Official BI apolitical COVID-19 Thread
94,457 Views |
980 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by bearister
Coronavirus news is America's new national pastime - Axios
https://www.axios.com/coronavirus-news-entertainment-8839cb9b-e61f-4ffb-8645-6986bb492ba1.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top
Coronavirus' emotional toll grows with telework, closed businesses - Axios
https://www.axios.com/coronavirus-quarantine-emotional-health-25105eac-873e-4abc-9e42-8c4e9b7f183a.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top
The coronavirus is creating a lobbying feeding frenzy in Congress - Axios
https://www.axios.com/coronavirus-lobbying-congress-stimulus-package-0636be28-6938-47a2-b079-6a50c1027dba.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top
https://www.axios.com/coronavirus-news-entertainment-8839cb9b-e61f-4ffb-8645-6986bb492ba1.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top
Coronavirus' emotional toll grows with telework, closed businesses - Axios
https://www.axios.com/coronavirus-quarantine-emotional-health-25105eac-873e-4abc-9e42-8c4e9b7f183a.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top
The coronavirus is creating a lobbying feeding frenzy in Congress - Axios
https://www.axios.com/coronavirus-lobbying-congress-stimulus-package-0636be28-6938-47a2-b079-6a50c1027dba.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
I would not pass any corporate bailout package unless a minimum of 3 weeks of in-person meetings in a tiny conference room occurred with all interested lobbyists and all interested politicians who want to pass such legislation. They need to show real commitment to the cause.bearister said:
The coronavirus is creating a lobbying feeding frenzy in Congress - Axios
https://www.axios.com/coronavirus-lobbying-congress-stimulus-package-0636be28-6938-47a2-b079-6a50c1027dba.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top
People keep looking at different hotspots and using traits to explain why they are hit hard. For instance, they explain North Italy because they have an older population. Problem being Japan has an older population. New York has high density. Japan and S. Korea have much higher.sycasey said:bearister said:
Comparing to San Francisco would be an interesting study too. SF is not as dense as NYC, but it's the closest example in the USA. Seems like the epidemic is more under control in SF (at least for now), possibly because the Bay Area instituted stronger controls more quickly?
The problem is that there are a lot of factors that go into it, and who gets hit is unpredictable. Many of the risk factors are a matter of degree. When things are reported like this it leads people and places who do not share that trait to think they are safe.
Population density increases the transmission of any communicable disease. Last I checked, people get the flu everywhere. Older people tend to get sicker. But while they have a very high mortality rate with coronavirus, working age populations still have a much higher mortality rate and a much higher hospitalization rate than the flu and will overwhelm our medical system. The only age group that is pretty unscathed is under 19. People with certain pre-existing conditions have a higher rate of complications, but perfectly healthy people have a significantly higher rate than the flu as well.
The idea that we can have non "vulnerable" populations go back to their normal lives and not get crushed is plain wrong. I fear for the parts of the country whose governors are not taking the lead. For those governors that are, I'd say they better buy up all the medical supplies like crazy before the other states are swamped. And of course there is a problem that states are not allowed to restrict travel in and out, so even those that do the right thing can't protect themselves fully without federal action.
It appears that the current administration has done a political calculus: If I require social distancing there is a 100% chance the economy will tank and I will take the heat. If I don't, there is a theoretical chance that the disease will stop spreading by some form of magic and I'll be okay. Go with the latter.
Our mid-30's daughter has arthritis and takes hydroxychloroquine (sp??), one of the drugs being mentioned has a possible coronavirus remedy. CVS called her yesterday and told her they're sending her a 90 day supply to ensure she has the drug should it become scarce.
I guess at least CVS is taking its potential use seriously.
Feelings about my daughter aside, I wonder if steering the drug to arthritis sufferers makes sense if the drug does prove effective. Maybe it does, as the treatment for arthritis involves weakening the immune system, making that population more vulnerable.
I guess at least CVS is taking its potential use seriously.
Feelings about my daughter aside, I wonder if steering the drug to arthritis sufferers makes sense if the drug does prove effective. Maybe it does, as the treatment for arthritis involves weakening the immune system, making that population more vulnerable.
I don't think that is an indication that CVS is taking its potential use seriously. I think it is an indication that CVS recognizes that it is already being hoarded whether it turns out to be an effective treatment for covid or not.LudwigsFountain said:
Our mid-30's daughter has arthritis and takes hydroxychloroquine (sp??), one of the drugs being mentioned has a possible coronavirus remedy. CVS called her yesterday and told her they're sending her a 90 day supply to ensure she has the drug should it become scarce.
I guess at least CVS is taking its potential use seriously.
Feelings about my daughter aside, I wonder if steering the drug to arthritis sufferers makes sense if the drug does prove effective. Maybe it does, as the treatment for arthritis involves weakening the immune system, making that population more vulnerable.
For what it's worth, there is a lot more evidence that it works than just the small study people have been talking about. This treatment has been widely used in China since January and a number of other countries as well. I think at this point the biggest concern is that the treatment is dangerous for a number of people who have certain conditions and/or other medications and that there is no clinically determined dosing and duration.OaktownBear said:I don't think that is an indication that CVS is taking its potential use seriously. I think it is an indication that CVS recognizes that it is already being hoarded whether it turns out to be an effective treatment for covid or not.LudwigsFountain said:
Our mid-30's daughter has arthritis and takes hydroxychloroquine (sp??), one of the drugs being mentioned has a possible coronavirus remedy. CVS called her yesterday and told her they're sending her a 90 day supply to ensure she has the drug should it become scarce.
I guess at least CVS is taking its potential use seriously.
Feelings about my daughter aside, I wonder if steering the drug to arthritis sufferers makes sense if the drug does prove effective. Maybe it does, as the treatment for arthritis involves weakening the immune system, making that population more vulnerable.
Essentially it's a bit of the wild west but a lot of people across the world have been working with this treatment to positive overall effect. Given that we have a different standard of care in the US, it's unclear what it would take to actually roll the treatment out en masse here. The fact that people are hoarding it is certainly disappointing, but it should be relatively easy to produce cheaply in large quantities if it becomes approved for broader use. At this point, given that we don't appear to be able to massively increase the number of ventilators and hospital beds we have, it's the most promising candidate to help us through this crisis.
OaktownBear said:
...
The idea that we can have non "vulnerable" populations go back to their normal lives and not get crushed is plain wrong. I fear for the parts of the country whose governors are not taking the lead. For those governors that are, I'd say they better buy up all the medical supplies like crazy before the other states are swamped. And of course there is a problem that states are not allowed to restrict travel in and out, so even those that do the right thing can't protect themselves fully without federal action.
It appears that the current administration has done a political calculus: If I require social distancing there is a 100% chance the economy will tank and I will take the heat. If I don't, there is a theoretical chance that the disease will stop spreading by some form of magic and I'll be okay. Go with the latter.
A lower level social isolation plateau can be attained while keeping the epidemic under control. This is what is happening now in most of China, in S. Korea and Japan. The key is having a very efficient and extensive testing and tracking program with strict isolation and quarantine for those who are in contact with known/suspected cases and those testing positive, respectively. This should be implemented after a 3-5 week lockdown, sometime in April, when the supply of test kits and masks comes in.
Not only is this possible to implement, but that is the path that is safest for society as a whole, because an extended lockdown also carries a severe health and mortality cost. The severe economic hardship from a very long lockdown will put for tens (hundreds?) of millions in a more precarious health situation. If for example you have a heart condition and face eviction or see your business collapsing, you will be much more likely to have a heart attack, at an order of magnitude similar or higher than the covid19 risk. As the covid19 fatality rates are being revised downwards at or below 1% with more data coming in, the health risks associated with an aggressive, extended, over a month long lockdown, loom larger.
Quote:
The US and South Korea announced their first cases of the coronavirus on the same day: January 20. More than six weeks later, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has tested around 1,500 people for the virus. South Korea, meanwhile, has tested about 140,000.
The nation is capable of conducting as many as 10,000 tests per day and has built drive-thru testing clinics that can detect coronavirus cases in just 10 minutes. Officials say the clinics can reduce testing time by a third.
This quick response has allowed South Korea to detect more than 6,000 coronavirus patients, around 35 of whom have died. That means the country's death rate is around 0.6%.
https://www.businessinsider.com/south-korea-coronavirus-testing-death-rate-2020-3
You can still maintain higher safeguards for the most vulnerable population, like retirement homes, while starting to relax a lot of the workplace down to a prudent but not extremely draconian plateau. Like holding this Fall home games at Memorial Stadium with 10,000-15,000 well-spaced young fans/students and middle-aged fans without preconditions.
This can and should be done, it's the best course of action on all levels.
I'm not commenting on its effectiveness as I wouldn't know beyond what has been published. But neither does CVS. I'm commenting on CVS' motivation here. I don't think their behavior means anything but they recognize supply chain issues that are already occurring due to premature hoarding of a drug that may or may not work. There are already people struggling to get the drug. Frankly, big props to CVS for getting their customers the drugs they need.Unit2Sucks said:For what it's worth, there is a lot more evidence that it works than just the small study people have been talking about. This treatment has been widely used in China since January and a number of other countries as well. I think at this point the biggest concern is that the treatment is dangerous for a number of people who have certain conditions and/or other medications and that there is no clinically determined dosing and duration.OaktownBear said:I don't think that is an indication that CVS is taking its potential use seriously. I think it is an indication that CVS recognizes that it is already being hoarded whether it turns out to be an effective treatment for covid or not.LudwigsFountain said:
Our mid-30's daughter has arthritis and takes hydroxychloroquine (sp??), one of the drugs being mentioned has a possible coronavirus remedy. CVS called her yesterday and told her they're sending her a 90 day supply to ensure she has the drug should it become scarce.
I guess at least CVS is taking its potential use seriously.
Feelings about my daughter aside, I wonder if steering the drug to arthritis sufferers makes sense if the drug does prove effective. Maybe it does, as the treatment for arthritis involves weakening the immune system, making that population more vulnerable.
Essentially it's a bit of the wild west but a lot of people across the world have been working with this treatment to positive overall effect. Given that we have a different standard of care in the US, it's unclear what it would take to actually roll the treatment out en masse here. The fact that people are hoarding it is certainly disappointing, but it should be relatively easy to produce cheaply in large quantities if it becomes approved for broader use. At this point, given that we don't appear to be able to massively increase the number of ventilators and hospital beds we have, it's the most promising candidate to help us through this crisis.
There has been some early indications that it and other drugs might have some effectiveness. Believe me, I hope one or all of them turn out to work without severe side effects. We just can't keep looking to behaviors of certain actors and reading into them more than is there.
And, by the way, this is all the more reason to keep up what we are doing. The more cases we have, the longer it will take to ramp up the production of whatever solution we have to meet the need. If we do find a drug or drugs to help, producing enough to treat 50K severe cases is a lot easier than having enough to treat 1 million.
Serious question - do you believe the USA is capable of doing this? I don't know if we have the infrastructure (and I don't mean physical infrastructure, but government and societal as well) to implement this on a nationwide basis. This isn't the type of problem you can just throw money at - it will require extensive commitment, discipline, and national strategic implementation. Nothing like this has ever been done at scale in recent memory.Cal88 said:A lower level social isolation plateau can be attained while keeping the epidemic under control. This is what is happening now in most of China, in S. Korea and Japan. The key is having a very efficient and extensive testing and tracking program with strict isolation and quarantine for those who are in contact with known/suspected cases and those testing positive, respectively. This should be implemented after a 3-5 week lockdown, sometime in April, when the supply of test kits and masks comes in.OaktownBear said:
...
There are already at least 4 drug treatments that are at least somewhat effective against covid19, chloroquine, vitamin C megadosing, Gilead's Remdesivir which is still in its early stages, and Heberon, an established interferon alpha 2b drug developed in Cuba that has been effective against HIV and hepathitis.
Vitamin C is more controversial, having been more the domain of alternative medecine circles, although it is deemed effective enough to actually being administered in China for covid cases, where it is also being tested under scientific methodology.
Vitamin C is more controversial, having been more the domain of alternative medecine circles, although it is deemed effective enough to actually being administered in China for covid cases, where it is also being tested under scientific methodology.
I completely agree with you Cal88 and maybe I wasn't clear. What I meant was the idea that we can do that NOW is just wrong. Ultimately we have to get to the place you are talking about. However, before we do that, we have to slow the immediate spread. We have to produce tests, masks, ventilators, and hospital beds. We have to find treatments. The idea that we are ready to ease restrictions next week is ridiculous.Cal88 said:OaktownBear said:
...
The idea that we can have non "vulnerable" populations go back to their normal lives and not get crushed is plain wrong. I fear for the parts of the country whose governors are not taking the lead. For those governors that are, I'd say they better buy up all the medical supplies like crazy before the other states are swamped. And of course there is a problem that states are not allowed to restrict travel in and out, so even those that do the right thing can't protect themselves fully without federal action.
It appears that the current administration has done a political calculus: If I require social distancing there is a 100% chance the economy will tank and I will take the heat. If I don't, there is a theoretical chance that the disease will stop spreading by some form of magic and I'll be okay. Go with the latter.
A lower level social isolation plateau can be attained while keeping the epidemic under control. This is what is happening now in most of China, in S. Korea and Japan. The key is having a very efficient and extensive testing and tracking program with strict isolation and quarantine for those who are in contact with known/suspected cases and those testing positive, respectively. This should be implemented after a 3-5 week lockdown, sometime in April, when the supply of test kits and masks comes in.
Not only is this possible to implement, but that is the path that is safest for society as a whole, because an extended lockdown also carries a severe health and mortality cost. The severe economic hardship from a very long lockdown will put for tens (hundreds?) of millions in a more precarious health situation. If for example you have a heart condition and face eviction or see your business collapsing, you will be much more likely to have a heart attack, at an order of magnitude similar or higher than the covid19 risk. As the covid19 fatality rates are being revised downwards at or below 1% with more data coming in, the health risks associated with an aggressive, extended, over a month long lockdown, loom larger.Quote:
The US and South Korea announced their first cases of the coronavirus on the same day: January 20. More than six weeks later, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has tested around 1,500 people for the virus. South Korea, meanwhile, has tested about 140,000.
The nation is capable of conducting as many as 10,000 tests per day and has built drive-thru testing clinics that can detect coronavirus cases in just 10 minutes. Officials say the clinics can reduce testing time by a third.
This quick response has allowed South Korea to detect more than 6,000 coronavirus patients, around 35 of whom have died. That means the country's death rate is around 0.6%.
https://www.businessinsider.com/south-korea-coronavirus-testing-death-rate-2020-3
You can still maintain higher safeguards for the most vulnerable population, like retirement homes, while starting to relax a lot of the workplace down to a prudent but not extremely draconian plateau. Like home games at Cal with 10,000-15,000 well-spaced young fans/students and middle-aged fans without preconditions.
This can and should be done, it's the best course of action on all levels.
I agree with you that we should be able to put such plans in place after a moderate period lockdown. I have to be honest, my confidence level that the government is doing enough to be ready in 5 weeks is low, but I hope they are. Definitely the strategy should have been to go into a 4-6 week lockdown to keep the cases down while we ramp up the necessary infrastructure and resources to handle it. Every time our number of cases doubles, it makes it that much tougher to build the infrastructure to fight this thing effectively. Part of South Korea's success was not only testing but testing EARLY before they had a lot of cases. They put out a camp fire. Much easier than a forest fire
My commentary was on the many politicians, including in the Administration who are resisting any lockdown and halfway through meager 15 day social distancing measures are panicked by the economy and want to undo the little that they did well before we are ready. It feels to me like the response has been 1. Do nothing. 2. Panic and announce largely ineffective measures for way too short of a period; 3. Do nothing during that time to get us more ready; and 4. Panic again and talk about rescinding the measures way too soon. There are about a dozen governors who seem to be taking an intelligent approach.
If Cal football is not being played, we have failed.
Unit2Sucks said:Serious question - do you believe the USA is capable of doing this? I don't know if we have the infrastructure (and I don't mean physical infrastructure, but government and societal as well) to implement this on a nationwide basis. This isn't the type of problem you can just throw money at - it will require extensive commitment, discipline, and national strategic implementation. Nothing like this has ever been done at scale in recent memory.Cal88 said:A lower level social isolation plateau can be attained while keeping the epidemic under control. This is what is happening now in most of China, in S. Korea and Japan. The key is having a very efficient and extensive testing and tracking program with strict isolation and quarantine for those who are in contact with known/suspected cases and those testing positive, respectively. This should be implemented after a 3-5 week lockdown, sometime in April, when the supply of test kits and masks comes in.OaktownBear said:
...
Yes we can! We have a month to implement such a plan. I presume the tests will be available by the hundreds of thousands by then, that is the main bottleneck at this point.
The discipline will be there, it's already hitting home for most, and by late April, most Americans will have known someone who has died or has had severe respiratory cases, that number will be in the neighborhood of 25,000 by then.
Finally an article touching on a topic I have been talking about for awhile: the possibility that many in the Bay Area have had a mild form of the virus and figured they just had a cold. Experts say the cruise ship passenger that died in Placer County contracted it in the community in Late January or early February. This topic is not helpful because it would alleviate the fear to shelter in place....and that fear is helping keep our community safe.
Have I already had coronavirus? How would I know and what should I do?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/23/have-i-already-had-covid19-coronavirus?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Have I already had coronavirus? How would I know and what should I do?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/23/have-i-already-had-covid19-coronavirus?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
88 - my understanding is that the bottleneck is not just the tests but the masks that health professionals need to safely administer the tests. I know a doctor whose family is reaching out to friends who may have purchased masks during the forest fires because they are already running out in California and we haven't even seen the major increases in need yet.Cal88 said:Unit2Sucks said:Serious question - do you believe the USA is capable of doing this? I don't know if we have the infrastructure (and I don't mean physical infrastructure, but government and societal as well) to implement this on a nationwide basis. This isn't the type of problem you can just throw money at - it will require extensive commitment, discipline, and national strategic implementation. Nothing like this has ever been done at scale in recent memory.Cal88 said:A lower level social isolation plateau can be attained while keeping the epidemic under control. This is what is happening now in most of China, in S. Korea and Japan. The key is having a very efficient and extensive testing and tracking program with strict isolation and quarantine for those who are in contact with known/suspected cases and those testing positive, respectively. This should be implemented after a 3-5 week lockdown, sometime in April, when the supply of test kits and masks comes in.OaktownBear said:
...
Yes we can! We have a month to implement such a plan. I presume the tests will be available by the hundreds of thousands by then, that is the main bottleneck at this point.
The discipline will be there, it's already hitting home for most, and by late April, most Americans will have known someone who has died or has had severe respiratory cases, that number will be in the neighborhood of 25,000 by then.
I also am not convinced that it is hitting home for most Americans. It feels like half the states don't think it's their problem and they won't until they start seeing 100's of cases in their communities.
Next question - we certainly are capable. Are we actually doing it though?
bearister said:
Finally an article touching on a topic I have been talking about for awhile: the possibility that many in the Bay Area have had a mild form of the virus and figured they just had a cold. Experts say the cruise ship passenger that died in Placer County contracted it in the community in Late January or early February. This topic is not helpful because it would alleviate the fear to shelter in place....and that fear is helping keep our community safe.
Have I already had coronavirus? How would I know and what should I do?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/23/have-i-already-had-covid19-coronavirus?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
My nephew (early 20s) goes to a junior college in LA where is he exposed to a lot of different people from a lot of different cultures on a daily basis. He developed a mild fever and cough back in February that wouldn't go away. He says that even now he still coughs sometimes. He went to the doctor after a couple days of low-grade fever and they sent him home. His doctor now says that he suspects he was infected with COVID-19. Luckily his mom (who he lives with) was away on business travel for 2 weeks during that time. He will get tested once a test is developed because he wants to know.
I also had a lingering cough in February that wouldn't go away (I live in Oakland, work in downtown SF where I could have been exposed to all kinds of things). Around the same time my whole family (wife and kids) had fevers and lingering coughs. Makes me wonder if we also already had it.dimitrig said:bearister said:
Finally an article touching on a topic I have been talking about for awhile: the possibility that many in the Bay Area have had a mild form of the virus and figured they just had a cold. Experts say the cruise ship passenger that died in Placer County contracted it in the community in Late January or early February. This topic is not helpful because it would alleviate the fear to shelter in place....and that fear is helping keep our community safe.
Have I already had coronavirus? How would I know and what should I do?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/23/have-i-already-had-covid19-coronavirus?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
My nephew (early 20s) goes to a junior college in LA where is he exposed to a lot of different people from a lot of different cultures on a daily basis. He developed a mild fever and cough back in February that wouldn't go away. He says that even now he still coughs sometimes. He went to the doctor after a couple days of low-grade fever and they sent him home. His doctor now says that he suspects he was infected with COVID-19. Luckily his mom (who he lives with) was away on business travel for 2 weeks during that time. He will get tested once a test is developed because he wants to know.
my family got sick first of February so it is possible. Didn't think anything at the time because the symptoms were not the same as the primary symptoms being reported. However, they do match some of the secondary reports. My daughter had fever and headaches and a raging sore throat and the doctor brought her in to be tested for strep, though she really didn't think that was it. (and it wasn't) The rest of us got varying lesser degrees of sick. I had a fever and headaches but kept working because I work from home anyway.bearister said:
Finally an article touching on a topic I have been talking about for awhile: the possibility that many in the Bay Area have had a mild form of the virus and figured they just had a cold. Experts say the cruise ship passenger that died in Placer County contracted it in the community in Late January or early February. This topic is not helpful because it would alleviate the fear to shelter in place....and that fear is helping keep our community safe.
Have I already had coronavirus? How would I know and what should I do?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/23/have-i-already-had-covid19-coronavirus?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
People should realize that most likely what they had was the usual illnesses that are going around. It is not like they stopped circulating when COVID hit. The chances were definitely a lot higher that you got a normal illness than you got COVID.
OaktownBear said:88 - my understanding is that the bottleneck is not just the tests but the masks that health professionals need to safely administer the tests. I know a doctor whose family is reaching out to friends who may have purchased masks during the forest fires because they are already running out in California and we haven't even seen the major increases in need yet.Cal88 said:Unit2Sucks said:Serious question - do you believe the USA is capable of doing this? I don't know if we have the infrastructure (and I don't mean physical infrastructure, but government and societal as well) to implement this on a nationwide basis. This isn't the type of problem you can just throw money at - it will require extensive commitment, discipline, and national strategic implementation. Nothing like this has ever been done at scale in recent memory.Cal88 said:A lower level social isolation plateau can be attained while keeping the epidemic under control. This is what is happening now in most of China, in S. Korea and Japan. The key is having a very efficient and extensive testing and tracking program with strict isolation and quarantine for those who are in contact with known/suspected cases and those testing positive, respectively. This should be implemented after a 3-5 week lockdown, sometime in April, when the supply of test kits and masks comes in.OaktownBear said:
...
Yes we can! We have a month to implement such a plan. I presume the tests will be available by the hundreds of thousands by then, that is the main bottleneck at this point.
The discipline will be there, it's already hitting home for most, and by late April, most Americans will have known someone who has died or has had severe respiratory cases, that number will be in the neighborhood of 25,000 by then.
I also am not convinced that it is hitting home for most Americans. It feels like half the states don't think it's their problem and they won't until they start seeing 100's of cases in their communities.
Next question - we certainly are capable. Are we actually doing it though?
It absolutely boggles the mind that it will be the end of March in about a week and hospitals in the United States of America still won't have enough masks. Effing MASKS for God's sake!
Haven't these people ever heard of Amazon Prime?!?
Big C said:
It absolutely boggles the mind that it will be the end of March in about a week and hospitals in the United States of America still won't have enough masks. Effing MASKS for God's sake!
Haven't these people ever heard of Amazon Prime?!?
My neighbor is a physician. He said he ordered masks a month ago. He still doesn't have them.
A good explanation of the problems of testing and why we were so much less prepared than South Korea. Hopefully we can get prepared for next time.Cal88 said:Unit2Sucks said:Serious question - do you believe the USA is capable of doing this? I don't know if we have the infrastructure (and I don't mean physical infrastructure, but government and societal as well) to implement this on a nationwide basis. This isn't the type of problem you can just throw money at - it will require extensive commitment, discipline, and national strategic implementation. Nothing like this has ever been done at scale in recent memory.Cal88 said:A lower level social isolation plateau can be attained while keeping the epidemic under control. This is what is happening now in most of China, in S. Korea and Japan. The key is having a very efficient and extensive testing and tracking program with strict isolation and quarantine for those who are in contact with known/suspected cases and those testing positive, respectively. This should be implemented after a 3-5 week lockdown, sometime in April, when the supply of test kits and masks comes in.OaktownBear said:
...
Yes we can! We have a month to implement such a plan. I presume the tests will be available by the hundreds of thousands by then, that is the main bottleneck at this point.
The discipline will be there, it's already hitting home for most, and by late April, most Americans will have known someone who has died or has had severe respiratory cases, that number will be in the neighborhood of 25,000 by then.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/videos/why-the-u-s-cant-process-coronavirus-tests-as-fast-as-south-korea/
It's hard to imagine that with them being produced now and for a while 24/7 that we do not have enough, but then I ran into the article that said hospitals that used 4,000/day are now using 40,000/day. Explains a lot, but still we should be catching up soon unless delivery trucks are honchoed.Big C said:OaktownBear said:88 - my understanding is that the bottleneck is not just the tests but the masks that health professionals need to safely administer the tests. I know a doctor whose family is reaching out to friends who may have purchased masks during the forest fires because they are already running out in California and we haven't even seen the major increases in need yet.Cal88 said:Unit2Sucks said:Serious question - do you believe the USA is capable of doing this? I don't know if we have the infrastructure (and I don't mean physical infrastructure, but government and societal as well) to implement this on a nationwide basis. This isn't the type of problem you can just throw money at - it will require extensive commitment, discipline, and national strategic implementation. Nothing like this has ever been done at scale in recent memory.Cal88 said:A lower level social isolation plateau can be attained while keeping the epidemic under control. This is what is happening now in most of China, in S. Korea and Japan. The key is having a very efficient and extensive testing and tracking program with strict isolation and quarantine for those who are in contact with known/suspected cases and those testing positive, respectively. This should be implemented after a 3-5 week lockdown, sometime in April, when the supply of test kits and masks comes in.OaktownBear said:
...
Yes we can! We have a month to implement such a plan. I presume the tests will be available by the hundreds of thousands by then, that is the main bottleneck at this point.
The discipline will be there, it's already hitting home for most, and by late April, most Americans will have known someone who has died or has had severe respiratory cases, that number will be in the neighborhood of 25,000 by then.
I also am not convinced that it is hitting home for most Americans. It feels like half the states don't think it's their problem and they won't until they start seeing 100's of cases in their communities.
Next question - we certainly are capable. Are we actually doing it though?
It absolutely boggles the mind that it will be the end of March in about a week and hospitals in the United States of America still won't have enough masks. Effing MASKS for God's sake!
Haven't these people ever heard of Amazon Prime?!?
I don't buy this idea that COVID has been distributed widely in our community for months and no one knew about it. That would require either (A) the asymptomatic or mild symptomatic rate is much higher than previously reported or (B) the virus that was here earlier was much weaker than the strain currently circulating here. Some people at Oxford are pushing a similar theory (that half the UK has already had it) but why would it be the case that all of the sudden our healthcare system is being overwhelmed whereas it wasn't previously?
Also, everyone talking about their prior colds/flus should remember that this has been a pretty bad year for colds and flus. 90% of COVID tests are still coming back negative, and that's taking into account the fact that the tests are so artificially limited to only address people who seem like they have COVID (and test negative for other things).
My kid had a strange random cough / sore throat thing in late January with strep-like symptoms (white throat, etc.). We took U2s Jr to urgent care and they said "WOAH, looks like strep" but tested negative for strep. I doubt it was COVID but I don't doubt it was one of the other screwy things that are still going around.
Also, everyone talking about their prior colds/flus should remember that this has been a pretty bad year for colds and flus. 90% of COVID tests are still coming back negative, and that's taking into account the fact that the tests are so artificially limited to only address people who seem like they have COVID (and test negative for other things).
My kid had a strange random cough / sore throat thing in late January with strep-like symptoms (white throat, etc.). We took U2s Jr to urgent care and they said "WOAH, looks like strep" but tested negative for strep. I doubt it was COVID but I don't doubt it was one of the other screwy things that are still going around.
I don't buy it much either because where are the deaths and hospitalizations. The most likely occurrence is that people had the normal flu and colds. Illness was running rampant through our kids' school, but no one thinks it was COVID. If anything, I think they are trying to get people to calm down. There is also a major difference between saying it was in the community vs. saying it was infecting thousand without us knowing.Unit2Sucks said:
I don't buy this idea that COVID has been distributed widely in our community for months and no one knew about it. That would require either (A) the asymptomatic or mild symptomatic rate is much higher than previously reported or (B) the virus that was here earlier was much weaker than the strain currently circulating here. Some people at Oxford are pushing a similar theory (that half the UK has already had it) but why would it be the case that all of the sudden our healthcare system is being overwhelmed whereas it wasn't previously?
Also, everyone talking about their prior colds/flus should remember that this has been a pretty bad year for colds and flus. 90% of COVID tests are still coming back negative, and that's taking into account the fact that the tests are so artificially limited to only address people who seem like they have COVID (and test negative for other things).
My kid had a strange random cough / sore throat thing in late January with strep-like symptoms (white throat, etc.). We took U2s Jr to urgent care and they said "WOAH, looks like strep" but tested negative for strep. I doubt it was COVID but I don't doubt it was one of the other screwy things that are still going around.
I think I know what Trump would chose between these two options:OaktownBear said:People keep looking at different hotspots and using traits to explain why they are hit hard. For instance, they explain North Italy because they have an older population. Problem being Japan has an older population. New York has high density. Japan and S. Korea have much higher.sycasey said:bearister said:
Comparing to San Francisco would be an interesting study too. SF is not as dense as NYC, but it's the closest example in the USA. Seems like the epidemic is more under control in SF (at least for now), possibly because the Bay Area instituted stronger controls more quickly?
The problem is that there are a lot of factors that go into it, and who gets hit is unpredictable. Many of the risk factors are a matter of degree. When things are reported like this it leads people and places who do not share that trait to think they are safe.
Population density increases the transmission of any communicable disease. Last I checked, people get the flu everywhere. Older people tend to get sicker. But while they have a very high mortality rate with coronavirus, working age populations still have a much higher mortality rate and a much higher hospitalization rate than the flu and will overwhelm our medical system. The only age group that is pretty unscathed is under 19. People with certain pre-existing conditions have a higher rate of complications, but perfectly healthy people have a significantly higher rate than the flu as well.
The idea that we can have non "vulnerable" populations go back to their normal lives and not get crushed is plain wrong. I fear for the parts of the country whose governors are not taking the lead. For those governors that are, I'd say they better buy up all the medical supplies like crazy before the other states are swamped. And of course there is a problem that states are not allowed to restrict travel in and out, so even those that do the right thing can't protect themselves fully without federal action.
It appears that the current administration has done a political calculus: If I require social distancing there is a 100% chance the economy will tank and I will take the heat. If I don't, there is a theoretical chance that the disease will stop spreading by some form of magic and I'll be okay. Go with the latter.
1) 50K Americans die over a 16 month suppression until vaccine is distributed, we have a recession, and he loses election.
2) 500K Americans die over a 2 month non-suppression until 60-70% of citizens have had disease, economy rebounds, and we achieve herd immunity and he wins re-election.
Those numbers are conservative estimates in the disparity between the two scenarios. And I am sure that his re-election is worth a few hundred thousand lives no problem.
Typically the R0 for this virus is 2.5- one person on average gives it to 2.5 people, ( 2-3 is the best guestimate). The R0 for a typical flu is about half of that- half as contagious. I don't think it's been lurking around in a benign state- we'd have been in the log phase way before now- though it is true and admitted that individuals in California contacted this early in the year.
Yeah, but as has been pointed out, the second scenario isn't realistic. There's no way a mass sickness/death event plus overloaded health care system doesn't also have terrible lasting effects on the economy. It wouldn't all be over after 2 months.blungld said:I think I know what Trump would chose between these two options:OaktownBear said:People keep looking at different hotspots and using traits to explain why they are hit hard. For instance, they explain North Italy because they have an older population. Problem being Japan has an older population. New York has high density. Japan and S. Korea have much higher.sycasey said:bearister said:
Comparing to San Francisco would be an interesting study too. SF is not as dense as NYC, but it's the closest example in the USA. Seems like the epidemic is more under control in SF (at least for now), possibly because the Bay Area instituted stronger controls more quickly?
The problem is that there are a lot of factors that go into it, and who gets hit is unpredictable. Many of the risk factors are a matter of degree. When things are reported like this it leads people and places who do not share that trait to think they are safe.
Population density increases the transmission of any communicable disease. Last I checked, people get the flu everywhere. Older people tend to get sicker. But while they have a very high mortality rate with coronavirus, working age populations still have a much higher mortality rate and a much higher hospitalization rate than the flu and will overwhelm our medical system. The only age group that is pretty unscathed is under 19. People with certain pre-existing conditions have a higher rate of complications, but perfectly healthy people have a significantly higher rate than the flu as well.
The idea that we can have non "vulnerable" populations go back to their normal lives and not get crushed is plain wrong. I fear for the parts of the country whose governors are not taking the lead. For those governors that are, I'd say they better buy up all the medical supplies like crazy before the other states are swamped. And of course there is a problem that states are not allowed to restrict travel in and out, so even those that do the right thing can't protect themselves fully without federal action.
It appears that the current administration has done a political calculus: If I require social distancing there is a 100% chance the economy will tank and I will take the heat. If I don't, there is a theoretical chance that the disease will stop spreading by some form of magic and I'll be okay. Go with the latter.
1) 50K Americans die over a 16 month suppression until vaccine is distributed, we have a recession, and he loses election.
2) 500K Americans die over a 2 month non-suppression until 60-70% of citizens have had disease, economy rebounds, and we achieve herd immunity and he wins re-election.
Those numbers are conservative estimates in the disparity between the two scenarios. And I am sure that his re-election is worth a few hundred thousand lives no problem.
Honestly, the best thing Trump could do for the economy is exactly the kind of mass production FDR put into action during WW2, only instead of making bombs and guns you put healthy people to work making and distributing the needed medical supplies, get MASH units set up in all affected areas to help with the spillover from the overloaded hospitals, hire and deploy people to do mass testing across the country, etc. You know, ACTUALLY behave like a wartime President taking action against the enemy virus and not like a guy just hoping it will all blow over.
Putin dons hazmat suit as Moscow says coronavirus outbreak is worse than it looks
https://news.yahoo.com/putin-dons-hazmat-suit-moscow-161407964.html
https://news.yahoo.com/putin-dons-hazmat-suit-moscow-161407964.html
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Article from the LA Times
https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2020-03-22/coronavirus-outbreak-nobel-laureate
I think the analysis is interesting and important, but also misleading, at least in how it is presented here. (Don't know if that is the underlying analysis or the media presentation).
1. We are definitely starting to see a curve in how new cases are increasing and then flattening out and dropping.
2. Doing this analysis by "country", though, is misleading. Viruses don't recognize borders. Point being that the curve that is discussed occurs in a region once the virus takes hold. The United States is not going to follow the curve. Each region that is hit will. China's number of new cases have dropped dramatically because 1. Wuhan has gone through the curve; but more importantly 2. China has been able to keep the virus from taking hold anywhere else. If the virus took hold in even a fraction of China's major cities the numbers would be devastating. Wuhan is the 9th largest city. Shanghai is 3 times larger. I think the quote "we're going to be fine" is significantly misleading. If the country looks like China, yeah. If the country looks like 25 Wuhans, no. Right now, it looks like there is a good chance it is already too late for NYC, Nola, and parts of Florida.
3. I think the analysis is irresponsible in one sense. We are getting an idea of what the curve looks like, but we don't know how many peaks there will be. In the Spanish flu, the second peak was higher than the first. To say we are okay because China's cases plateau'd and dropped is very premature when based on historical information we don't know if Wuhan is done or just in between phases.
4. The curve we have observed includes every place that has been hit ultimately taking strong measures to stop the spread. It is not the curve that happens if we stop taking steps to do so.
https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2020-03-22/coronavirus-outbreak-nobel-laureate
I think the analysis is interesting and important, but also misleading, at least in how it is presented here. (Don't know if that is the underlying analysis or the media presentation).
1. We are definitely starting to see a curve in how new cases are increasing and then flattening out and dropping.
2. Doing this analysis by "country", though, is misleading. Viruses don't recognize borders. Point being that the curve that is discussed occurs in a region once the virus takes hold. The United States is not going to follow the curve. Each region that is hit will. China's number of new cases have dropped dramatically because 1. Wuhan has gone through the curve; but more importantly 2. China has been able to keep the virus from taking hold anywhere else. If the virus took hold in even a fraction of China's major cities the numbers would be devastating. Wuhan is the 9th largest city. Shanghai is 3 times larger. I think the quote "we're going to be fine" is significantly misleading. If the country looks like China, yeah. If the country looks like 25 Wuhans, no. Right now, it looks like there is a good chance it is already too late for NYC, Nola, and parts of Florida.
3. I think the analysis is irresponsible in one sense. We are getting an idea of what the curve looks like, but we don't know how many peaks there will be. In the Spanish flu, the second peak was higher than the first. To say we are okay because China's cases plateau'd and dropped is very premature when based on historical information we don't know if Wuhan is done or just in between phases.
4. The curve we have observed includes every place that has been hit ultimately taking strong measures to stop the spread. It is not the curve that happens if we stop taking steps to do so.
Millions of people streamed out of Wuhan right before Chinese New Years to all parts of the country. I don't understand why all of China was not more debilitated. Sure there were outbreaks in Shanghai and Beijing but the secondary outbreaks were less severe. It could be the government measures or perhaps the virus mutates when hosts are less opportunistic
Anarchistbear said:
Millions of people streamed out of Wuhan right before Chinese New Years to all parts of the country. I don't understand why all of China was not more debilitated. Sure there were outbreaks in Shanghai and Beijing but the secondary outbreaks were less severe. It could be the government measures or perhaps the virus mutates when hosts are less opportunistic
Obviously we don't know, but given that the virus went from Wuhan to many hotspots, and there is no reason to believe all other Chinese cities were less receptive to the virus, I think a good guess is that China was very early to take draconian measures in those places. It was just too late for Wuhan.
The Chinese cannot be trusted. We have no idea what happened over there.Anarchistbear said:
Millions of people streamed out of Wuhan right before Chinese New Years to all parts of the country. I don't understand why all of China was not more debilitated. Sure there were outbreaks in Shanghai and Beijing but the secondary outbreaks were less severe. It could be the government measures or perhaps the virus mutates when hosts are less opportunistic
There are a lot of encouraging signs about how people all over the world are dealing with the virus. There are even encouraging signs from the lockdown in California. Unfortuately, unless we get the whole world on the same page and really stamp this thing out, I'm not sure we can really prevent a second wave or even just a continuation of this initial wave. We need more testing and more isolating of infected but asymptomatic people and I'm not seeing that as being close to happening in the US.
You are right they cannot be trusted to report accurate data, but they can't hide major virus outbreaks. They can fudge the numbers, but if there was a second Wuhan, we'd know.dimitrig said:The Chinese cannot be trusted. We have no idea what happened over there.Anarchistbear said:
Millions of people streamed out of Wuhan right before Chinese New Years to all parts of the country. I don't understand why all of China was not more debilitated. Sure there were outbreaks in Shanghai and Beijing but the secondary outbreaks were less severe. It could be the government measures or perhaps the virus mutates when hosts are less opportunistic
OaktownBear said:You are right they cannot be trusted to report accurate data, but they can't hide major virus outbreaks. They can fudge the numbers, but if there was a second Wuhan, we'd know.dimitrig said:The Chinese cannot be trusted. We have no idea what happened over there.Anarchistbear said:
Millions of people streamed out of Wuhan right before Chinese New Years to all parts of the country. I don't understand why all of China was not more debilitated. Sure there were outbreaks in Shanghai and Beijing but the secondary outbreaks were less severe. It could be the government measures or perhaps the virus mutates when hosts are less opportunistic
In my initial post I started to write down a lot of scenarios why other cities were not so impacted. Some are very outlandish (e.g., they had already vaccinated the population based on previous information) and some are not. The truth is, we don't really know. I wouldn't put anything past the Chinese. Maybe even THEY don't understand it.
Featured Stories
See All