Coronavirus

[Dalal.Holdings]

I have very clearly distinguished outdoor vs indoor gatherings as have many studies...In fact, indoor interaction in winter time is thought to contribute to seasonality of other viruses that spread via respiratory droplets such as influenza...

 

Bottom line is that lockdowns can work if everyone takes part and then you do phased reopening based on strict criteria. If you have some states that choose not to (thanks to federal lack of leadership and attempts to minimize the pandemic), then you will not do well. The trick is to squash the virus with lockdowns then reopen carefully, but some US states skipped lockdowns or just reopened bc they felt like it. That is why you are seeing vast difference for USA vs most developed countries.

 

My answer to reopening is what NY, NJ, CT are doing...reopening counties in phases based on objective criteria while testing a lot.

 

So now the USA has screwed up the pregame (Jan to Mar), the game itself (Mar to May), and the postgame (June onwards)...but not really surprising considering the managers we have.

[Dalal.Holdings]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-27/pence-events-postponed-in-arizona-florida-as-virus-cases-spike?sref=zRDgFQcM

 

Vice President Mike Pence has postponed campaign events scheduled for Arizona and Florida next week as coronavirus cases jump in those states, said a senior Trump campaign official.

 

Funny--your boss just held an indoor rally with thousands on Tuesday...What changed so suddenly?

 

What a clown show. You can no longer accuse this administration of mere negligence when it comes to pandemic--the AZ and OK rallies held in just the past 1 week amount to active spreading of the virus. People will die and healthcare workers in these areas will face the brunt, working night and day dealing with the consequences and exposing themselves...

 

How Great are we now?

[Dalal.Holdings]

Scott Gottlieb for the "lockdowns are not worth it" crowd:

 

 

"See how quickly you can find Sweden on this map...."

 

 

Now do one with the United States, Scott...

[rb]

One thing is clear, the lockdown work.

 

Again, simplifying the situation. Yes, it slows down transmission. But then what? Should we be in the lockdown until a vaccine is developed? That could be anywhere between 18 months to forever, based on the initial estimation of experts.

 

Then there are countries like S. Korea, where they never had any lockdown as we have it here or in Europe. Yet, they kept the virus under control. I think that's a strong sign that there are other much more effective measures than the lockdown.

To some effect yes. The fact is that there's a killer virus going around. It spreads and kills. Doesn't care about what you think, how you feel, how you vote. It does not give a fuck. So reality has suddenly changed. There is no normal anymore. The virus looks at the normal and laughs.

 

So effectively there are two options: a soft lockdown - which you're not gonna like, or a hard lockdown - which you're really not gonna like. Normal isn't on the list.

 

A soft lockdown is basically the South Korea model. Masks, sanitizer, social distancing, huge test and trace. You don't get to pack bars and do whatever you like. Life isn't normal. SK thought they could do more normal, opened clubs, had one superspreader event and was like "that's it, no more clubs".

 

If you don't want the soft lockdown you get the hard lockdown. That's the problem with America. It is not responsible enough to go through a soft lockdown because they are "special" so they want normal. Well you can't have normal. It's interesting that places that had bad outbreaks in the north east are not seeing pops. I don't know why, but maybe they were scared enough by what happened that they really want to go with the soft lockdown. Whereas other places that didn't partake in the carnage are not at that point yet.

 

 

[cwericb]

Is this how you make America great again?

 

How much has to happen before people wake up to see what a disaster is taking place and realize there is a serious problem stemming from the top?

[rb]

One thing is clear, the lockdown work.  Social isolation works. Go look at one of those new infection graphs.  You see it go exponential, flatten and start to recede. Then in June it takes off again. This correlates roughly with relaxation of counter measures and the protests.

 

We have also seen how countries with strong counter measures did not get sick to the same effect.

 

I feel this is the greatest blunder by the right since the Iraq war.  Neither party clued into this until it hit north america. However once it did the left was on it, the right foolishly took the bait and the opposite side. As a conservative it infuriates me. I support the right wingers for almost everything and I see how difficult it is for then to get elected. They are correct on so many issues but then they will take the DUMBEST point of view on some issues and screw themselves at the polls. Why in God's name did conservatives think that ignoring corona virus was smart?  Do you guys want to see a democratic dynasty?  Grow the fuck up, put down some common sense and go issue by issue and choose the right path even if the dems are there first.

I'll give you a +1 and fist pump. As you can probably know I can get as partisan as the next guy.

 

But trying to make a political thing out of a deadly virus is about the same as useful as having a political argument with gravity and will have the same result.

 

The most baffling thing for me is masks. Why did wearing or not wearing a mask has become a political statement. Sure there's a lot of commentary whether they work or not. But pretty cheap, at worst they provide no protection and at best they provide a lot of protection. From a risk management that's like buying really, really cheap insurance from a maybe dodgy insurance company. Let me put it another way: I'm willing to sell you put options on SPY for 0.01, you don't know my credit rating. Do you buy them? Those are masks.

[clutch]

One thing is clear, the lockdown work.

 

Again, simplifying the situation. Yes, it slows down transmission. But then what? Should we be in the lockdown until a vaccine is developed? That could be anywhere between 18 months to forever, based on the initial estimation of experts.

 

Then there are countries like S. Korea, where they never had any lockdown as we have it here or in Europe. Yet, they kept the virus under control. I think that's a strong sign that there are other much more effective measures than the lockdown.

To some effect yes. The fact is that there's a killer virus going around. It spreads and kills. Doesn't care about what you think, how you feel, how you vote. It does not give a fuck. So reality has suddenly changed. There is no normal anymore. The virus looks at the normal and laughs.

 

So effectively there are two options: a soft lockdown - which you're not gonna like, or a hard lockdown - which you're really not gonna like. Normal isn't on the list.

 

A soft lockdown is basically the South Korea model. Masks, sanitizer, social distancing, huge test and trace. You don't get to pack bars and do whatever you like. Life isn't normal. SK thought they could do more normal, opened clubs, had one superspreader event and was like "that's it, no more clubs".

 

If you don't want the soft lockdown you get the hard lockdown. That's the problem with America. It is not responsible enough to go through a soft lockdown because they are "special" so they want normal. Well you can't have normal. It's interesting that places that had bad outbreaks in the north east are not seeing pops. I don't know why, but maybe they were scared enough by what happened that they really want to go with the soft lockdown. Whereas other places that didn't partake in the carnage are not at that point yet.

 

Just to let you know, all those things you mentioned regarding S. Korea help, but the most effective measure that S. Korea was able to take was put those infected in a hospital and won't release you until you test negative. Yes, you heard that right. They don't just ask you to self-quarantine at home for two weeks. Now they are debating whether they should not hospitalize those who test positive but show only mild symptoms. In China, I believe that they do something similar, or put you in a house arrest. With this kind of measure in place, you can let people go to work, dine at restaurants, go to schools, etc. and manage the transmission...

 

Now you can ask, why can't the US do this? Well, I'd say two main things are: 1) their health care system is not designed for that kind of measure (fewer hospital beds, cost/insurance issues), and 2) many people will not abide by that kind of "hard" quarantine measures. Some people might not even get tested because they don't want to get locked in a hospital. What could Trump have done to fix these things? (I don't want to defend him, but just being realistic here)

 

So my feeling is... No matter what the US politicians could have done, you wouldn't have been able to stop this virus. Especially given its size, connections with the rest of the world, and the two points above, etc.. There are inherent reasons why the spread could not be stopped. You could wish and vent all you want how the US admin. could have prevented this crisis, but in reality, I don't think it was possible. You are right, this virus doesn't give a fuck, and you might just have to see it run its course.

 

[rb]

One thing is clear, the lockdown work.

 

Again, simplifying the situation. Yes, it slows down transmission. But then what? Should we be in the lockdown until a vaccine is developed? That could be anywhere between 18 months to forever, based on the initial estimation of experts.

 

Then there are countries like S. Korea, where they never had any lockdown as we have it here or in Europe. Yet, they kept the virus under control. I think that's a strong sign that there are other much more effective measures than the lockdown.

To some effect yes. The fact is that there's a killer virus going around. It spreads and kills. Doesn't care about what you think, how you feel, how you vote. It does not give a fuck. So reality has suddenly changed. There is no normal anymore. The virus looks at the normal and laughs.

 

So effectively there are two options: a soft lockdown - which you're not gonna like, or a hard lockdown - which you're really not gonna like. Normal isn't on the list.

 

A soft lockdown is basically the South Korea model. Masks, sanitizer, social distancing, huge test and trace. You don't get to pack bars and do whatever you like. Life isn't normal. SK thought they could do more normal, opened clubs, had one superspreader event and was like "that's it, no more clubs".

 

If you don't want the soft lockdown you get the hard lockdown. That's the problem with America. It is not responsible enough to go through a soft lockdown because they are "special" so they want normal. Well you can't have normal. It's interesting that places that had bad outbreaks in the north east are not seeing pops. I don't know why, but maybe they were scared enough by what happened that they really want to go with the soft lockdown. Whereas other places that didn't partake in the carnage are not at that point yet.

 

Just to let you know, all those things you mentioned regarding S. Korea help, but the most effective measure that S. Korea was able to take was put those infected in a hospital and won't release you until you test negative. Yes, you heard that right. They don't just ask you to self-quarantine at home for two weeks. Now they are debating whether they should not hospitalize those who test positive but show only mild symptoms. In China, I believe that they do something similar, or put you in a house arrest. With this kind of measure in place, you can let people go to work, dine at restaurants, go to schools, etc. and manage the transmission...

 

Now you can ask, why can't the US do this? Well, I'd say two main things are: 1) their health care system is not designed for that kind of measure (fewer hospital beds, cost/insurance issues), and 2) many people will not abide by that kind of "hard" quarantine measures. Some people might not even get tested because they don't want to get locked in a hospital. What could Trump have done to fix these things? (I don't want to defend him, but just being realistic here)

 

So my feeling is... No matter what the US politicians could have done, you wouldn't have been able to stop this virus. Especially given its size, connections with the rest of the world, and the two points above, etc.. There are inherent reasons why the spread could not be stopped. You could wish and vent all you want how the US admin. could have prevented this crisis, but in reality, I don't think it was possible. You are right, this virus doesn't give a fuck, and you might just have to see it run its course.

So basically almost every developed country and most developing countries were able to get their outbreak under some sort of control but the almighty US can't do anything?

 

As I've said. you get soft lockdown or hard lockdown. There is no option C. You don't like or can't fathom option A, well then... option B it is.

[KJP]

 

So my feeling is... No matter what the US politicians could have done, you wouldn't have been able to stop this virus. Especially given its size, connections with the rest of the world, and the two points above, etc.. There are inherent reasons why the spread could not be stopped. You could wish and vent all you want how the US admin. could have prevented this crisis, but in reality, I don't think it was possible. You are right, this virus doesn't give a fuck, and you might just have to see it run its course.

 

I think you're letting "US politicians" off the hook.  President Trump remains very popular among the Republican base.  If he said it's very important to (i) wear masks, and (ii) avoid crowded indoor spaces, I believe that would make a major difference, not only in how people actually behave, but also in the cover it would give to Republican state- and local-level officials with respect to the pace and scope of reopening various venues.  In many ways he has done the opposite by choosing not to wear a mask in public, urging rapid and broad reopening, and holding indoor rallies.  I acknowledge, though, that, so far at least, this is a counterfactual that cannot be proven.

 

 

[Spekulatius]

It seems to me that Trump has pretty much given up fighting the virus  - the task force meetings ceased about 8 weeks ago (with one recent exception). I guess it is all up the Gouverneurs now.

[Gregmal]

Making the masks political was indeed very stupid. But otherwise, as I said probably back in February or March, there is a massive difference between being able to do a China style lockdown in China, and in America. Americans are different people. It shows with the obesity, focus on materialism, me first Twitter and Instagram stuff, etc. It doesnt help you when the high courts are also declaring it unconstitutional. Americans will do what they want. Even in NJ there were multiple cases of businesses just refusing to stay shut and people continuing to go to them. Same in Michigan and Texas. The difference hopefully between now and March is that the states have had time to prepare for the hospitalizations and come up with contingency plans, if they become out of hand. There really shouldn't be a need to shut the economy down, that was incredibly stupid. When looking strictly at the figures, its said that 10-20% of the total population get the flu every year and you've got 30 million hospital/ER/urgent care visits as a result of it. Worldometers currently has 15,816 serious/critical CV cases. Not looking to get back to a flu vs CV debate, but having plans and protocol in place will be a huge factor in how something unfolds. Given the time everyone has had to prepare, it would be an unforgivable mistake should any state not be ready.

[Casey]

It seems to me that Trump has pretty much given up fighting the virus  - the task force meetings ceased about 8 weeks ago (with one recent exception). I guess it is all up the Gouverneurs now.

 

Maybe he's bored of being President.

[clutch]

One thing is clear, the lockdown work.

 

Again, simplifying the situation. Yes, it slows down transmission. But then what? Should we be in the lockdown until a vaccine is developed? That could be anywhere between 18 months to forever, based on the initial estimation of experts.

 

Then there are countries like S. Korea, where they never had any lockdown as we have it here or in Europe. Yet, they kept the virus under control. I think that's a strong sign that there are other much more effective measures than the lockdown.

To some effect yes. The fact is that there's a killer virus going around. It spreads and kills. Doesn't care about what you think, how you feel, how you vote. It does not give a fuck. So reality has suddenly changed. There is no normal anymore. The virus looks at the normal and laughs.

 

So effectively there are two options: a soft lockdown - which you're not gonna like, or a hard lockdown - which you're really not gonna like. Normal isn't on the list.

 

A soft lockdown is basically the South Korea model. Masks, sanitizer, social distancing, huge test and trace. You don't get to pack bars and do whatever you like. Life isn't normal. SK thought they could do more normal, opened clubs, had one superspreader event and was like "that's it, no more clubs".

 

If you don't want the soft lockdown you get the hard lockdown. That's the problem with America. It is not responsible enough to go through a soft lockdown because they are "special" so they want normal. Well you can't have normal. It's interesting that places that had bad outbreaks in the north east are not seeing pops. I don't know why, but maybe they were scared enough by what happened that they really want to go with the soft lockdown. Whereas other places that didn't partake in the carnage are not at that point yet.

 

Just to let you know, all those things you mentioned regarding S. Korea help, but the most effective measure that S. Korea was able to take was put those infected in a hospital and won't release you until you test negative. Yes, you heard that right. They don't just ask you to self-quarantine at home for two weeks. Now they are debating whether they should not hospitalize those who test positive but show only mild symptoms. In China, I believe that they do something similar, or put you in a house arrest. With this kind of measure in place, you can let people go to work, dine at restaurants, go to schools, etc. and manage the transmission...

 

Now you can ask, why can't the US do this? Well, I'd say two main things are: 1) their health care system is not designed for that kind of measure (fewer hospital beds, cost/insurance issues), and 2) many people will not abide by that kind of "hard" quarantine measures. Some people might not even get tested because they don't want to get locked in a hospital. What could Trump have done to fix these things? (I don't want to defend him, but just being realistic here)

 

So my feeling is... No matter what the US politicians could have done, you wouldn't have been able to stop this virus. Especially given its size, connections with the rest of the world, and the two points above, etc.. There are inherent reasons why the spread could not be stopped. You could wish and vent all you want how the US admin. could have prevented this crisis, but in reality, I don't think it was possible. You are right, this virus doesn't give a fuck, and you might just have to see it run its course.

So basically almost every developed country and most developing countries were able to get their outbreak under some sort of control but the almighty US can't do anything?

 

As I've said. you get soft lockdown or hard lockdown. There is no option C. You don't like or can't fathom option A, well then... option B it is.

 

Again, look at the daily death rate or cases/test ratio. It's not really exploding...

 

And you are missing my point... I'm saying that it's not as simple as soft lockdown vs. hard lockdown. S. Korea did a soft lockdown but together with putting every infected person into a hospital. It's not whether people like it or not, but the US simply cannot afford to take that kind of approach.

[Dalal.Holdings]

It seems to me that Trump has pretty much given up fighting the virus  - the task force meetings ceased about 8 weeks ago (with one recent exception). I guess it is all up the Gouverneurs now.

 

Maybe he's bored of being President.

 

Onto more important things--protecting us from ANTIFA, CHAZ (all caps makes it scarier), statue vandals, and other things that keep Hannity up at night...

 

Virus that killed 120k? A hoax (duh), and the pandemic was declared "nearly over" on Tuesday in his great AZ speech anyway.

 

Here is our dear leader at work:

 

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1276999704153337859

 

Mark Cuban is right--this guy enjoys campaigning (by stirring up division and discord), not being President. Oh, and that intel about bounties on U.S. troops in Afghanistan ? Probably didn't read it...

[Dalal.Holdings]

It's not whether people like it or not, but the US simply cannot afford to take that kind of approach.

 

Now with that kind of attitude, how will we ever be Great Again?

[Spekulatius]

And you are missing my point... I'm saying that it's not as simple as soft lockdown vs. hard lockdown. S. Korea did a soft lockdown but together with putting every infected person into a hospital. It's not whether people like it or not, but the US simply cannot afford to take that kind of approach.

 

At this point , putting every infected in a hospital wouldn’t be possible because we don’t have the capacity. That may be an option at the beginning when few are infected. But help from the government to bring food etc to infected to help with quarantine as well as monetary as well as better testing and tracking might be ways to reduce the spread.

 

In any case, it is correct that the death rate so far remain low. Hopefully it stays this way. It is already bad that health care facilities are closed for non. COVID-19 cases as this is akin to rationing.

 

COVID-19 besides that the beds places a heavy burden on the personal due to need to keep Segregated COVID sections and the need to wear PPE, which becomes an issue in the longer run.

[meiroy]

One thing is clear, the lockdown work.

 

Again, simplifying the situation. Yes, it slows down transmission. But then what? Should we be in the lockdown until a vaccine is developed? That could be anywhere between 18 months to forever, based on the initial estimation of experts.

 

Then there are countries like S. Korea, where they never had any lockdown as we have it here or in Europe. Yet, they kept the virus under control. I think that's a strong sign that there are other much more effective measures than the lockdown.

To some effect yes. The fact is that there's a killer virus going around. It spreads and kills. Doesn't care about what you think, how you feel, how you vote. It does not give a fuck. So reality has suddenly changed. There is no normal anymore. The virus looks at the normal and laughs.

 

So effectively there are two options: a soft lockdown - which you're not gonna like, or a hard lockdown - which you're really not gonna like. Normal isn't on the list.

 

A soft lockdown is basically the South Korea model. Masks, sanitizer, social distancing, huge test and trace. You don't get to pack bars and do whatever you like. Life isn't normal. SK thought they could do more normal, opened clubs, had one superspreader event and was like "that's it, no more clubs".

 

If you don't want the soft lockdown you get the hard lockdown. That's the problem with America. It is not responsible enough to go through a soft lockdown because they are "special" so they want normal. Well you can't have normal. It's interesting that places that had bad outbreaks in the north east are not seeing pops. I don't know why, but maybe they were scared enough by what happened that they really want to go with the soft lockdown. Whereas other places that didn't partake in the carnage are not at that point yet.

 

Just to let you know, all those things you mentioned regarding S. Korea help, but the most effective measure that S. Korea was able to take was put those infected in a hospital and won't release you until you test negative. Yes, you heard that right. They don't just ask you to self-quarantine at home for two weeks. Now they are debating whether they should not hospitalize those who test positive but show only mild symptoms. In China, I believe that they do something similar, or put you in a house arrest. With this kind of measure in place, you can let people go to work, dine at restaurants, go to schools, etc. and manage the transmission...

 

Now you can ask, why can't the US do this? Well, I'd say two main things are: 1) their health care system is not designed for that kind of measure (fewer hospital beds, cost/insurance issues), and 2) many people will not abide by that kind of "hard" quarantine measures. Some people might not even get tested because they don't want to get locked in a hospital. What could Trump have done to fix these things? (I don't want to defend him, but just being realistic here)

 

So my feeling is... No matter what the US politicians could have done, you wouldn't have been able to stop this virus. Especially given its size, connections with the rest of the world, and the two points above, etc.. There are inherent reasons why the spread could not be stopped. You could wish and vent all you want how the US admin. could have prevented this crisis, but in reality, I don't think it was possible. You are right, this virus doesn't give a fuck, and you might just have to see it run its course.

So basically almost every developed country and most developing countries were able to get their outbreak under some sort of control but the almighty US can't do anything?

 

As I've said. you get soft lockdown or hard lockdown. There is no option C. You don't like or can't fathom option A, well then... option B it is.

 

Again, look at the daily death rate or cases/test ratio. It's not really exploding...

 

And you are missing my point... I'm saying that it's not as simple as soft lockdown vs. hard lockdown. S. Korea did a soft lockdown but together with putting every infected person into a hospital. It's not whether people like it or not, but the US simply cannot afford to take that kind of approach.

 

The correct word is "incapable".

 

For example, the US can surely afford to manufacture and provide all its residents with surgical masks.

 

Even if it does, plenty of people will not comply.  Why? Because currently, it is incapable, incompetent, and impotent.

 

It's not a question of money.  It's a question of who.

 

 

[Viking]

Making the masks political was indeed very stupid. But otherwise, as I said probably back in February or March, there is a massive difference between being able to do a China style lockdown in China, and in America. Americans are different people. It shows with the obesity, focus on materialism, me first Twitter and Instagram stuff, etc. It doesnt help you when the high courts are also declaring it unconstitutional. Americans will do what they want. Even in NJ there were multiple cases of businesses just refusing to stay shut and people continuing to go to them. Same in Michigan and Texas. The difference hopefully between now and March is that the states have had time to prepare for the hospitalizations and come up with contingency plans, if they become out of hand. There really shouldn't be a need to shut the economy down, that was incredibly stupid. When looking strictly at the figures, its said that 10-20% of the total population get the flu every year and you've got 30 million hospital/ER/urgent care visits as a result of it. Worldometers currently has 15,816 serious/critical CV cases. Not looking to get back to a flu vs CV debate, but having plans and protocol in place will be a huge factor in how something unfolds. Given the time everyone has had to prepare, it would be an unforgivable mistake should any state not be ready.

 

The Japanese thought US citizens were lazy and bombed Pearl Harbour to break their spirit. We all know how the US responded. I think you are way underestimating what the US population is capable of when they rally to a cause.

 

The virus has presented the US with its greatest challenge since Pearl Harbour. To defeat the virus leadership was by far the most important factor (just like in WW II). Trump’s performance has been terrible. The US response has been one of the worst of any developed country.

 

Imagine if Trump was President pre Pearl Harbour. He would have been lauding Hitler and Imperial Japan... concentration camps? Go ahead and build them! Want to over run Hong Kong... who cares. He loves dictators :-)

[Investor20]

I have very clearly distinguished outdoor vs indoor gatherings as have many studies...In fact, indoor interaction in winter time is thought to contribute to seasonality of other viruses that spread via respiratory droplets such as influenza...

 

Bottom line is that lockdowns can work if everyone takes part and then you do phased reopening based on strict criteria. If you have some states that choose not to (thanks to federal lack of leadership and attempts to minimize the pandemic), then you will not do well. The trick is to squash the virus with lockdowns then reopen carefully, but some US states skipped lockdowns or just reopened bc they felt like it. That is why you are seeing vast difference for USA vs most developed countries.

 

My answer to reopening is what NY, NJ, CT are doing...reopening counties in phases based on objective criteria while testing a lot.

 

So now the USA has screwed up the pregame (Jan to Mar), the game itself (Mar to May), and the postgame (June onwards)...but not really surprising considering the managers we have.

 

Yes Indoor vs Outdoor there is a difference.

 

But why won't the WHO, Fauci or CDC tell people to simulate conditions of outside by having good ventilation?

 

Keep windows open.  Have exhaust fans.  Keep fresh air more in HVAC systems.  Keep car ventilation on fresh.  Try to avoid indoors as much as possible. Why not educate people on this?

 

You can kill the virus inside the air systems by using UV light or HEPA filters or other engineering techniques. 

 

WHY??? Why won't they tell people?

 

Afterall both S. Korea and Japan emphasize this ventilation a lot. WHO, Dr. Fauci or CDC don't know about this? Are they so ignorant?

 

This Church below tried having a system that kills virus inside the air ducts.  All the press could think of is criticize them.  But the idea is fundamentally good.  It will reduce the virus in air which is same what happens when you are outside.  Why not say its a good idea?  WHY? Why not tell people to do this more? 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/23/us/politics/trump-arizona-church-covid.html

Ahead of Trump Visit, Church Makes Unproven Claim of Virus-Killing Technology

 

So what "unproven claim" they did?  They tested with another Coronavirus that is safer to test with than the Covid-19 and said

"kills 99.9 percent of Covid within 10 minute" instead of "kills 99.9 percent of Coronavirus within 10 minute".

 

But what is the chance if one Coronavirus gets killed, Covid 19 also gets killed under same conditions?

 

 

[meiroy]

Afterall both S. Korea and Japan emphasize this ventilation a lot. WHO, Dr. Fauci or CDC don't know about this? Are they so ignorant?

 

This Church below tried having a system that kills virus inside the air ducts.  All the press could think of is criticize them.  But the idea is fundamentally good.  It will reduce the virus in air which is same what happens when you are outside.  Why not say its a good idea?  WHY? Why not tell people to do this more? 

 

 

You are right, Japan even came up with this:

 

 

According to this, clustering in Churches should definitely be avoided. 

 

In addition, in Japan and South Korea, it is so obvious and acceptable that everyone should be wearing a mask it wasn't even included in this poster.

 

"Photos of the event taken inside the church showed the crowd shoulder to shoulder, with very few people appearing to wear masks.". 

 

Aren't you tired of your trolling?

 

 

 

 

 

[Investor20]

Afterall both S. Korea and Japan emphasize this ventilation a lot. WHO, Dr. Fauci or CDC don't know about this? Are they so ignorant?

 

This Church below tried having a system that kills virus inside the air ducts.  All the press could think of is criticize them.  But the idea is fundamentally good.  It will reduce the virus in air which is same what happens when you are outside.  Why not say its a good idea?  WHY? Why not tell people to do this more? 

 

 

You are right, Japan even came up with this:

 

 

According to this, clustering in Churches should definitely be avoided. 

 

In addition, in Japan and South Korea, it is so obvious and acceptable that everyone should be wearing a mask it wasn't even included in this poster.

 

"Photos of the event taken inside the church showed the crowd shoulder to shoulder, with very few people appearing to wear masks.". 

 

Aren't you tired of your trolling?

 

Yes this church is trying to avoid clusters by using technology to kill virus in ventilation ducts. Why criticize them for that?

 

Why not WHO, Fauci, CDC, promote this way of reducing infections?  You have not answered that.

 

If protesters go out and and are very crowded for prolonged periods is ok, why not a church that ventilates and kills virus is not OK?

 

I am personally not against wearing masks.  In S. Korea everyone gets N95 masks.  But, how well cloth masks work is debatable.  See below article

 

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/data-do-not-back-cloth-masks-limit-covid-19-experts-say

Data do not back cloth masks to limit COVID-19, experts say

 

In the paper, the National Academies' Standing Committee on Emerging Infectious Diseases and 21st Century Health Threats said that, because no studies have been done on the effectiveness of cloth masks in preventing transmission of coronavirus to others, it is impossible to assess their benefits, if any.

 

 

 

 

[Cigarbutt]

Sunday morning ramblings.

 

1-Visual and nonpartisan summary

https://www.scientificamerican.com/interactive/inside-the-coronavirus/

A nice and short summary. The topic of virulence was raised before in this thread and it seems there is even difficulty defining what viral virulence means although tribal debates shine an interesting and polarizing light. The last section has a short part on the genomic aspect. The virus has an unusually long sequence. Coronaviruses typically don't mutate rapidly and even possess a proofread mechanism to get rid of errors that occur during replication.

 

2-On the regional heterogeneity of response (and results)

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/208354

It's an old study and contains very obvious limitations, but still quite helpful. Even under high uncertainty and baked-in-the-cake "features", it seems that doing the right things tends to result in good outcomes even if nothing is guaranteed. Figure 3 is interesting. The study was published in 2007 and since then trust in institutions has worsened and maybe that's the most important issue to deal with. One advantage of regional variations is the possibility to learn from others.

 

3-Long-term homes, impact and consequences in an aging population

https://www.cihi.ca/sites/default/files/document/covid-19-rapid-response-long-term-care-snapshot-en.pdf

In my area, the results were very poor. At the critical period, when the ill-defined wave was coming, focus (human and physical resources) was put on acute hospital capacity while attention slipped for the protection of chronic care facilities. This is giving rise to private opportunities to get rich slowly as it has become clear that a void needs to be filled and public players are looking for partners. In general, you won't hear much about chronic care for the old but it's a growth story in the making.

[orthopa]

I have very clearly distinguished outdoor vs indoor gatherings as have many studies...In fact, indoor interaction in winter time is thought to contribute to seasonality of other viruses that spread via respiratory droplets such as influenza...

 

Bottom line is that lockdowns can work if everyone takes part and then you do phased reopening based on strict criteria. If you have some states that choose not to (thanks to federal lack of leadership and attempts to minimize the pandemic), then you will not do well. The trick is to squash the virus with lockdowns then reopen carefully, but some US states skipped lockdowns or just reopened bc they felt like it. That is why you are seeing vast difference for USA vs most developed countries.

 

My answer to reopening is what NY, NJ, CT are doing...reopening counties in phases based on objective criteria while testing a lot.

 

So now the USA has screwed up the pregame (Jan to Mar), the game itself (Mar to May), and the postgame (June onwards)...but not really surprising considering the managers we have.

 

I think some of what we are seeing in the US is a result of what I bolded above. What is unique vs the other countries in that graph is the span of climates the US has. We know that indoor activities increase spread and maybe the largest factor. NY,NJ,CT are indoors more in Feb, March, April, TX, AZ, FL much less so. Now during summer TX, AZ, FL have tropical climates and are seeing outbreaks like Central America. Cuomo said most cases were coming from inside houses in NYC. Most cases likely coming from inside houses/enclosed spaces now. 

 

As we all know this is multifactorial but I think comparing graphs of NY, NJ, CT, to UK, Italy makes as much sense as comparing TX, AZ, FL to central america now. In the fall this will likely flip again. Anyone able to find graphs comparing the above states/regions?

 

As much as we believe we can control and stop the virus we cannot control the factors above pushing populations indoors and outdoors.

[KCLarkin]

But why won't the WHO, Fauci or CDC tell people to simulate conditions of outside by having good ventilation?

 

Here are the CDC guidelines for ventilation

 

Consider improving the engineering controls using the building ventilation system. This may include some or all of the following activities:

 

Increase ventilation rates.

Ensure ventilation systems operate properly and provide acceptable indoor air quality for the current occupancy level for each space.

Increase outdoor air ventilation, using caution in highly polluted areas. With a lower occupancy level in the building, this increases the effective dilution ventilation per person.

Disable demand-controlled ventilation (DCV).

Further open minimum outdoor air dampers (as high as 100%) to reduce or eliminate recirculation. In mild weather, this will not affect thermal comfort or humidity. However, this may be difficult to do in cold or hot weather.

Improve central air filtration to the MERV-13 or the highest compatible with the filter rack, and seal edges of the filter to limit bypass.

Check filters to ensure they are within service life and appropriately installed.

Keep systems running longer hours, 24/7 if possible, to enhance air exchanges in the building space.

Note: Some of the above recommendations are based on the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Guidance for Building Operations During the COVID-19 Pandemicexternal icon. Review these ASHRAE guidelines for further information on ventilation recommendations.

[Investor20]

But why won't the WHO, Fauci or CDC tell people to simulate conditions of outside by having good ventilation?

 

Here are the CDC guidelines for ventilation

 

Consider improving the engineering controls using the building ventilation system. This may include some or all of the following activities:

 

Increase ventilation rates.

Ensure ventilation systems operate properly and provide acceptable indoor air quality for the current occupancy level for each space.

Increase outdoor air ventilation, using caution in highly polluted areas. With a lower occupancy level in the building, this increases the effective dilution ventilation per person.

Disable demand-controlled ventilation (DCV).

Further open minimum outdoor air dampers (as high as 100%) to reduce or eliminate recirculation. In mild weather, this will not affect thermal comfort or humidity. However, this may be difficult to do in cold or hot weather.

Improve central air filtration to the MERV-13 or the highest compatible with the filter rack, and seal edges of the filter to limit bypass.

Check filters to ensure they are within service life and appropriately installed.

Keep systems running longer hours, 24/7 if possible, to enhance air exchanges in the building space.

Note: Some of the above recommendations are based on the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Guidance for Building Operations During the COVID-19 Pandemicexternal icon. Review these ASHRAE guidelines for further information on ventilation recommendations.

 

You really try hard to support incompetent people.  "Consider", "recommendations"? No specific requirements for air flow per person.

 

Why dont you use the same language for other guidelines too, of requesting Consideration of their recommendations? Why doesn't Cuomo come on TV and request consideration of his recommendation for shelter in place orders?

 

Japanese are very clear with their 3Cs.

 

They have a law in place to require certain amount of fresh air per person in an office. That gives confidence to employees to go to office.

 

If protests are ok because they are outside, why not require employers to provide certain amount of ventilation and let people go to work?  Why not tell how much fresh air or air which has been cleaned of virus is required so that employers can open their offices?

 

Japanese had public transportation windows opened so that people can go to work.

 

And most importantly they communicated these measures to the public so that both employers and employees are clear what environmental conditions they need to follow and are safe.

 

Fauci and CDC could have told not only offices but shops how much air flow is required for shops to be opened.  May be shop owners could have brought an exhaust fan and opened the shops?

 

Where are those guidelines KCLarkin?  Please dont keep saying outside for protests are ok, but we dont want to require offices to have specific ventilation scientifically determined so that people can go to work with confidence.