COVID-19 updates

[Manoli]

But that's the whole point.  If the casualties wind up not being that bad, maybe a lot less than from regular seasonal flu, then why are we shutting down the world? 

Leaving aside the deaths, normal flu doesn't have the accute severity or the 'R=3" factor to bring the whole of a country's medical infrastructure to breaking point. It's not just the covid-19 victims , the consequential insufficiency will affect ALL those needing hoapitalisation, let alone ICU.

[LesPalenik]

But if that's going to happen anyway, then what?

By enforcing a lockdown, you would mitigate those numbers. And save maybe two million lives.

[Alan Klein]

By enforcing a lockdown, you would mitigate those numbers. And save maybe two million lives.

How do you save lives if 80% still gets sick.  Pay now or pay later.  Believe me, being an old fart, I'm not happy about that prediction.  As an ex smoker with a touch of emphysema and a diabetic, the pneumonia that often accompanies this disease is a killer.  But am I going to get this thing anyway?  Regardless of what we do?  That's why I keep asking what China is doing?  What Taiwan did?  Both lowered their cases and maybe stopped it.  It didn't go to 80% or anything close.

[hogloff]

I'll end with this, from a behavioral science point of view, I dont think not having a time frame most can plan around, even if just figuring out how to deal with it mentally, is practical.  They are eventually going to give up, much like with a diet that has no end date.  True, it may not be the best thing when some who really need to be on that diet goes off it, but most do and in this case most will as well, no matter how much we scream to the heavens not to. 

Especially given the case that for the most part, the majority are not in danger of dying from this.  As more and more politicians and celebrities get this and survive, this will become more evident and will make a stronger case to most that they can go outside and work, make an income instead of watching their family starve, get financially ruined, loose all they have worked for, etc. 

People don't work for society.  When the rubber meets the road, they work for themselves and their family.  We may think different, but we have the advantage of being wealthy at the moment.  As that wealth decreases though, we will become more and more like the previous poorer versions of ourselves generations ago. 

We need to start thinking about how we will protect the elderly and sick when this breaks, and break it will.  We need a more practical plan for those most vulnerable then "everyone just stay inside damn it!"

Are you an expert on human behaviour sciences? Seems like you think you are. Maybe time for less of this chicken little attitude and stay with facts rather than your dreams / nightmares. Really it's getting boring.

[JoeKitchen]

I'll add one more thing, those on this forum saying that we need to follow this at all cost indefinitely are sounding exactly like the climate change people who also say we need to stop using fossil fuels at all cost while completely ignoring the economic sides of things. 

Fact is that we know, from several studies, that one needs to acquire a certain amount of personal wealth before becoming concerned enough with the environment to change habits.  This is one of the reasons fighting climate change, which is just as much of an extensional threat yet just as much unseen as this virus, is so challenging.  People need cheap energy in order to operate, and Wind/Solar are by no means cheap.  So most simply ignore those "crazies" out there jumping up and down, waving their arms, screaming to the heavens we need to stop using fossil fuels and go about their day. 

Just like with environmental issues, as soon as the level of wealth decreases below that point for the average person, this will break.  And just like with those crazies waving their arms around, I am sure there will be a high level of befuddlement with as to why suddenly people stopped paying attention.  But that does not mean it will not happen.

[hogloff]

I didn't get to see my endocrinologist because of this.  I have a tooth issue that might break out into a lot of pain.  what do I do?  My dentist is shut down until May 2.  We provide important services to one another when we work.  When we stop working, and economic activity grinds to a halt, those services are not being performed.  Not only don't we eat, others don't eat either as well. 

Calling people stupid and selfish for wanting to put food on their table so they can feed their family is demeaning to them as well as short sighted.  Their working might save your life.

I would bet your dentist is considered an essential service, at least for emergencies and I'm sure they were not ordered to shut down...but they did anyways. Maybe that tells you something about intelligent people making decisions not to get ill and spread the virus to their customers.

[JoeKitchen]

Are you an expert on human behaviour sciences? Seems like you think you are. Maybe time for less of this chicken little attitude and stay with facts rather than your dreams / nightmares. Really it's getting boring.

Well I'm not an expert driver, but I still drive a car.  The Wright Brothers were not engineers, yet they beat many of the best engineers to flight. 

See how I completely destroyed your argument.

[hogloff]

Well I'm not an expert driver, but I still drive a car.  The Wright Brothers were not engineers, yet they beat many of the best engineers to flight. 

See how I completely destroyed your argument.

No. Anyone can dump anything onto the net...does not make it right or even on point...words are cheap. Many armchair quarterbacks spewing all over the net without any facts.

[hogloff]

By enforcing a lockdown, you would mitigate those numbers. And save maybe two million lives.

This has been said a million times now. People just plug their ears and continue on. The Brits thought the same a few weeks ago and now are singing a different song.

[PeterAit]

So, our dimwit president suggested chloroquine as a way to avoid getting the virus. Two folks took him at his word and now one is dead and the other is in ICU. This is about a week after he went on TV and gave incorrect symptoms for covid-19. What a time to be led by an incompetent nitwit.

[JoeKitchen]

So, our dimwit president suggested chloroquine as a way to avoid getting the virus. Two folks took him at his word and now one is dead and the other is in ICU. This is about a week after he went on TV and gave incorrect symptoms for covid-19. What a time to be led by an incompetent nitwit.

Governor Andrew Cuomo on the same day gave a news conference playing up the same exact drug. 

Are you holding him responsible for these deaths as well?  I mean after all, CNN said Cuomo was giving people "real hope" when he talked about chloroquine as opposed to them saying Trump was giving false hope over the same thing.  Sounds like Cuomo is more at fault here then Trump for knowingly giving out real hope. 

[hogloff]

How do you save lives if 80% still gets sick.  Pay now or pay later.  Believe me, being an old fart, I'm not happy about that prediction.  As an ex smoker with a touch of emphysema and a diabetic, the pneumonia that often accompanies this disease is a killer.  But am I going to get this thing anyway?  Regardless of what we do?  That's why I keep asking what China is doing?  What Taiwan did?  Both lowered their cases and maybe stopped it.  It didn't go to 80% or anything close.

Alan, don't you get it. If we let everyone get sick all at once...our medical systems will collapse and the vast majority of patients that need hospitalization will just be dying at home. We'd also see people with heart conditions, diabetes, respiratory issues, cancer...you name it that would require hospital care would also be dropping dead.

By increasing the timeframe for that 80% getting sick to range over months rather than all at once, the medical system would fare better and less would die.

Don't know if you just don't understand this or have some other motive behind your continual questioning why we just don't all get sick today so we can get over this really fast.

[Alan Goldhammer]

Also, in order to make accurate estimates of both the extent of infection and the death rate, won't it also be necessary to check a sample of the population for antibodies to the COVID-19 virus in order to determine how many people already have been infected and have recovered?  My impression is that to date the only tests that are being performed―at least in the United States―are to determine which individuals are currently infected.

Yes, but the antibody tests have not been fully validated yet.  There is a group at Mt. Sinai in NYC that has the first reported (at least that I have found) test for this:  https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/03/new-blood-tests-antibodies-could-show-true-scale-coronavirus-pandemic  I hope this can be deployed quickly.

[JoeKitchen]

So, all essential services are shut down in Philly by order, yet outside a few landscapers just showed up to get to work on a neighbor's yard.  Yep, it's totally working. 

[Robert Roaldi]

So, all essential services are shut down in Philly by order, yet outside a few landscapers just showed up to get to work on a neighbor's yard.  Yep, it's totally working.

Don't be obtuse. Of course you will not get 100% buy-in. Nothing ever does. You need enough participation to get the numbers to come down.

How often do we have to keep repeating the same conversation.

[Robert Roaldi]

How do you save lives if 80% still gets sick.  Pay now or pay later.  Believe me, being an old fart, I'm not happy about that prediction.  As an ex smoker with a touch of emphysema and a diabetic, the pneumonia that often accompanies this disease is a killer.  But am I going to get this thing anyway?  Regardless of what we do?  That's why I keep asking what China is doing?  What Taiwan did?  Both lowered their cases and maybe stopped it.  It didn't go to 80% or anything close.

I think you're deliberately trying to not understand. They isolated and the numbers came down. The virus can still come back like it did in Hong Kong when they let their guard and released restrictions too early. There is no magic involved.

Again, how often do we have to keep repeating the same conversation.

[JoeKitchen]

Don't be obtuse. Of course you will not get 100% buy-in. Nothing ever does. You need enough participation to get the numbers to come down.

How often do we have to keep repeating the same conversation.

And how often do I need to repeat myself that this is reasonable to expect in the beginning, but sooner or later it wont be. 

I have yet to see any plans on how to go forward when it is no longer practical for people to remain in doors. 

I might add, if people start seeing such "essential services" as landscaping being attended to, how long before they say screw it, and get back to work themselves?

[Alan Goldhammer]

Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are both anti-malarial drugs and can be taken for both treatment and prophylaxis of malaria.  Both of them have side effects, some particularly severe.  We absolutely DON'T know if they work for treating or even prophylaxis of SARS-CoV-2.  Other than the one very small French trial which was highly flawed, there is no report of clinical results.  Based on that French paper there will be a very large open label study in NYC on the use of the two malaria drugs with and without added azithromycin (Zithromax, a commonly use antibiotic for bacterial respiratory infections).  There is no guarantee that we will get good data from this.  There are ongoing clinical trials of these drugs in a number of different countries.  We don't even know what the right dose is!!!

One thing that has happened, is that community physicians have been prescribing the two malaria drugs such that patients who are on these for treatment of lupus and rheumatoid arthritis are now SOL if their Rx needs to be refilled.  This is totally irresponsible.

[JoeKitchen]

Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick: 'I'm all in' on risking my health to lift social distancing guidelines for economic boost

I really hope there is a plan to protect the vulnerable, even though no one wants to talk about it.  Something's goin give; I'd rather it be controlled then not. 

[PeterAit]

Governor Andrew Cuomo on the same day gave a news conference playing up the same exact drug. 

Are you holding him responsible for these deaths as well?  I mean after all, CNN said Cuomo was giving people "real hope" when he talked about chloroquine as opposed to them saying Trump was giving false hope over the same thing.  Sounds like Cuomo is more at fault here then Trump for knowingly giving out real hope.

Your claim is false. Cuomo did not promote Chloroquine as a treatment, he announced that New York was beginning clinical trials to see if it was effective. Two totally different things.