Jump to content

Coronavirus

spartansaver

By spartansaver
in General Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 8.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

minten Newbie

minten

Posted
Posted

In all the talk about the contact tracing apps nobody seems to want to get into how it will work in practice.    If I go out running, and run past someone who is infected, how will the system evaluate risk. How will the system know if and in what way I interacted with this person?  If you set the filter too loose, it won't work. If you set it too tight, your whole society will be in quarantine in days and everybody will de-install it within a week. Also, if I sit in locked up my apartment all day, and my infected neighbour will sit 1 meter away for hours in his apartment, but with a wall between us, will the app know there's a wall?  I can think of countless more questions like this.

 

 

RichardGibbons Collaborator

RichardGibbons

Posted
Posted

In all the talk about the contact tracing apps nobody seems to want to get into how it will work in practice.    If I go out running, and run past someone who is infected, how will the system evaluate risk. How will the system know if and in what way I interacted with this person?  If you set the filter too loose, it won't work. If you set it too tight, your whole society will be in quarantine in days and everybody will de-install it within a week. Also, if I sit in locked up my apartment all day, and my infected neighbour will sit 1 meter away for hours in his apartment, but with a wall between us, will the app know there's a wall?  I can think of countless more questions like this.

 

Yeah, any solution won't be perfect. It's nice, however, that everyone involved recognizes that the perfect is the enemy of the good. I imagine that the epidemiologists' understanding of exponential growth will allow them to see that a solution that reduces the R0 by 70% is worthwhile even if it doesn't reduce it by 100%.

brianr27 Newbie

brianr27

Posted
Posted

My guess is that contact testing will require widespread testing. Anyone flagged as at risk via contact tracing to be required to self-quarantine until they can provide a test result showing that they are not infectious. Ideally, the person would take an at home test and submit the results but that could be open to tampering. A less ideal option would be that the person would go to a drive through, show an ID and be certified non-infectious.

ERICOPOLY Mentor

ERICOPOLY

Posted
Posted

President Donald Trump yesterday retweeted a Republican politician's call to fire Dr. Anthony Fauci from his post as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

 

Trump's decision to spread the anti-Fauci tweet came hours after Fauci, in an interview with CNN, said it's "obvious" that the United States could have saved lives by imposing social-distancing measures in February as health experts recommended.

 

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/04/trump-spreads-firefauci-hashtag-on-twitter-as-pandemic-continues/

 

Dalal.Holdings Mentor

Dalal.Holdings

Posted
Posted

Politicizing the crisis response:

 

President Donald Trump's name will appear on checks sent to millions of Americans to combat the economic effects of the coronavirus in a last-minute Treasury Department order, a senior administration official confirmed to CNN on Tuesday.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/14/politics/trump-name-checks-coronavirus/index.html

 

Herr Dicktator is pure Cialdini genius.

Buying votes legally.

 

And it will work because people won’t know that Congress has the power of the purse, not the Executive.

 

When this guy is out of office, he should teach a MasterClass in how to fool some of the people—after all, what do you expect from a longtime casino operator?

rb Newbie

rb

Posted
Posted

Politicizing the crisis response:

 

President Donald Trump's name will appear on checks sent to millions of Americans to combat the economic effects of the coronavirus in a last-minute Treasury Department order, a senior administration official confirmed to CNN on Tuesday.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/14/politics/trump-name-checks-coronavirus/index.html

 

Herr Dicktator is pure Cialdini genius.

Buying votes legally.

 

And it will work because people won’t know that Congress has the power of the purse, not the Executive.

 

When this guy is out of office, he should teach a MasterClass in how to fool some of the people—after all, what do you expect from a longtime casino operator?

LOL! Congress should insist that the cheques be signed by "The Nancy"! ✍🤣

Dalal.Holdings Mentor

Dalal.Holdings

Posted
Posted

Politicizing the crisis response:

 

President Donald Trump's name will appear on checks sent to millions of Americans to combat the economic effects of the coronavirus in a last-minute Treasury Department order, a senior administration official confirmed to CNN on Tuesday.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/14/politics/trump-name-checks-coronavirus/index.html

 

Herr Dicktator is pure Cialdini genius.

Buying votes legally.

 

And it will work because people won’t know that Congress has the power of the purse, not the Executive.

 

When this guy is out of office, he should teach a MasterClass in how to fool some of the people—after all, what do you expect from a longtime casino operator?

LOL! Congress should insist that the cheques be signed by "The Nancy"! ✍🤣

 

Somehow this fool got Nancy and Chuck to write for trillions in bailout in an election year (they sure don't play the game like Mitch McConnell does). And yet we keep hearing about how the "opposition party" is holding Trump back from making us great again...

 

Idiot moves like this (insisting his name goes on the checks) injects politics right into these packages and risks that Dems will no longer play ball with subsequent stimulus which they were planning.

minten Newbie

minten

Posted
Posted

 

"Whoa!  29/210 (13.7%) of asymptomatic women admitted for delivery tested positive for the #coronavirus in NYC  (3/29 developed fever later) https://nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2009316"

 

And now this:

 

"Whoa, 147 (36%) out of 408 people tested positive for the #coronavirus at a large homeless shelter in Boston

https://medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.12.20059618v1. More interestingly, only ~1/6 showed symptoms among those tested positive, i.e.  1:5 for symptomatic vs asymptomatic.  #COVID19"

gfp Grand Master

gfp

Posted
Posted

I would just like to thank muscleman for his early 'on the ground' perspective from his family in Wuhan - January 24th seems like a year ago!  Certainly got my attention at the time and I know one or two people at my dog park that I shared the story with who started taking it seriously then as well.  You could still buy lysol wipes on amazon back then lol

 

I am from Wuhan and I have lots of friends and relatives there. I could tell you this: If you trust the government's stats of 500 infections and 17 deaths, it is no different from buying Chinese stocks merely based on their financial reports. All fake numbers.

The actual number is likely in the 100k range.

Right now even the doctors ran out of masks and gloves and are working unprotected. I don't know how much longer they can last before they are down.

I have 3 relatives infected. One staying at home, and two who spent 6 days going to each hospital to try to get hospitalized. They were all told one thing: We don't have resources for you. Go home. They finally got hospitalized yesterday. Think about it. That's after they are diagnosed positive. They are walking on the streets for 6 days while spreading the virus everywhere, with no hospital taking them in.

There are thousands and thousands of such patients.

There are also dead bodies everywhere in all hospitals. They are dead on the floor and for hours, no one comes to pick the bodies up. When they do get picked up, they are immediately sent to the funeral to be burned, without any diagnose of whether they got infected by this virus or else. Therefore the 17 death is just a joke.

orthopa Explorer

orthopa

Posted
Posted

 

"Whoa!  29/210 (13.7%) of asymptomatic women admitted for delivery tested positive for the #coronavirus in NYC  (3/29 developed fever later) https://nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2009316"

 

And now this:

 

"Whoa, 147 (36%) out of 408 people tested positive for the #coronavirus at a large homeless shelter in Boston

https://medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.12.20059618v1. More interestingly, only ~1/6 showed symptoms among those tested positive, i.e.  1:5 for symptomatic vs asymptomatic.  #COVID19"

 

No way, I don't believe it. So we have germany, pregnant woman, homeless people. Critics will note, not a totally representative study but very interesting. Need to see what the Stanford study says. Mortality rate will likely trend down still. Will be interesting to watch.

orthopa Explorer

orthopa

Posted
Posted

Another interview - different group - Professor of Medicine, Stanford Medical School - who is astounded that we have shut down the economy for this:

 

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/stanford-professor-jay-bhattacharya-coronavirus-death-rate

 

Another Stanford guy that is a Doubting Thomas... good to have skeptics

 

Makes you wonder what the death rate of the flu would be without widespread testing, vaccine, and 2 meds. Likely much closer to the corona virus then we think. Time will tell.

Cigarbutt Community Regular

Cigarbutt

Posted
Posted

"Whoa!  29/210 (13.7%) of asymptomatic women admitted for delivery tested positive for the #coronavirus in NYC  (3/29 developed fever later) https://nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2009316"

And now this:

"Whoa, 147 (36%) out of 408 people tested positive for the #coronavirus at a large homeless shelter in Boston

https://medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.12.20059618v1. More interestingly, only ~1/6 showed symptoms among those tested positive, i.e.  1:5 for symptomatic vs asymptomatic.  #COVID19"

No way, I don't believe it. So we have germany, pregnant woman, homeless people. Critics will note, not a totally representative study but very interesting. Need to see what the Stanford study says. Mortality rate will likely trend down still. Will be interesting to watch.

As more data come in, it looks like the CV is more contagious, less deadly and "natural" immunity looks higher than initially assumed in basic R0 assumptions.

There are major problems with the Boston data. The most important limitation is selection bias (population and timing). The idea of the "random" sampling was triggered by a "cluster". To provide more value, it would be nice to see if positive-test people become symptomatic over time.

In my area, clusters in areas where people are vulnerable has caused impressive growth in ICU and morgue admissions. Exit scenarios will need to take critical variables of the virus that are becoming clearer.

...

Makes you wonder what the death rate of the flu would be without widespread testing, vaccine, and 2 meds. Likely much closer to the corona virus then we think. Time will tell.

Isn't that the whole idea? To shift the trajectory of the new virus to the influenza curve or better?

KCLarkin Collaborator

KCLarkin

Posted
Posted

 

As of April 4...Of those tested in the general population, 87 (0.8%) in the open-invitation screening and 13 (0.6%) in the random-population screening tested positive for the virus.

 

Only 0.6% in a random sample currently had the infection. Interestingly, 11.9% of the random sample had symptoms! So in Iceland, more people had symptoms than had the disease!

 

Add that to your file of random anecdotes, Orthopa.

StubbleJumper Proficient

StubbleJumper

Posted
Posted

 

"Whoa!  29/210 (13.7%) of asymptomatic women admitted for delivery tested positive for the #coronavirus in NYC  (3/29 developed fever later) https://nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2009316"

 

And now this:

 

"Whoa, 147 (36%) out of 408 people tested positive for the #coronavirus at a large homeless shelter in Boston

https://medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.12.20059618v1. More interestingly, only ~1/6 showed symptoms among those tested positive, i.e.  1:5 for symptomatic vs asymptomatic.  #COVID19"

 

No way, I don't believe it. So we have germany, pregnant woman, homeless people. Critics will note, not a totally representative study but very interesting. Need to see what the Stanford study says. Mortality rate will likely trend down still. Will be interesting to watch.

 

 

The interesting aspect of this is that the homeless population is not a very healthy group.  Most of them have some sort of existing condition, are smokers, drinkers, or have poor nutrition.  I am very surprised that Covid was not harsher with such a group.

 

 

SJ

cubsfan Mentor

cubsfan

Posted
Posted

Kim Strassel on not having an impartial functioning press using Coronavirus timeline (4/14/2020)

 

 

Warning label: You Fake News lovers are going to hate this interview.

 

 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...