Question about Coronovirus?

(Jeff S) #12

  • COVID appears to be more easily transmissable than the flu because you can have it and infect others several days before you feel symptoms yourself.

  • COVID is about 10 times more deadly than the flu - the COVID fatality rate is around 2%, maybe higher, but let’s use that number

  • It is likely to infect 50-70% of the population. Let’s just say 50% because the math is easier:

    • US population = 300 million (very round number)
    • 50% infected = 150 million
    • 2% fatality rate for 150 million people = 3 million. That’s deaths. Flu is amateur compared to COVID

  • Do we have enough hospital beds? No. Do we have enough ventilators? No.

  • Do we have a population of lots of people with other health problems like heart disease, morbid obesity, and diabetes that make them high risk? Yes

If you think this sounds ridiculous:
a) take a look at Italy - they are about 8-10 days ahead of us
b) come back here in 8-10 days and see how ridiculous it still sounds.

Whether that is our destiny depends very much on how seriously we take the danger and implement actions to slow it down now. Like extreme social distancing.
I would love to be wrong.

(Michael - When reality fails to meet expectations, the problem is not reality.) #13
(Full Metal KETO AF) #14

@amwassil CORVID-19…To poo poo or not to poo poo, that is the question! :joy::joy::joy::cowboy_hat_face:

(Michael - When reality fails to meet expectations, the problem is not reality.) #15

@Backspin and anyone else who has not checked out the link I posted here, please do so.

(Full Metal KETO AF) #16

@amwassil The Hoover Institute article had some good points regarding the spread of the virus from a logical perspective. One particular fault was concerning things getting better possibly as the weather warms up forgetting that the world has two hemispheres and as one heats up the other cools off. Honestly though who knows. It could mutate easily as well so there’s no telling where it goes. Maybe more heat tolerant or more deadly if infected. Or drug resistant where it comes back seasonally adapted like the flu does now. It might not be simple and over soon like he suggested. :cowboy_hat_face:

(Michael - When reality fails to meet expectations, the problem is not reality.) #17

Check out the linked article here.

(Michael - When reality fails to meet expectations, the problem is not reality.) #18

Finally, no prescription required and ships to anywhere.

http://rx.travelweblog.net/categories/Other/Chloroquine

There may be other sources and if anyone locates, please post.

(Troy) #19

Interesting
:slightly_smiling_face:

image
A7D8A274-62A4-4CF4-A176-CB5CDDF058E2.jpeg987×1525 627 KB

(Michael - When reality fails to meet expectations, the problem is not reality.) #20

Not so much.

#21

I’m glad you’re getting more sleep but closing all leisure time business (and all arts productions) is sending my local economy into a tailspin. I have friends who will likely have to close businesses they’ve had for decades, and my husband and I will be hard put to pay our mortgage because we’ve had nearly all our spring events cancelled. No one I know is complaining - we obviously need to do what’s necessary to flatten that curve - but “can’t we take a break from those for a while” feels pretty glib for those of us who might lose our homes.

(Scott) #22

Anything that disrupts commerce is going to have a negative impact. I have already seen some businesses close. To those owners this is catastrophic vs someone who is going to stay home and binge watch TV and save money by not going out. Not saying they don’t care but just pointing out the contrast in their two worlds.

(Jeff S) #23

The unfortunate irony is that the better we are at flattening the curve, the longer the economic and societal implications will last. Dragging it out instead of having a dramatic spike is the whole point.

#24

I’ve been worried about this as well.

My current thought is that we’re all stuck in a false dichotomy: save the elderly (and immuno-compromised) OR protect the economy. What if we had to come up with solutions that saved the elderly AND protected the economy. Lots of super-smart and creative thinkers in this world, and I’m sure there are a lot of great solutions.

(charlie3) #25

There is a lack of time. Pubic officials believe the the medical system will be overloaded in many places in a few weeks. Can they let that happen while taking no counter measures? I would hesitate to do that in their position. But there’s only so long they’ll get away with locking down the economy. There’s some bittersweet to paying medical insurance for decades, then need care but it’s not available because of the epidemic.

#26

I’m not disagreeing with the policies in place right now (well, actually I disagree a little but it’s just that I think that the work in protecting the vulnerable and shoring up medical system can be stronger and more targeted); I was just letting you know that for many of us, the non-medical effects are dramatic and painful, that it’s not just a question of missing out on the bar scene for a few weeks.

(Michael - When reality fails to meet expectations, the problem is not reality.) #27



#28

I watch the numbers and definitely see no downturn at all. It barely started anyway, we know nothing at this point (except that it can be VERY bad if we aren’t careful. the numbers go up like crazy in many places). China is special, not every country can do the same - and it’s not a given China will be safe in the near future, of course.
We can’t make good predictions at this point. The economy will suffer and many old or unhealthy people will die in some countries but actual numbers? No one can say much about that.

Humanity will survive, sure, no sane person ever thought we all will die… Most of us will survive it with mild symptoms for sure (or won’t get infected at all). It still causes huge problems and millions of people may die. They surely would if we wouldn’t take this seriously enough.

(Scott) #29

I heard that Boris Johnson was thinking that “we might as well let everyone get it and get the whole thing over with” An advisor tapped him and asked “you do realize that we will have 1.5 million deaths if we do that” That is when he changed his mind. I heard this on talk radio and have no way of knowing if it is based on fact.

#30

It would be okay for me personally - except half of my family would probably die of it.
It would be Russian roulette with the old, sick ones… Like my aunt and my SO’s Mom (not very old but has serious health problems).

Not only the very sick or old people would be in grave danger. Death rates would be much higher without health care… Flattening the curve is very important. And the economy still wouldn’t be great with all those dead and grieving people I imagine…

(Michael - When reality fails to meet expectations, the problem is not reality.) #31

The following was published in 2007. Did anyone learn anything?

Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus (SARS-CoV) is a novel virus that caused the first major pandemic of the new millennium (89, 180, 259). The rapid economic growth in southern China has led to an increasing demand for animal proteins including those from exotic game food animals such as civets. Large numbers and varieties of these wild game mammals in overcrowded cages and the lack of biosecurity measures in wet markets allowed the jumping of this novel virus from animals to human (353, 376). Its capacity for human-to-human transmission, the lack of awareness in hospital infection control, and international air travel facilitated the rapid global dissemination of this agent.

Coronaviruses are well known to undergo genetic recombination (375), which may lead to new genotypes and outbreaks. The presence of a large reservoir of SARS-CoV-like viruses in horseshoe bats, together with the culture of eating exotic mammals in southern China, is a time bomb. The possibility of the reemergence of SARS and other novel viruses from animals or laboratories and therefore the need for preparedness should not be ignored.