Does the coronavirus merit investment, or personal, concern or consideration?

You’ve omitted a rather important portion of my quote that could take my argument out of context (not by you, but by other readers). I’m gonna requote in full.

I’m not sure whether you are (a) agreeing or insinuating that abortion is an elective procedure or (b) simply asking whether I agree that resources could be diverged to unrelated issues.

Arguing about (a) seems pointless, but since I don’t agree that abortion should ever be treated as non-essential elective procedure, I do agree with preserving the right and access to abortion (and to fund it if additional funding is needed). This probably wouldn’t even come up if a few Republican states’ AGs did not use the “urgent matter in front of us” to issue memos declaring abortions non-essential.

I do not agree with some other items, such as student loan forgiveness, being bundled into this package.

You can find all the links at the top of the thread. The one I like the most is worldometers.info, it’s much more detailed and useful than the JHU world map. You can click on some individual countries and see the real time and daily stats. It does not show a breakdown by county within each state, but it provides links to data sources (usually state health agencies) and some of those have county breakdowns.

1 Like

I like refer to that one that one the most as well. Usual caveats apply. Number of tests are a limiting factor (Italy). Selectivity/eligibility of tests too. And for the USA that can vary somewhat by city/county/state. Federal directive is currently to only test people who are admitted to a hospital (unless you have $$$$ or a politician… funny non-answers to why they didn’t follow the directive themselves). So it’s mostly only the serious condition people being added to it now who are also tested.

There’s still lots of “flu deaths” that are really covid19, which the other person at the press conference at least brought up. A stealthy correction to Trump’s false claim we’ve already had 50k flu deaths, so the current numbers are nothing important. If fact, many of those were from covid19. (we also have less than 35k vehicular deaths a year… so No, we do not have vastly more deaths from automobiles each year than from flu or than from the potential of this virus.) It’s obvious that many deaths going forward are still unlikely to be tested so they can also be swept under the rug. They certainly won’t be tested under the current guidelines.

How far back do you reckon these mis-attributed “flu” deaths go back?

This may been posted before and but this guy did a good job graphing the trends:

1 Like

Trump task force person said couple months, if I remember accurately.

There was also a double flu season last year and this year so it’s tough. So I don’t want to throw in anecdotal pneumonia cases of multiple people at work who traveled over that time period. I’m sure there’s some experts trying to make educated guesses with the new data coming in. With zero testing until a week or two ago (and only slightly less than zero now, in places like TX), it seems like it’s pretty hard to make accurate guesses.

I’d guess they might go back to December in lower numbers. It’s not reasonable to assume all travel cases were caught. If the travel case was asymptomatic or light symptoms, they would NOT have been tested. Then anyone who they infected who had serious symptoms or death would NOT have been tested because they had no known contact with someone who tested Positive. It doesn’t seem reasonable to assume that those travel cases didn’t also multiply on planes/in airports to spread things around the country. That’s why the piecemeal “partial lockdown or business as usual by state/area” that’s being put forth now is nonsense. That only works if you cut off transportation between the states/areas, or at the least heavily limit it. Otherwise the interstate travelers will just spread it.

1 Like

I’d guess that 3 months back isnt unreasonable. I’m not claiming it to be so, but it wouldnt surprise me to learn it already went through my household two months ago.

That’d also mean that all these projections of exponential growth are wrong, we’re much further along ‘the curve’ than we think. And/or the ease of transmission has been grossly overstated. Plus, that there is a not-insignificant portion of the population walking around already immune. I’m not saying any of that must be true, but it does make you wonder.

1 Like

No. It’s 18 days for a death to show up. If you go with <1% as overall death rate, as the healthcare system wasn’t yet overwhelmed… It means there’s ~100 people infected 18 days earlier to create 1 death. It takes much more than one death for “sticking out”. With doubling more than once every week (what is the estimate, 5 days now?), it still takes a couple months to get to the millions we have infected. Even after you get to the first 100, if you double every 5 days it’s about 2 1/2 months to get to a million (which we’re well past now).

The travesty is that if we would have moved on it earlier we’d be in a much better situation.

1 Like

Good job.
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/489097-man-dies-after-taking-malaria-medication-in-effort-to-prevent-coronavirus

4 Likes

The countries that were hit by SARS are very well prepared and are able to keep most of the business open.

We spent billions on intelligence gathering but what good does all it do? The alarms were sounded but ignored. It’s human nature to always fight the last war, so maybe we need AI that one can’t attack as biased to advise us. Maybe our robot overlord can save us from the next disaster.

That’s great. How are they doing it. I mean how are they preventing the virus from spreading while people continue to be in close contact.

Testing ramped up high. Quarantines. Yes, the quarantines of contacts of anyone infected seems “tough”, but it’s much less strain than closing the whole states and having everyone dying as well. And the quarantines are only a couple weeks…
You’ll still miss some (see S Korea), but then you blanket tests in those areas with a small outbreak.

Plenty of good. Intelligence agencies have been warning about the potential event for years. Trump was repeatedly approached earlier this year with blaring alarms from the intelligence agencies as well (specific to covid-19). The voters share directly responsibility for what is happening now.

2 Likes

Testing ramped up high - like daily?

It seems like this would work if you caught each infected person very early, which is why you have to test daily, or have a limited ingress into the area. Regardless, I’m impressed that it worked.

Their big outbreak was mostly one super spreader, the cases were much lower before that. But still back under control again.

2 Likes

Thanks for the link. I tried to read it. I should have read the sub-title.

I want to go back to this, because I was in Canada when SARS hit. Why do you think they’re doing so much better than the U.S.?

Oops first one that came up with numbers. I didn’t read that either haha.

Of course, I’m not sure how anyone wouldn’t characterize us having floundered. The failed tests fiasco is nothing other than a severe falling. No other way to look at it. That’s absent of placing blame anywhere.

National healthcare also removed obstacle for testing.(the sub title doesn’t say that’s the ONLY way to get there. Just what worked for S Korea) We have insurance and individuals pay for things like tests, that makes no sense for public health like this. You WANT to find the infected as quick and as efficiently as possible, not only test people who pay. It took a bill from Congress to only partially address that here.

1 Like

Understood. It was just the tone and repeated political attacks that turned me off. A couple of things that I think may have worked for them much more than nationalized health care:

  1. Population density - I’m not positive about this one, but such density would allow for much easier control of the public, both for testing and quarantine.

  2. Culture - Aren’t S. Koreans more amenable to rule following than rule breaking? I’m not trying to cast aspersions, or insult anyone. I just don’t know. For example, I suspect Germany will knock this thing down pretty quick, because they seem to do what their government tells them.

Oh, and I agree that the test shouldn’t be on a fee basis. It protects everyone, so should be paid for and not necessarily mandated, but strongly encouraged.

Round up and review of various existing drugs being tested against the new virus in a new global WHO trial.

2 Likes

Apparently someone in Arizona failed to heed the above, and died:

Man takes fish chloroquine and dies

With the trials commencing today in NYC there is no excuse for this. Doctors know the correct and safe dose, and they will be conducting those trials. The article does not say how large a dose the dead man consumed, which seems to me rather important.

On the NYC trials:

I hope to God people are helped. It would truly be a blessing. We should know within just one week’s time.