Politicians won't admit it yet, but it's time to prepare—physically and psychologically—for a sudden stop to all life outside your home.[...] Whether you are reading this in your living room in Vancouver, office in London, or on a subway in New York City, you need to think hard, and fast, about two crucial questions: Where, and with whom, do you want to spend the next six to 12 weeks of your life, hunkered down for the epidemic duration? And what can you do to make that place as safe as possible for yourself and those around you?Your time to answer those questions is very short—a few days, at most. Airports will close, trains will shut down, gasoline supplies may dwindle, and roadblocks may be set up. Nations are closing their borders, and as the numbers of sick rise, towns, suburbs, even entire counties will try to shut the virus out by blocking travel. Wherever you decide to settle down this week is likely to be the place in which you will be stuck for the duration of your epidemic.To appreciate what lies ahead for the United States, Canada, Mexico, and the United Kingdom, pay heed to Italy, France, and Germany. The United States, for example, is currently tracking exactly where Italy was about 10 days ago. France and Germany, which track two to five days ahead of the United States, are now revving up measures akin to those taken by Italy, including lockdowns on movement and social activity. In a matter of days, the United States will follow suit.[...] Once tough location decisions have been made, the household must be readied for a long siege. While panic-buying has led to stockpiles of toilet paper and hand sanitizer, getting through eight months of confinement with others will require a great deal more, both physically and psychologically. This is especially true for households that span generations.
Politicians won't admit it yet, but it's time to prepare—physically and psychologically—for a sudden stop to all life outside your home.
[...] Whether you are reading this in your living room in Vancouver, office in London, or on a subway in New York City, you need to think hard, and fast, about two crucial questions: Where, and with whom, do you want to spend the next six to 12 weeks of your life, hunkered down for the epidemic duration? And what can you do to make that place as safe as possible for yourself and those around you?
Your time to answer those questions is very short—a few days, at most. Airports will close, trains will shut down, gasoline supplies may dwindle, and roadblocks may be set up. Nations are closing their borders, and as the numbers of sick rise, towns, suburbs, even entire counties will try to shut the virus out by blocking travel. Wherever you decide to settle down this week is likely to be the place in which you will be stuck for the duration of your epidemic.
To appreciate what lies ahead for the United States, Canada, Mexico, and the United Kingdom, pay heed to Italy, France, and Germany. The United States, for example, is currently tracking exactly where Italy was about 10 days ago. France and Germany, which track two to five days ahead of the United States, are now revving up measures akin to those taken by Italy, including lockdowns on movement and social activity. In a matter of days, the United States will follow suit.
[...] Once tough location decisions have been made, the household must be readied for a long siege. While panic-buying has led to stockpiles of toilet paper and hand sanitizer, getting through eight months of confinement with others will require a great deal more, both physically and psychologically. This is especially true for households that span generations.
Long-term confinement that includes children undergoing remote schooling and adults trying to work requires designated spaces for each individual, a powerful Internet signal and Wi-Fi router, and a great deal of shared patience. Everybody in the household must understand how the coronavirus is spread, and what steps each should follow to eliminate their personal risk of passing infection to others in the home.The virus is transmitted by droplets and fomites[*]—it isn't like measles, capable of drifting about in the air for hours. It dehydrates quickly if not inside water, mucus, or fomite droplets. The size of the droplets may be far below what the human eye can see, but they are gravity-sensitive, and will fall from an individual's mouth down, eventually, to the nearest lower surface—table, desk, floor. You do not need to clean upward.However, a newly published study, backed by the National Institutes of Health, found that the virus survives in "aerosols for up to three hours, up to four hours on copper, up to 24 hours on cardboard and up to two to three days on plastic and stainless steel." This means an uncleaned surface can pose a risk to members of the household for a very long time—a doorknob, tabletop, kitchen counter or stainless steel utensil.
Long-term confinement that includes children undergoing remote schooling and adults trying to work requires designated spaces for each individual, a powerful Internet signal and Wi-Fi router, and a great deal of shared patience. Everybody in the household must understand how the coronavirus is spread, and what steps each should follow to eliminate their personal risk of passing infection to others in the home.
The virus is transmitted by droplets and fomites[*]—it isn't like measles, capable of drifting about in the air for hours. It dehydrates quickly if not inside water, mucus, or fomite droplets. The size of the droplets may be far below what the human eye can see, but they are gravity-sensitive, and will fall from an individual's mouth down, eventually, to the nearest lower surface—table, desk, floor. You do not need to clean upward.
However, a newly published study, backed by the National Institutes of Health, found that the virus survives in "aerosols for up to three hours, up to four hours on copper, up to 24 hours on cardboard and up to two to three days on plastic and stainless steel." This means an uncleaned surface can pose a risk to members of the household for a very long time—a doorknob, tabletop, kitchen counter or stainless steel utensil.
[*] Wikipedia entry on fomites:
any inanimate object that, when contaminated with or exposed to infectious agents (such as pathogenic bacteria, viruses or fungi), can transfer disease to a new host.[...] In addition to objects in hospital settings, other common fomites for humans are cups, spoons, pencils, bath faucet handles, toilet flush levers, door knobs, light switches, handrails, elevator buttons, television remote controls, pens, touch screens, common-use phones, keyboards, and computer mice, coffeepot handles, countertops, and any other items that may be frequently touched by different people and infrequently cleaned.Researchers have discovered that smooth (non-porous) surfaces like door knobs transmit bacteria and viruses better than porous materials like paper money because porous, especially fibrous, materials absorb and trap the contagion, making it harder to contract through simple touch. Nonetheless, fomites may include soiled clothes, towels, linens, handkerchiefs, and surgical dressings
any inanimate object that, when contaminated with or exposed to infectious agents (such as pathogenic bacteria, viruses or fungi), can transfer disease to a new host.
[...] In addition to objects in hospital settings, other common fomites for humans are cups, spoons, pencils, bath faucet handles, toilet flush levers, door knobs, light switches, handrails, elevator buttons, television remote controls, pens, touch screens, common-use phones, keyboards, and computer mice, coffeepot handles, countertops, and any other items that may be frequently touched by different people and infrequently cleaned.
Researchers have discovered that smooth (non-porous) surfaces like door knobs transmit bacteria and viruses better than porous materials like paper money because porous, especially fibrous, materials absorb and trap the contagion, making it harder to contract through simple touch. Nonetheless, fomites may include soiled clothes, towels, linens, handkerchiefs, and surgical dressings
You know what? Kill yourself now, when your death can make a difference. 'cause 30years later it won't.
It'll never happen. People will start a revolution just out of sheer boredom.
National Guard will win thou...
It ain't just old people, stupid. It's ALL people, basically. You've already got the flu, and you're marginally weakened? Guess what - you've just put up a glowing neon sign that the coronavirus can't resist. New baby in the house, maybe premature, and having some difficulty breathing? Bingo, more virus food! Mother was weakened by a long labor? Oh well, kiss her good-bye while you have the time. Cousin Albert has pneumonia? Corona says "nom nom nom".
We shouldn't be feeding the troll, but this troll is particularly stupid. He is, or someone he loves, is at risk, and he isn't smart enough to understand that. Ahhhh, to be ten feet tall, and bullet proof again. Except, the virus don't care how big you are, and it knows you have to breathe.
Cousin Albert has pneumonia?
Well, the others I do care about. But cousin Albert...? (large grin)
Hey, stop picking on Fat Albert.
Hey hey hay, Fat Albert should be about 65 by now, probably lost a foot to diabetes and had a couple of emergency bypasses.
Or at the very least, drugged a few women so he can have anal sex with them.
Hey HEy HEY!
Good post. I'll also add that a portion of younger people still end up needing to be hospitalized. The first case detected here in Nebraska was a 36 year old woman with underlying health conditions who had traveled to the UK. At last report, she was still in critical condition, but was improving. Younger people can still become seriously ill and account for a substantial portion of those hospitalized in the US and Europe.
There are conversations about how hospitals might have to prioritize medical treatment like ventilators, generally giving the higher priority to younger patients. It made me quite angry when I read about beaches full of young people on spring break, some of whom were interviewed and didn't seem to care if they were infected. Some even complained that they were inconvenienced by bars and restaurants being closed. A young person who contracts the virus because they refused to voluntarily comply with social distancing might take a ventilator away from an elderly person in an assisted living facility who contracted the virus through absolutely no fault of their own. The governor of Puerto Rico directly said that the reason for the shelter in place order there was because people would not voluntarily engage in social distancing.
In other words, all of us may have our rights taken away and some people who have tried to comply with social distancing might die because some people are too selfish to voluntarily do the right thing.
The youngest death in the UK from COVID-19 is 18 years old [sky.com], reported on Monday. However, the same source reports that UK deaths "were in vulnerable groups, with underlying health conditions." adding some credence to Runaway's statement.
I'll also add that a portion of younger people still end up needing to be hospitalized.
Yeah. A small fraction of a percent. I accept those odds.
Because we disagree with the authoritarian overreaction of the government, we are at fault for further overreaction? "Pray I don't alter the terms further?"Fuck you, you authoritarian bootlicker.
Nobodies rights are being taken away. That is an overreaction in of itself.
Freedom is absolutely wonderful, but it has never meant that one gets to accept odds on behalf of other people. In times of war, and great crisis, it's entirely reasonable for certain measures to be taken.
You sound like some ignorant fuckwad in World War II, either in England or Germany, that complained, "Fuck you authoritarian bootlickers! I can keep a light on at night! Fuck your Tryanny! I'm walking to the outhouse with a goddamn light so I can see!". Then the village is gone from a bombing run. So what now big man? Willing to accept THOSE odds? That Clark Gable might be 50k ft above you, with a crew ready to take your ass out? All they need is a little light below....
When we all are enduring the same crisis, it's not an abridgment of rights to demand that you do the things that are necessary for all to survive the crisis. It's not permanent either. You're the reason why this will take longer. Your ignorance and selfishness, combined with conflating rights of movement and expression with the right to run around like Typhoid Mary, will end up with people dead.
You're an incredible fucking sociopathic asshole to roll dice for other people.
Copied from a post I made elsewhere:
Here is what people don’t get: yeah, CV19 is overall no more deadly (and maybe less so) than the flu, which nukes ~30,000 lives a year in the U.S. alone. But with flu we have a long history of good herd immunity built up, from regular exposure and vaccine. With CV19, we have none. Which means if we do nothing to slow the spread -- we’ll get a lifetime worth of serious-to-fatal cases just in the first couple years. (After that, herd immunity will kick in and it’ll be just another seasonal nasty. Might already be so in select regions. But not generally.)
And THAT is why epidemiologists are freaking out. Yeah, CV19 will probably kill 300,000 people over the next decade, no matter what. BUT -- would you prefer they all died in the next two years? and that many die needlessly due to overloaded health care systems, as is happening in Italy? Cuz that’s what happens if we can’t slow it down. Compared to western Europe, where they initially chose to avoid economic disruption, and too many people are still in "Oh yeah? make me" mode -- the U.S. (of similar area and population) has, on a per capita basis, only a small fraction as many cases, and a TINY fraction as many dead.
And bodies piled in the streets is a lot worse for the economy than any degree of temporary shutdown.
We can regrow the economy, especially once we drag our manufacturing back from overseas (and now we’ve the literal incentive from hell). We can take back our civil liberties, as we have after other crises pass. We can’t get the people back. And if the people are gone, so is all their earning power and creativity and culture.
“Bring out your dead!”
According to the research that changed the mind of the Brits, the US will lose 1.1-1.2 million people during the first wave in the best case scenario even with social distancing implemented and all sick treated (wich is currently 8x not the case). https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf [imperial.ac.uk]
Could be. We'll see how it goes. It's still early.
Better read that paper again, and thoroughly. The number you quote is if nothing gets done (it's 2.2 million people, btw). When all NPMs (non-pharmaceutical measures) are implemented, the death toll dramatically goes down. I can't recall the numbers for the US, but for the UK the numbers are 410,000 to 520,000 in case no measures are taken, dependent on infection rate. When all NPMs are implemented, the numbers drop to the tens of thousands, again dependent on infection rate.
The number 8 you mention, is the estimated number of ICU beds needed: 8 times as much as current surge capacity.
Yes, the number of dead, IF ALL THE MEASURES ARE TAKEN AND ALL THE BEDS ARE PROVIDED AT 8X OF CURRENT CAPACITY, is 410-520,000 for England and 1.1-1.2 millions for the USA.2.2 millions is nothing is done.
Nop. Table 4, page 13. Do nothing: 410,000 - 550,000 (UK). PC_CI_HQ_SD: 5,600 - 48,000 deaths.
Uh-huh, that herd immunity that makes me need to get an updated flu shot every year.
And of course, some of those students will take the virus home with them and give it to parents and grandparents. They should be forced to live in the back yard for 2 weeks just to be sure.
Only two weeks?
8 months of "full lockdown" would be an absolutely pointless exercise resulting in more deaths than the virus could cause if it were left to run unchecked.
What percentage of the modern world has even 4 months supply of food in their homes? Are we going to be air-dropping sterilized MREs? If so, who's allowed out on the street to collect them? Food supplies will have to continue, and mostly through the established channels.
When we go "full lockdown" what about people who require medical care, not only from COVID19, but all manner of things including household accidents, heart attacks, etc.? Are ambulances the only allowed method of transport on the roads?
Like toilet paper, it doesn't take much to set off gasoline shortages - they crop up occasionally for simple industrial planning snafus and the panic buying mentality deepens their severity. My wife already was asking for a "panic filling" of our tanks two weeks ago.
I was a little surprised yesterday, the home window replacement consultant is still doing at-home sales calls, but my mechanic is not working because he can't get parts... but restaurants are still serving tables and carry-out. That seems more than a little backwards in the priorities and risk profiles, but things like this are more akin to "herding cats" than ideal central planning.
The best thing they did, from our perspective, was stop sending the kids to school - I'm pretty convinced that we all have had the virus already through that vector + our visitor from Seattle, but whether we have or not, schools are definitely a major distribution hub for viral vectors.
He is, or someone he loves, is at risk, and he isn't smart enough to understand that.
I agree the AC Troll is intentionally insensitive, but they are probably more trying to set people off than genuinely oblivious to the consequences. However, there is a strong counterpoint that over-focus on and overreaction to COVID-19 is going to spread more misery and death due to other causes than COVID-19 by itself is capable of.
When will it end? IMO, testing should be rolling out faster than ventilator or mask production, and when we can establish the true "silent carrier" ratios we can finally start to get on with life. If 90% of the population has already been infected, that 90% can get back to business as usual and we can just build walls around the nursing homes and facilities for the fragile as yet uninfected so they can get the care they need when the virus finally reaches them.
What will be interesting to see are who all comes out with their hidden agendas during this time... if we really can function as a society with 90% work from home and home schooling, imagine the energy savings. Republicans staging the biggest free cash giveaway in the history of the world - but, then, the $1T proposed stimulus package is only a little bigger than the $800B+ that the last red administration spent on war.
> If 90% of the population has already been infected, that 90% can get back to business as usual
More likely, 0.1 % of the population has already been infected. So lockdown.
More likely, 0.1 % of the population has already been infected.
When only 0.02% of the population has been tested, we're all just running around panicked on speculation.
Ordinary seasonal flu infects up to 50 million US citizens and kill up to 50,000.
> panicked on speculation> Ordinary seasonal flu infects up to 50 million US citizens and kill up to 50,000.
No! There is good evidence that this is much more serious than influenza.
Look at Italy for example. The health care system was overwhelmed by Coronavirus. 6,077 deaths, 3,204 ICU cases. It appears that the number of new cases has only been curtailed by implementing lockdown, with the peak number of new cases arising about two weeks after start of lockdown; without this measure the pandemic is likely to have been considerably worse.
(The ICU provision in UK is about 5000 with similar population to Italy, I don't know the Italian equivalent number).
Note this from the wikipedia article:> On 19 March the Army was deployed to the city of Bergamo, the worst hit Italian city by the coronavirus, as the local authorities can no longer process the number of dead residents.
One could also look at China. They built two new hospitals. They cancelled christmas! (Well Chinese new year which is equivalent).
There is good evidence that this is much more serious than influenza.
And, I agree with that. Overwhelming of the system is indeed a valid concern, and we should be implementing some form of social distancing controls.
They cancelled christmas!
And we closed Disney World. Appropriate, IMO.
DOOM! DOOM! End of Days! Locked in your home for 8 months! That is beyond premature, and highly improbable, based on the available data.
At this point, everything published everywhere, including this post by me, is propaganda pushing the author and publishers' agendae.
What I take away from the article you linked is:
Strong coronavirus measures today should only last a few weeks
not 8 months.
but also only if 80% of people isolate.
if it is only 70%, it could go on until September, or beyond [smh.com.au]
I believe the isolation will go on just about as long as it serves other political aims... sure, we're "saving lives," but that's far from the only thing going on now.
The experiment is done in part to determine what the length of time is they can hold the people under house arrest on the basis of fear. It will take people with money and influence to put an end to it.
Landlords are just not being paid rent while businesses are shut down. Big finance has properties mortgaged and the proceeds invested elsewhere. If the value of the underlying assets drops, they'll be hit with margin calls.
Right now, the moneyed class is waiting for what bailouts the government may provide. With sustenance, they can keep the pot from boiling over in the near future. The resulting inflation hurts everybody, so it's just a cost of being in business to them.
The working class is also waiting for their government checks, but the speculated amounts on the order of one time payments of $1500 per adult won't last long. Eventually many of them that are now stuck in front of the TV cowering in fear and calling the police on their neighbors who are going to the park are going to have their bank accounts touch zero. That is the point the politicians will try to stay away from. People going on the streets, clamoring for a reopening of the economy, is antithetical to US social control doctrine.
Trump spoke out that "we cannot shut down the nation just because some people may get sick and die", and set an end day of Easter for the state of emergency. Yeah, politicians words don't mean much, but Trump is a businessman. He also has the power to make the decision.
Their officials said that to the media themselves.That by definition is more than number of deaths FROM coronavirus.When, at the same time, those with weak symptoms or asymptomatic are not tested at all, you can produce a Lovecraftian horror from any flu epidemic.You want realistic numbers, you look at Germany.
You're a real idiot comparing this to the flu. 50 million infected? How many still go to work for awhile? How many tough it out at home, then go back to work as early as possible? Those 50,000 dead were already on the way out. What percentage of that 50,000 is at an advanced age? How many of them required ventilators and ICU?
If you want to compare it to the flu, then yeah, every flu season we're worried about overwhelming the medical system. Happens every year, the doctors and hospitals all panick due to lack of supplies and all the flu victims flooding the medical system past capacity. It's just so routine, we all forgot about it. Thank God, you're here to remind us amiright?
Stop saying stupid fucking shit like comparing Corona to the flu.
THIS IS NOT THE FUCKING FLU! Seriously, FFS, REPEAT AFTER ME, "THIS IS NOT THE FUCKING FLU"
Every time one of you dipshits speaks it puts all of us in danger, because you refuse to acknowledge, THAT THIS IS NOT THE FUCKING FLU.
Ohhh, last thing, before I forget, THIS AIN'T THE FUCKING FLU!
No, you are a squealing pig. A stupid scared animal trying to scare others.
For reasons of political hatred.
GGP post was backed by the CDC, in other words The Science®. I guess The Science® doesn't matter if you can blame things on Trump.
The science my ass. There is nobody in scientific circles comparing this to the flu, in fact, they say don't compare it.
My political hatred outweighs your science? LOL Really?
Well, Trumpers sure know their medical science. Killing themselves because the Emperor claims fish medicine will work :)
You're right it's not the flu. CDC says
Total cases: 44,183Total deaths: 544
(https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/cases-in-us.html) for COVID-19, while
max medical visits ~25 millionmax deaths: 59000
(https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/preliminary-in-season-estimates.htm) for the seasonal flu. I quoted medical visits because total number infected is unsure due to lack of available testing.
Let's get real about numbers: those 50 million normal flu cases (out of a population of 350 million) only count those who stand up to be counted, they don't count me, because I never complain when I get the normal flu. Point being: flu gets a huge percentage of the population every year, 1/7 complain about it enough to be counted - how many really contract and spread the virus? Safely: more than 1/7 - 1/2 would not surprise me at all.
COVID19 death rates are worse than the "regular" flu - yes, absolutely, I believe, understand, and want appropriate measures to be taken. However... with the reported 12,000+ confirmed cases in New York City, they're missing the larger picture: how many of the remaining 8 million residents have COVID19, or have already had it and gotten over it? 1% of 8 million will be ~80,000 NYC denziens who require significant medical intervention to avoid death from COVID19, and that will indeed overstress the healthcare system to tragic proportions - we are right to be trying to slow the spread, but wrong if we thinking the total number of infected in anywhere even within an order of magnitude of 12,000 in NYC alone - it is higher, much higher, and most of those people are either unaware they have it, or walking it off as they do the normal flu.
Every time one of you dipshits speaks it puts all of us in danger
You have me confused with the buffoon who ran for President as a joke and accidentally won. And... if we handle it like Mexico (in other words: just ignore it) 98% of us are not in danger, but if we keep jacking around like this is the end of days, far more than 2% of us could have serious problems as a result, perhaps even death. Medical care for non COVID19 related conditions is significantly compromised by the way we are handling it, and if we're not careful, we'll kill more people from other causes by overreaction to COVID19.
I'm not confused about you. You're the one who keeps popping out the comparison to the flu. It's not the flu.
Everybody needs to stop comparing it to the flu, because every argument regarding it, is about taking it less seriously. Especially, from the absolute joke of a president (who is illegitimate anyways), who keeps saying the exact same stupid shit.
Everything is significantly compromised because of the way that we aren't handling it.
Make your points, but stop comparing it to the flu. It's a comparison that is inaccurate, stupid, foolish, and dangerous under the current conditions. Just like going on and on about "cures" that don't exist yet, undereducated Trump supporters, and desperate and deadly measures.
Trump is 100% responsible for that death in Arizona, and you and the others are 100% responsible for anyone not taking this seriously because you persist in comparing it to the flu. Which only serves to argue that this isn't as serious.
Wake up dude. I've been watching the numbers too, and there hasn't been a flu season on record that has required this many ventilators. If it were truly an overreaction, we wouldn't see New York pressing the panic button regarding ventilators and ICU beds would we?
This IS NOT THE FLU.
Yep. Another point that they don't compare, contagion factor. I can get into a train or cruise ship with someone with a flu and my chances of catching it are low, in fact even when a family member living in the same house there's easy precautions I can take and I typically avoid getting it. This virus, look at the cruise ships and the weddings and the plane flights and the churches where 1 sob turns up with it and how fast it spreads. We know there's enough idiots out there that just read tag lines and see "flu" and "corono" in the same sentence and starts having a backyard barbie with his neighbourhood invited.
in fact even when a family member living in the same house there's easy precautions I can take and I typically avoid getting it
And yet, somehow, "normal" flu ends up infecting and affecting 1/7 U.S. citizens in "normal" years so badly that they seek medical attention for it. IDK about you and your circles, but around here, 4/5 people who catch something like the flu will "walk it off" and never present themselves to a M.D. to be counted as a flu infection case for the year.
Sure, I'm not debating that you can walk off flu. All I'm saying is the contagiousness is a lot less. Do you hear of folks with flu in cruise ships or plane flights that infect mass amounts of people?
Depends on the "flu" you're talking about - Hong Kong flu had symptoms very similar to Norovirus. I don't think Cruise ships were as big a thing back when Hong Kong flu went around, but Norovirus is a perennial cruise ship threat.
My point of 1/7 seeking medical care for the flu, and 4/5 not reporting is that flu sweeps most of the population every year.
I believe COVID19 is 10x as deadly, and has 10x worse symptoms in some people, but not that it's unusually transmissible - just that people who get it are 10x more likely to report having it.
It spreads like the flu, it even causes complications like the flu, just more severe and more often deadly.
because every argument regarding it, is about taking it less seriously.
There are some of us who wish it was taken more seriously, sooner, but believe that the present late reaction is taking things too far and beginning to enter counterproductive territory.
What I see happening now is everybody's personal hidden agendas coming to the forefront. Beancounters at our company are flying the "teleconferencing not travel" banner (which I have been pushing for a decade to anyone who would listen, but people are finally listening now). Schoolboards and Universities are giddy with the prospect of increased tele-learning and what that would do for their budgets. Even city planners and others are falling over themselves at the potential positive impacts of people working from home and "let's push thing a little harder and longer to show what can be done" (again, a pet cause of mine for the past many years that has never gotten traction with the establishment.) I like a lot of what's being demonstrated in this overreaction to a slightly scary virus, but, let's be real about the threat that's driving this: 1% death rate, and with hundreds of thousands of deaths there are a few tragic cases to point out of young doctors, 18 year olds, etc, but, all in all, 1% is the number. It's bad. 3.5 million deaths in the US within 3 months would be horrific, let's not do that. Please, let's also not kill more than 3.5 million people by going overboard with our social distancing experiment - I'd really like the positive aspects of demonstrating tele-education and tele-work to not be spoiled by needless deaths caused by reactionary shutdown of normal societal functioning.
Calls to mind the evacuation of Houston for hurricane Rita (same year Katrina hit N.O.), several dozen people were straight up killed in the evacuation, and in the end it turned out that they (the ones who died) didn't need to evacuate at all. For those of us who survived the evacuation, there was a tremendous amount of stress and financial expense that was similarly brought on by the "abundance of caution."
Well, none of the examples you link to are going to be anywhere near equivalent situations. This is more serious than any one hurricane, and if we were to compare, it would be against the entire United States.
One thing is for certain, you can't accurately determine what is an abundance of caution vs an overreaction till after the fact. Given the consequences of inaction, abundance of caution is favored.
I don't know what is up with this 8 months bullshit. If we actually enforced it hard enough, it could be as little as an additional month. People are not cooperating, because leadership is divided, and this country is so divided that we're actually arguing about how to react to a serious outbreak of disease. It's become political, which is so stupid, that we deserve our fate as a species. Internecine fighting and sociopathic behavior stopped us from using logic, reason, and science. The epitaph of our people.
Determining if it is an overreaction isn't possible till we have adequate testing, which looks like its probably not coming at all. Which is all the more reason to double, and triple down on this shit hard for the next 4 weeks. Give us some time to obtain the resources we need, especially since 90% of the problem is the Emperor not cooperating.
It would be logical to get rid of you, then at least you couldn't transfer your viruses to the rest of us. Submit now.
you can't accurately determine what is an abundance of caution vs an overreaction till after the fact.
You can't accurately determine the line, but I can tell you what's going too far:
1) House to house mandatory testing, followed by firebombing of any house in which a positive test was found.
2) Mandatory testing, followed by forced incarceration of individuals who test positive at "camps" at a remote location "until further notice" to protect the rest of us.
3) Shutdown of all road, rail, ship and air transport "until further notice".
Those are pretty clear cut, over the line, aren't they?
I haven't liked Florida's Republican Governors since forever, but our current one is talking a bit of sense on his moderation in the response. Panic and overreaction "just to be safe" is what you do for a zombie apocalypse, not for a virus that's only 10x more deadly than the usual flu.
And the reason it is not the fucking flu is because as yet, we have no herd immunity. If we don't slow it down, we get (as I put it above) a lifetime worth of deaths right up front. It will probably kill about the same total numbers regardless, over the next decade -- but the social and economic impact (not to mention the hospital load) is a lot less if those deaths can be spread out across a decade, instead of being crammed into the first couple years.
So, slow it down and get ~30,000 fatal cases per year for all eternity, or let it run wild and get 300,000 dead per year for the next couple years, and STILL get 30,000 per year for all eternity (and that's just in the U.S.) because it's not going to just go away after the first assault.
Currently about 6% of the US population is infected with seasonal bugs. I'd assume they were the one who went to drive through facility opened in NJ that closed in 4 hours. During this time they took 600 samples and about 10% were positive. I guess 5 days ago about 0.6% of tri state area were infected.
What percentage of the modern world has even 4 months supply of food in their homes?
At this point everyone already has a 4 month supply of toilet paper, which is low quality plant fiber, and thus the new food for the future of humanity.
(heard long ago: America will fall after Europe falls and the spoils will go to the Chinese as soon as Russians drink themselves to death.)
Then we can all move to New Zealand.
New Zealand could build a wall along its border with the US.
I think Dave has nearly finished that.
If you're all coming over, can you bring more beer? I'll get the barbie going.
I have two 50 pounds bags of corn to weight down my track. It is 7 years old though.
> "If 90% of the population has already been infected, that 90% can get back to business as usual and we can just build walls around the nursing homes and facilities for the fragile as yet uninfected so they can get the care they need when the virus finally reaches them."
You don't naturally gain immunity to all viruses/diseases after being infected once. In some cases, such as dengue, it ends up being vastly worse the second time around. This virus is similar to SARS and part of the reason a vaccine for SARS failed not only was because it was only moderately effective, but because if/when you did get it - outcomes were much worse. Nobody seems to entirely know exactly how reinfection works with this virus yet, but there have been numerous cases of people getting it twice. So that's not looking good.
Finally there is mutation. Nobody really understands what this virus is or how it works, if it end up being simply a new persist contagion, if it will end up dying off more or less naturally, or on the other hand if it may become inherently more deadly. It's just a giant question mark. One thing's for certain - we'll have some answers relatively soon because the number of 'test subjects' is going to hit the millions soon.
Typically bugs, including viruses, don't want to to kill the host because they die with the host. They want cooperation.The reason the viruses that jumped species are that agressive is that they did not learn yet how to be gentle to the host. With time chances are it will become less deadly. This would explain low mortality rate of greater China and Korea.On the other hand, the bug could learn how to infect young people better. It also seems to be the case.
Your point is valid, but overstated...at least in the long term.
OTOH, the virus keeps mutating. Iceland reported 40 variant strains from three European sources. Some of them may be (eventually) considerably more fatal than this one.
P.S.: Don't expect this to ever go away. Expect it to be as persistent as influenza. But it's something that we'll adjust to. ("Adapt to" implies immunity, and that's probably wrong. "Adjust to" is a "life goes on, even if not mine" kind of attitude. Humanity will survive this without much problem, but people may have a very hard time, and many people won't.)
Some of them may be (eventually) considerably more fatal than this one.
That is always a possibility, but please do consider the fact that it takes roughly 100 years for random chance to come up with a virus as deadly as COVID19 in the first place. Most mutations are going to be less harmful, not more. It is starting from a "bad place" and will be easier to mutate to a worse one than starting from a less harmful virus, but still - odds are low that it will become the next Black Death, and even if it does - we've got far better responses in place today - overall mortality might be higher than in the Black Death, but mortality rates will be much lower, even in the less developed corners of the modern world.
Please don't take me to be saying COVID19 isn't serious - 7 million people in the US have a lot to fear from it, and I want to do what I can to help them, and the 700 million others around the world, get through this as best they can. On the other hand, if we destroy (or just damage) the functional aspects of modern society in the process of trying to protect 2% of the population, we're going to end up hurting more than we help.
To be an effective care giver, you first have to take care of yourself.
No. There have been at least predecessor two viruses within the last couple of decades that were more fatal. They just didn't spread as well. The two I'm thinking of are SARS and Ebola. SARS was of the same family as COVID-19, and, in fact, COVID-19 looks like a cross between SARS and one of the other corona viruses. And then there's the AIDS virus. One of the reasons that one's so hard to control is it keeps mutating away from every form of suppression.
Now some virologists have said that the COVID-19 virus mutates relatively slowly. I suppose it depends on what you're comparing it to. Or perhaps they're just being hopeful. It's an RNA virus that doesn't have much error correction in it's copying, so it mutates relatively rapidly. Perhaps it's at a local optimum, though, and more effective mutations are difficult. Whatever, there are already at least two strains circulating, so it's not mutating THAT slowly. So far, however, the evidence seems to be that immunity to one will yield immunity to the other. This is not something one can count on remaining true.
Based on my current knowledge, such as it is, we can expect COVID to make repeat appearances frequently, though quite possibly not as frequently as influenza. And given it's long asymptomatic period of infection, and the large number of potential hosts, there will be minimal pressure on it to evolve to be less deadly. There will be pressure on it to develop a longer asymptomatic period, as long as that doesn't interfere with it being contagious.
This is how we get "Logan's Run".