You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Covid 19
TheMole wrote:Well, that's the crux of the discussion isn't it? Would the impact of the pandemic have been worse if we didn't take the measures we're taking? I think so, based on the evolution of that R0 metric I mentioned in the other post. You seem to believe that we haven't really saved anyone, and I'm curious to know why you think that...
The quick answer is the "flattening the curve" concept. The theory behind that was never to stop the virus, it was just to delay the timing. So following that logic, we end up in the same place but the timing of when we get there is different. You can argue semantics if you want, but that's as accurate and simple of a description of what flattening the curve does as you can get. It lowers the peak but makes it last longer.
The flattening the curve concept is meant to apply to coronavirus cases, not coronavirus deaths. As I'm sure you know, the idea behind it is that we can spread the number of infections over time so that we can focus on the active cases at any given time and treat them properly, leading to an overall lower casualty rate.
For instance, back in early April it looked very likely the state of Texas would've run out of beds if no further actions were taken. On April 2nd, the state issued its "don't call it a stay at home order" stay at home order, resulting in a rapid decline in the growth of the virus. It turns out that they never came close to the projected needed number of beds.
I would argue there's very strong statistical evidence that this is because of the measures taken to flatten the curve. Just by looking at the graph of daily cases for the state, you can tell there are clearly two parts to it: pre-and post-lockdown spread rates, with the turning point around that early April timeframe.:strip_exif(true):strip_icc(true):no_upscale(true):quality(65)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/gmg/DLZWB7NMEVBTTE5LF65AO5EET4.PNG)
There's nothing to suggest that this change in spread rate would've happened on its own, so to me this is a clear indication that the significant reduction in new cases is due to the measures the state government took.
- IRISH OS1R1S
- Rep: 59
Re: Covid 19
Exactly this. Look at Spain and other countries. They were having to pick who got a ventilator for fuck sake. If the rest of the world did nothing we would have many more Spains. Maybe the US might have coped with their health system I don't know, but I do know a lot of other countries wouldn't have coped.
Seriously the mental gymnastics here by some to deny such an obvious and logical response has indeed saved lives. I wouldn't dicuss toothpaste with some on here, fools.
Re: Covid 19
Exactly this. Look at Spain and other countries. They were having to pick who got a ventilator for fuck sake. If the rest of the world did nothing we would have many more Spains. Maybe the US might have coped with their health system I don't know, but I do know a lot of other countries wouldn't have coped.
Seriously the mental gymnastics here by some to deny such an obvious and logical response has indeed saved lives. I wouldn't dicuss toothpaste with some on here, fools.
LOL. The picking and choosing of facts by some is amazing as well. Turns out ventilators appear to be more or less a death sentence. So I guess those that didn't get one lucked out.
You're so out of touch with reality on this it's not funny. The numbers tell you everything you need to know about who is at risk. EVERYTHING you need to know. They don't lie, though many people that believe like you do are working hard to manipulate them to keep the irrational fear going. Slowly but surely people are seeing the light though and posts like yours are slowly dying out at a much faster rate than people infected with Covid-19.
As the Rolling Stones said "Time is on my side"
Re: Covid 19
There's nothing to suggest that this change in spread rate would've happened on its own, so to me this is a clear indication that the significant reduction in new cases is due to the measures the state government took.
Right. We agree 100% on this part. That's exactly what I said. Where we disagree is everything that happens from there. You think new cases automatically equal exponential death. I don't and the statistics don't either. The virus spreading (from an immunology point of view) is actually good...this is how we have gotten through all the viruses that came before we decided to go into panic mode. The thing you're ignoring is that the vast majority of people that would have gotten the infection had we done nothing other than lock down our nursing facilities would have been absolutely fine. Many wouldn't even know they ever had it. Maybe some in the nursing homes could have survived had we locked them down and focused our energies on that piece...you know where most of the actual deaths are happening. Turns out hospitals weren't overrun either (certainly thanks in part to the shutdown)...in fact most outside of major metropolitan areas weren't even close and likely could have maintained status quo care just fine. How many times do I have to say this? Protect the at-risk. We've done a terrible job at that.
At the same time, the people that were infected and stayed healthy or got sick and recovered would still have their jobs. They wouldn't be worried how they were going to pay their bills. They wouldn't be worried about losing their house. They wouldn't be putting their immune system at further risk by isolating themselves away from the common bugs that keep their immune systems functioning at a high level. They wouldn't be skipping doctor visits out of fear and subsequently dying from things that could have been treated. Domestic violence wouldn't have gone up. Children would still be getting fed at school instead of parents trying to figure out how to feed their family meals they don't have budgeted. I could go on and on, but I won't. It has been made clear people are more worried about people that in many cases would have died anyway than they are those that have to live after the damage has been done. I know...that sounds harsh, but it's the truth. Sometimes (often) the truth isn't kind.
Re: Covid 19
Interesting article. I know some are going to take the headline and run with it, but I'll paste an important thing to note.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
13 USS Roosevelt Sailors Test Positive For COVID-19, Again
https://www.npr.org/sections/coronaviru … pF-55fvzsQ
"Based on other infections where you get a deep lung infection, you are usually protected against the second infection. If you just have a mild COVID-19 infection that involves your upper airway, maybe it will behave like a common cold coronavirus and maybe you can be reinfected again," Perlman said. "We just really don't know. It's even hard to speculate."
Re: Covid 19
I strongly suggest this thread get closed...this won’t end. RF and buzz will force everyone out of this conversation if they haven’t already.
Dude, two posts before this you made a post where you told one of them to fuck off. You are equally as bad as them at times.
Agreed with what someone said earlier - stating with absolute certainty and trying to demean others when you make whatever point you are making is stupid and low.
Re: Covid 19
Sweden is getting fucked, and their economy is tanking anyway. Really, it goes back to the point that it doesn't matter if a state reopens or not, you can't force people to go out and spend money like they once did.
I would say it was funny that all those "open up, don't wear a mask!" protesters got sick, but it's not funny, it's friggin sad. Read about an ER doctor who said he'd been chewed out before but never to this extent from patients refusing to believe his diagnosis that they have covid because they think it's fake, or he's just trying to use them to make fake statistics.
Re: Covid 19
Sweden is getting fucked, and their economy is tanking anyway. Really, it goes back to the point that it doesn't matter if a state reopens or not, you can't force people to go out and spend money like they once did.
I would say it was funny that all those "open up, don't wear a mask!" protesters got sick, but it's not funny, it's friggin sad. Read about an ER doctor who said he'd been chewed out before but never to this extent from patients refusing to believe his diagnosis that they have covid because they think it's fake, or he's just trying to use them to make fake statistics.
Try again...either you don't understand at all what the point of what Sweden's doing is or you're just willfully ignoring it because you think it proves something. Unfortunately for you, the jury is and will be out for a while on this. You're a flattening the curve guy...you should understand what that means. Here's a hint...it spreads it out longer. Instead of seeing little snippets that support your theory and doing cartwheels, look deeper. Understand what the bigger picture is. The headline is interesting. The article is more interesting.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles … -be-worlds
One thing of note. Sweden did not lock down their nursing facilities either. I can't even begin to tell you how low the death toll would be had we done that efficiently and effectively. But that doesn't fit the narrative either, does it? If we put 1/10th of the resources we put into all the other crap into just protecting the nursing/long term care facilities where most of the deaths are occurring...
CDC changing it's mind again on the spread of the virus. So glad we made all these brilliant decisions without accurate information.
Re: Covid 19
misterID wrote:Sweden is getting fucked, and their economy is tanking anyway. Really, it goes back to the point that it doesn't matter if a state reopens or not, you can't force people to go out and spend money like they once did.
I would say it was funny that all those "open up, don't wear a mask!" protesters got sick, but it's not funny, it's friggin sad. Read about an ER doctor who said he'd been chewed out before but never to this extent from patients refusing to believe his diagnosis that they have covid because they think it's fake, or he's just trying to use them to make fake statistics.
Try again...either you don't understand at all what the point of what Sweden's doing is or you're just willfully ignoring it because you think it proves something. Unfortunately for you, the jury is and will be out for a while on this. You're a flattening the curve guy...you should understand what that means. Here's a hint...it spreads it out longer. Instead of seeing little snippets that support your theory and doing cartwheels, look deeper. Understand what the bigger picture is. The headline is interesting. The article is more interesting.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles … -be-worlds
One thing of note. Sweden did not lock down their nursing facilities either. I can't even begin to tell you how low the death toll would be had we done that efficiently and effectively. But that doesn't fit the narrative either, does it? If we put 1/10th of the resources we put into all the other crap into just protecting the nursing/long term care facilities where most of the deaths are occurring...
CDC changing it's mind again on the spread of the virus. So glad we made all these brilliant decins without accurate information.
You don't read, remember? You've admitted you don't even read the shit you post. So, you just keep being your uninformed self in imagination land. 
There was a county near me that only had 13 cases before reopening. Today they have almost 200.
