

Lock down slows the spread but takes about 2 weeks to start to impact the numbers. And even so, it likely takes another couple of weeks to see total confirmed case numbers really start to decline.

 

For example, are people suggesting that as we see the numbers in Washington State start to turn down in the next couple of weeks (and the death count does not mushroom higher) that that is proof that the lock down as implemented was way overdone and the issue was ‘blown way out of proportion’?

 

 

I would say your last sentence is incorrect, numbers are expected to go up according to this guy, same one predicting 81,000 US deaths. He sees 1429 deaths in washington state even with the lock down.

 

So if numbers come down as you say it isn't due to the lock down, something else was off.

 

https://komonews.com/news/coronavirus/uw-study-estimates-81000-us-deaths-from-coronavirus-1429-in-wash-state

[ERICOPOLY]

 

NRA sues California Gov. Gavin Newsom and other state officials over gun store closures

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/28/us/nra-sues-california-over-gun-store-closures/index.html

[KJP]

 

NRA sues California Gov. Gavin Newsom and other state officials over gun store closures

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/28/us/nra-sues-california-over-gun-store-closures/index.html

 

I'm not surprised.  This has already been litigated in Pennsylvania.  The day after the Governor ordered all non-essential businesses (including gun shops) closed, various parties petitioned the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to enjoin that order as applied to, among others, gun shops:  http://www.pacourts.us/assets/files/page-1305/file-8694.pdf

 

A few days later, the Court denied the petition with respect to gun shops, but there were three dissenters:

Majority opinion:  http://www.pacourts.us/assets/files/page-1305/file-8710.pdf

Dissent:  http://www.pacourts.us/assets/files/page-1305/file-8709.pdf

 

Shortly thereafter, the Governor revised his closure order to permit gun shops to continue to operate with certain restrictions:  https://www.fox43.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/gun-shops-reclassified-as-life-sustaining-businesses/521-b8d38d12-0438-4410-9488-7e8fbc5ce993

 

 

[mcliu]

People need to start wearing face masks, even home made ones help. Such a cheap/quick solution to slow the spread and save lives. This should be national policy.

 

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/03/19/opinion/guidance-against-wearing-masks-coronavirus-is-wrong-you-should-cover-your-face/?outputType=amp&__twitter_impression=true

[mloub]

FWIW:

 

Differing opinions from doctors.

 

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=793985471088619&id=100014315194592&_rdr

 

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=793945707759262&id=100014315194592&_rdr

 

The second doctor is a boob. He is making some very interesting logical errors. Firstly, he claims, without proof that covid-19 is widespread - at some points he conflates covid-19 with other strains of coronavirus, which he says represent 10-17% of common colds, and then uses that conflation to claim that covid-19 is probably as widespread as the common cold. Then he takes the unfounded leap that if covid-19 is so widespread, maybe we are mis-attributing mortality. Someone who dies and tests positive with covid-19, according to this guys faulty logic, may have died from something else.

 

Musk made a similar dubious argument regarding the Italy death data on twitter, arguing since the dead often had other underlying conditions, maybe it was those conditions that resulted in their death and not covid-19.

 

This line of reasoning lacks even the most basic understanding of pathology and causation.

 

If an elderly person with heart disease, for example, died and tested positive for covid-19, the cause of death can be reasonably determined. Covid-19 infection serious enough to cause death presents with a severe ground-glass pattern pneumonia, decreased oxygenation, fever, increased white blood cell count (and a myriad of other objective measurements) that are NOT present in a cardiac death. To disingeniously claim that we can not tell the difference is so ignorant of the basic facts it would be laughable in any other circumstance.

 

M.

 

 

 

 

[drzola]

Yep I ask of Facebook poster boy lol, define an epidemiologist, virologist and a doctor.

 

[LC]

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/03/28/unacceptable-dems-fume-after-trump-announces-plan-refuse-congressional-oversight

 

Trump suggested that under his own understanding of his constitutional powers as president, he can gag the special inspector general for pandemic recovery, known by the acronym S.I.G.P.R., and keep information from Congress.  [...]

 

The signing statement also challenged several other provisions in the bill, including one requiring consultation with Congress about who should be the staff leaders of a newly formed executive branch committee charged with conducting oversight of the government's response to the pandemic.

 

[Castanza]

FWIW:

 

Differing opinions from doctors.

 

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=793985471088619&id=100014315194592&_rdr

 

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=793945707759262&id=100014315194592&_rdr

 

The second doctor is a boob. He is making some very interesting logical errors. Firstly, he claims, without proof that covid-19 is widespread - at some points he conflates covid-19 with other strains of coronavirus, which he says represent 10-17% of common colds, and then uses that conflation to claim that covid-19 is probably as widespread as the common cold. Then he takes the unfounded leap that if covid-19 is so widespread, maybe we are mis-attributing mortality. Someone who dies and tests positive with covid-19, according to this guys faulty logic, may have died from something else.

 

Musk made a similar dubious argument regarding the Italy death data on twitter, arguing since the dead often had other underlying conditions, maybe it was those conditions that resulted in their death and not covid-19.

 

This line of reasoning lacks even the most basic understanding of pathology and causation.

 

If an elderly person with heart disease, for example, died and tested positive for covid-19, the cause of death can be reasonably determined. Covid-19 infection serious enough to cause death presents with a severe ground-glass pattern pneumonia, decreased oxygenation, fever, increased white blood cell count (and a myriad of other objective measurements) that are NOT present in a cardiac death. To disingeniously claim that we can not tell the difference is so ignorant of the basic facts it would be laughable in any other circumstance.

 

M.

 

I’m not claiming the validity of eithers arguments. Simply saying it’s interesting to see differing opinions. Hence the (fwiw). What were your thoughts on the first?