Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19) (SARS-CoV-2) [2020]
- Thread starter RDGoodla
- Start date
Yeah they’re strengthening their hold on the Silver medal, Spain’s currently in bronze but Germany made some big gains today, . Though I’m more worried about the USA I fear they will again top the medal table in 2020.
I have to say it was jolly nice of them to allow the other countries a chance, by going communist and not charging for civid19 tests.
Trump on the drug I’ve been talking about here
:| Why did he have to go and curse it, I was pinning my hopes on it
Speaking of USA ... Granted total # of cases isn't everything, as population is way up there, and most of USA are still holding onto the only testing over age 61 or already hospitalized. Around 3000 new cases in NewYork alone in 1 day.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
![vyaoukcj5un41[1].png](https://forum.beyond3d.com/data/attachments/3/3685-a7c937a5533da40275a3d26b73af1622.jpg "vyaoukcj5un41[1].png")
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
Considering the way a lot of the US works and the way large quantities of its residents think, I would be very worried about how it will pan out. I would probably put the military in charge together with the national disaster management team and take some serious action.
Many European countries already have been too soft. The US should act more aggressively in terms of social distancing and enforcing this.
Many European countries already have been too soft. The US should act more aggressively in terms of social distancing and enforcing this.
I can imagine many of the paramilitary guys bursting into tears at the news
“This is the most wonderful day of my life, I have been stockpiling weapons for this very moment, people thought I was a comoflague wearing nutter with an American pitbull dog, but I knew this day was coming, the good book predicted it”
The fallout from the trying to resist the disease could end up far worse than the disease itself. If people get panicked and start fighting (sales of weapons in US have spiked, and even after this is all over, those weapons will be in homes), the nation could be thrown into turmoil. If that results in disruption for supplies (let's say some gangs raiding deliveries is the starting point and it snowballs) then you've got a real problem. And all to stop a lot of old people from dying five years earlier than they would anyway. If we have economic collapse and then the suicide rate spikes as happens, that's a lot of younger, active, possible-parents killing themselves so that an 83 with a heart condition can live out their days (to 86?).
If there was one Western nation that said, "sod it, survival of the fittest," and didn't change their medical services at all, loads of people would die in their homes over a period of two months, but the economy would be the strongest of any in the Western world because everyone else, the active population of the nation, would have kept going. The young aren't massively at risk. You'd then get a little thinning of the population and some freeing up of homes so more young folk can afford to move out. Economically, doing nothing is probably the best thing a nation can do (once containment has failed) in the long run.
Interesting and quite long article:
https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance-be9337092b56
I think I agree with most of the conclusions though I think the author(s) are being overly optimistic about the best case scenario.
On another note, following yesterday's order by the government to shut the pubs at the first reasonable opportunity, here in the small northern English town where I live, the pubs decided to sell off their remaining beer at £1 a pint. Cue drunken chaos from the intellectually challenged. I doubt many of those doing the drinking and fighting will suffer, but I wonder if they'll spare a thought for the doctors and nurses as they try to save the lives of their parents and grandparents in a few weeks time? Fuckwits.
https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance-be9337092b56
I think I agree with most of the conclusions though I think the author(s) are being overly optimistic about the best case scenario.
On another note, following yesterday's order by the government to shut the pubs at the first reasonable opportunity, here in the small northern English town where I live, the pubs decided to sell off their remaining beer at £1 a pint. Cue drunken chaos from the intellectually challenged. I doubt many of those doing the drinking and fighting will suffer, but I wonder if they'll spare a thought for the doctors and nurses as they try to save the lives of their parents and grandparents in a few weeks time? Fuckwits.
So in the UK this is what Boris Johnson suggested initially. Then the scenario was simulated and the result was 500.000 deaths. Roughly 20% of those will be 20-45, 36% 45-65 - these are people that now survive the tough 2-3 weeks of treatment necessary at the ICU during complete lung failure ... and with everyone getting sick at the same time, the most basic parts of society will collapse resulting in various other serious problems. Also this kind of lung failure can have much longer lasting effects.
I have my doubts that a more serious lockdown is more expensive. Thankfully in these modern times a lot of work can be done remotely or with limited person to person contact. We just need to get better at that, this will also be needed for worse stuff like Ebola or more aggressive strains of SARS, MERS etc do escape into the world, where ever or whenever they do.
In the light of that, even Boris Johnson changed his mind, fortunately.
I have my doubts that a more serious lockdown is more expensive. Thankfully in these modern times a lot of work can be done remotely or with limited person to person contact. We just need to get better at that, this will also be needed for worse stuff like Ebola or more aggressive strains of SARS, MERS etc do escape into the world, where ever or whenever they do.
In the light of that, even Boris Johnson changed his mind, fortunately.
That wasn't the initial plan in the UK. I don't know why people keep going with that. The plan was only ever to flatten the curve, same as everywhere else. And as for 20% being 20-45 year olds, that's not consistent with anything except the US numbers - the rest of the world has far lower rates for the young. Bit of Googling:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-...se/have-many-coronavirus-patients-died-italy/
Zero deaths under 30. A couple of percent under 60. And that's not young surviving because they are toughing it out for three weeks in ICU, but people just staying home and getting over it. As above, 30% had severe/critical conditions, and those are weighted very much towards the elderly and infirm. In terms of an animal species, young, healthy specimens largely get through Covid19 fine. Outside of our economy, the human animal in its raw, natural state wouldn't be impacted as a species by this disease much at all.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-...se/have-many-coronavirus-patients-died-italy/
Zero deaths under 30. A couple of percent under 60. And that's not young surviving because they are toughing it out for three weeks in ICU, but people just staying home and getting over it. As above, 30% had severe/critical conditions, and those are weighted very much towards the elderly and infirm. In terms of an animal species, young, healthy specimens largely get through Covid19 fine. Outside of our economy, the human animal in its raw, natural state wouldn't be impacted as a species by this disease much at all.
You are confusing numbers of people dying who do receive proper treatment with numbers of people who end up on the IC and would have died without proper IC treatment.
In the Netherlands the initial 20 OC patients 10 were under 45 or something like that. Haven’t seen figures since but the US definitely isn’t the only data. Similar warnings have come out of Italy.
I got that other bit about the initial plan from the BBC site, sorry if that was wrong I didn’t verify it extensively. Our government prime minister presented the same argument verbatim on tv but a day later the dutch version of WHO (rivm) said they never meant it like that.
Still the message was clearly wrong.
EDIT: this was my source for the UK policy shift
Coronavirus: UK changes course amid death toll fears - BBC News https://www.nu.nl/components/comments/article/6038171?commentId=6c1b9331-f1db-40fb-8c2d-5e9b40ff3cc0
In the Netherlands the initial 20 OC patients 10 were under 45 or something like that. Haven’t seen figures since but the US definitely isn’t the only data. Similar warnings have come out of Italy.
I got that other bit about the initial plan from the BBC site, sorry if that was wrong I didn’t verify it extensively. Our government prime minister presented the same argument verbatim on tv but a day later the dutch version of WHO (rivm) said they never meant it like that.
Still the message was clearly wrong.
EDIT: this was my source for the UK policy shift
Coronavirus: UK changes course amid death toll fears - BBC News https://www.nu.nl/components/comments/article/6038171?commentId=6c1b9331-f1db-40fb-8c2d-5e9b40ff3cc0
Last edited:
I point to the death rate only to illustrate the skew in the severity. 30% of cases are severe or critical, but these are weighted very much towards the elderly and infirm it seems. Sadly I haven't found any data on actual age and symptoms - all we get is broad overview numbers that we have to piece together. If you've a report that shows severity by age, that'd be very enlightening.
I point to the data above that states 25% are 50 and under, and the South Korea data the testing was far more widespread and where 30% of those tested positive were 20-30 but not showing symptoms, hence the lack of testing and identification in Italy who were only testing those with notable symptoms:
I don't see any convincing data that 20% of people with Covid19 are young, and over half are 65 are under retirement age. The story is that it's the elderly and infirm most at risk by a large margin.
"He said: "Our aim is to try and reduce the peak, broaden the peak, not suppress it completely." There was never a plan to let the virus run amok and just let it take the elderly - no-one is trying that strategy.
or find a vaccine.
I don't know what the right answer is, this will just play out, we can't stop all the forces that will swirl in this type of event. From public panic, to elected officials, to who will be infected and who will die. To who will be triaged and who will not be.
It's one of those situations where I guess people can take the time we have now in quarantine and just slow down and appreciate life in this sudden change.
Latest numbers Italy, from 3047 deaths
aged 0-29 0%
30-39 0.3%
40-49 0.8%
50-59 2.7%
60+ 96.2%
Again for this discussion, the ONLY relevant numbers are the ages of people admitted to intensive care. These are the potential victims of not properly slowing down or stopping the virus to flatten the curve.
In Italy they will have choices like 2 45 yo and a 61 yo are admitted to the IC at the same time (an actual example I read!) then they will give up the oldest weakest patient and focus on an otherwise healthy patient etc.
In Italy they will have choices like 2 45 yo and a 61 yo are admitted to the IC at the same time (an actual example I read!) then they will give up the oldest weakest patient and focus on an otherwise healthy patient etc.
No-one does! However, there's actually a fairly brutal option that might in reality be the best, although you won't get anyone admitting to it! If we look at the possibilities of Covid becoming a yearly thing, and loads of people fighting for their lives, reality might be that nature is looking to reset the gene pool to only those who can happily resist the virus. Maybe 20% of all people have to die to leave a strong species? As human beings, we struggle to see Life in terms of the universal forces that shape and balance it. Like the forest fires that were resisted, until it was discovered that the fires were necessary to clear the growth and heat caused the next iteration of seeds to germinate. Life was actually structured around massive fires. Human health is perhaps structured around populations being shaped by disease resistance, and maybe there's not much that can (or should?) be done about it.
There's a very interesting statistic that more and more babies are being born by caesarian section because woman's birth canals are getting narrower. In the past, these woman would had possibly died in child-birth, limiting the progression of narrow-birth-canal genes. But as more babies are saved and women saved, the birth canal of the species is shrinking to the point that, quite possibly, the human species will become biologically incapable of procreating.
I suppose that discussion is really RSPC though. This thread is more for just the progression and understanding of the disease, and not trying to understand the Universal Meaning of it all.
Yes, indeed. That and the symptoms versus age. I don't think anyone has this data publicly available.
800 dead in one day in Italy. After yesterday’s 600+. Terrifying.