Corona Virus

[cookinbrak]

17 minutes ago, stirs said:

The point I am making is that the hospitals are packed full of the "at risk" folks.  The social distancing does not work when grandparents spend all their time with family, even in groups under 10.  If the 65 and up and at risk folks were quarantined and not getting this virus, the rest of the country could most likely work and serve the at risk folks.  There might be people that are not at risk going to the hospital, but the system should be able to handle them, not unlike the flu each season.

Name one person who is not "at risk".

Quote

An infant in Illinois has died of the new coronavirus, becoming the youngest known COVID-19 victim in the state, the governor announced Saturday. “I know how difficult this news can be, especially about this very young child,” Gov. J.B. Pritzker said at a news conference. “Upon hearing it, I admit that I was immediately shaken. It’s appropriate for any of us to grieve today. It’s especially sorrowful for the family of this very small child for the years stolen from this infant. We should grieve ... We should grieve for a sense of normalcy we left behind just a few short weeks ago,” he said. No further details were available about the baby. A state employee was also among the latest fatalities reported as Illinois announced its highest number yet of deaths in a single day: 13. The state now has reported 47 deaths total and 3,491 confirmed coronavirus cases.

Read it at Chicago Tribune

 

[stirs]

12 minutes ago, cookinbrak said:

Name one person who is not "at risk".

 

Yep, everyone saw it.

One infant in Illinois, a 15 year old in China and a 17 yr old in CA.

Is everyone technically "at risk"?  Sure, but in waaaaaay less percentages than the seasonal flu, for which we do nothing but provide immunizations.  The older folks are at major risk, and especially underlying conditions.

What we are doing now is akin to standing out side thinking that as long as we watch the weatherman, we won't get wet when the thunderstorm hits our area.  At least that is they way I see it.  Why not get the ones who need to be in shelter inside?  I just like opening up ideas and conversations.  Do you guys never try to think of alternative views for solving problems? Governments and people are sometimes reactionary by nature.

Not much conversation here except just the sensational headline links.  There have been only a couple people who will discuss, but mostly fear based rebuts.  Not that I can't handle rebuttals, but would be nice if it were thought out and discussions spawned.  It is a moving target, changing every single day and I just enjoy NOT waiting on it all the time.

[LinvilleGorge]

If you're going to watch any one thing on the coronavirus, watch this:

South Korea has handled this outbreak as well or better than any other country out there, so I'll take one of their leading expert's opinion on the matter over just about anyone else's.

[4Corners]

2 hours ago, Car123 said:

What an idiot.

This is appalling. Add it to the list. 

[Harbingers]

1 hour ago, LinvilleGorge said:

If you're going to watch any one thing on the coronavirus, watch this:

South Korea has handled this outbreak as well or better than any other country out there, so I'll take one of their leading expert's opinion on the matter over just about anyone else's.

Oh poo that Asian Boss hasn’t come up on my YouTube feed yet. Def gonna watch it. 
 

fug man, that poo about reactivation cases is scary.

“Ok you’re good, we can discharge you. Go rest at home for a few days and do your life... oh wait 5 days later it’s back.”

Edited March 29, 2020 by Harbingers

[Harbingers]

1 hour ago, LinvilleGorge said:

If you're going to watch any one thing on the coronavirus, watch this:

South Korea has handled this outbreak as well or better than any other country out there, so I'll take one of their leading expert's opinion on the matter over just about anyone else's.

OK that’s just depressing. This one popped up and I skimmed it. He says that even though the death rate is 3% or less right now, 50% of people that advance far enough to be put on a ventilator die. 
 

Which tells us if NYC needs 30,000 ventilators. Ya...

He also pulls no punches against dumbass people being dumb. Holy poo he rips “kids” apart unabashedly. “We have healthcare workers who have died... not gotten sick fuger... died{from exhaustion and burnout} trying to help your family.”

Its important to note too this is a week old and his says his estimates are BEST case scenario. We are way past his best case scenario projection a week later.

Edited March 29, 2020 by Harbingers

[luke262]

36 minutes ago, stirs said:

Yep, everyone saw it.

One infant in Illinois, a 15 year old in China and a 17 yr old in CA.

Is everyone technically "at risk"?  Sure, but in waaaaaay less percentages than the seasonal flu, for which we do nothing but provide immunizations.  The older folks are at major risk, and especially underlying conditions.

What we are doing now is akin to standing out side thinking that as long as we watch the weatherman, we won't get wet when the thunderstorm hits our area.  At least that is they way I see it.  Why not get the ones who need to be in shelter inside?  I just like opening up ideas and conversations.  Do you guys never try to think of alternative views for solving problems? Governments and people are sometimes reactionary by nature.

Not much conversation here except just the sensational headline links.  There have been only a couple people who will discuss, but mostly fear based rebuts.  Not that I can't handle rebuttals, but would be nice if it were thought out and discussions spawned.  It is a moving target, changing every single day and I just enjoy NOT waiting on it 

Let's say you're young fit and healthy, you catch it, you most likely don't die, but whilst you're in hospital on a ventilator, whilst unpleasant you most likely don't die. However that is one less ventilator for someone else. Social distancing is done so that less people get ill at the same time so that hospitals have capacity for those that are ill. Its as simple and necessary as that. 

[stirs]

46 minutes ago, luke262 said:

Let's say you're young fit and healthy, you catch it, you most likely don't die, but whilst you're in hospital on a ventilator, whilst unpleasant you most likely don't die. However that is one less ventilator for someone else. Social distancing is done so that less people get ill at the same time so that hospitals have capacity for those that are ill. Its as simple and necessary as that. 

Understood, but in all the scenarios I gave, I have taken the old and existing conditions folks out of the equation by quarantining them strictly.  The occasional fit person on the vent would not be taking it from someone else most likely.  Also, did not say quit social distancing.

The biggest issue in my scenario is getting the US to go along with quarantining the elderly.  Yes, they can shut down a rest home,  but what about those not in rest homes.  That would be like herding cats.  My own folks, I have to watch them like a hawk or they will be talking about going here and there.  I have them send me grocery lists against their will because they want to get out of the house.

Also remember, with every elderly person that has tested positive and passed or are still in the hospital, their entire families have probably been infected.  How many have gotten tested?

I think again, more than the initial tests that everyone is wanting, we need the test that looks at antibodies to see who has already had it.

[Brooklyn 3.0]

Stirs DOES know this isn't just an old person disease right? Surely he does.

[stirs]

14 minutes ago, Brooklyn 3.0 said:

Stirs DOES know this isn't just an old person disease right? Surely he does.

You can ask me direct instead of the "in front of the whole class" thing.

When this things passes, in 3 months, or 6 months or whatever, then we will get all sorts of info and scenarios.  I would bet that if the 65 and older, at risk folks had been kept safe, and out of harms way, they would be hating everyone involved and saying there was no need to trample their rights, because not that many in the world died.

And duh, NOBODY has said it is just an old person disease, but does KILL them way disproportionately.  The whole, "lets treat em after they get it" might not have been the best approach.  The harsher measure should have been put in place for them early on, but again, they might complain.  Someone in this thread even suggested it was a Nazi method.  They are still being treated just like everyone else at this stage as far as anything further than "urgings" from officials.

I might be out to lunch on this, but guess we will see in the numbers.  The early numbers showed it was very bad for certain groups by a wide wide margin.  Don't lose perspective, we can lose 50k each year in the US for seasonal flu and not blink, and that include hundreds of kids.  Like I said before, if you have statistics and science, why not use them?  There are diseases we have in the US that affects male vs female and young vs old.  This might need to be tailored a bit in that direction.  That is all I am saying.

Edited March 29, 2020 by stirs

[stirs]

Here are some other groups, probably full of elderly, acting stupid.

Every responsible congregation should be live streaming and cut the crap about your religious liberties.  It is not banned but put on hold for a bit.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/some-megachurches-are-still-packing-in-crowds/ar-BB11SBxU

[Cam's New Arm]

I think people are still in shock over this. If that 20something million in China is anything then this is way different.
I would assume that would have to be some other thing mixed into this. Like a crackdown on some hacking ring or something lol

[jasonluckydog]

The healthy should go back to work and the fragile should be in quarantine. 

[Jaycat]