This Thread Blows - C19 and beyond

[one piece crank]

...Testing is up to 70K now in the US and 90% test negative.

Where did this information come from?

 

[JimN]

For example, bring back @gtluke

He's not banned, he just doesn't feel like posting here any more.

 

[thegock]

He's not banned, he just doesn't feel like posting here any more.

Perfect.

 

[Norm]

But I guess I didn't like it enough to read the other eleven books that he gave to me when he was done with them.

I am torn on this. I stand with my 15-or-nothing mandate.

 

[Big Dumb Animal]

I'd like to retract my statement about Wheel of Time. It was Sword of Shannara that I couldn't get through because it was a LOTR ripoff. I read Eye of the World but I don't remember if I liked it or not. I guess I liked it enough that I gave it to my father-in-law, and he read it and then bought all the other books to read. But I guess I didn't like it enough to read the other eleven books that he gave to me when he was done with them.

View attachment 122014

If you have a library card there's an app called Libby where you can borrow books right to your phone, even audio books. I've used it extensively and the only draw back is waiting for ppl to return books but it is free.

 

[JerseyPete]

i believe it is because the medical community needs the masks to treat everyone and there is a shortage already.

Yeah, my suspicion is the masks work to prevent you from getting/spreading the virus, but if everyone that doesn't really need them buys them, then the people that really need them can't get them.

Most people I have seen are not using medical grade masks, more like painters masks from Home Depot.
Are those fool proof, not at all. Like I said, if it does a little to limit broadcast or aerosol spreading, that is good.

 

[JimN]

If you have a library card there's an app called Libby where you can borrow books right to your phone, even audio books. I've used it extensively and the only draw back is waiting for ppl to return books but it is free.

I have one of those old Sony e-reader devices, and I used to just pirate books, but I find that I'd rather read a physical book. The Morris County library system is awesome, and you can reserve books from any town's library and have them delivered to your local branch. It was very convenient, back when I was actually reading books.

 

[JimN]

I am torn on this. I stand with my 15-or-nothing mandate.

I'll buy the other three books and then give you all fifteen.

 

[jmanic]

If you have a library card there's an app called Libby where you can borrow books right to your phone, even audio books. I've used it extensively and the only draw back is waiting for ppl to return books but it is free.

Absolutely kicking myself for not getting down to the liberry to renew my card- just didn't make the priority list in the last few weeks.
Fortunately I have a 2 year backlog of magazines on Zinio from when I was a member in good standing.

Edit: speaking of, check if your local liberry supports Zinio.

 

[Tim]

We should assume everyone is infected- mask or not. When we start mass testing then we can adjust and start to be certain that those around us are...

• No longer contagious because they've already had the virus and recovered (I have no idea what the time frame is.)
• Have no trace of the virus and are not infectious

I own my own business - no vacation pay, no sick leave, unable to collect unemployment. I'm trying to improvise and train clients remotely. I can survive and take care of my family for about 3 months with little to no income. I get others may not be so lucky (laughable term right now) but if we want this to end then we have to SOCIAL DISTANCE and KEEP AWAY FROM OTHERS. (see first paragraph).

The consequences can not be over stated. Look around you and imagine this life for 3-6 more months.

This is going to take 3-6 more months. The whole point of social distancing is to make this take longer. If we just went about our daily lives this would be over much sooner, albeit with a presumably much larger death toll.

The vast majority of people will get this virus and have minor or moderate symptoms and recover just fine with no medical care whatsoever.

My earlier question was serious. Why are we potentially devastating our economy which will have long lasting effects on society and all of our future health and well being by shutting everything down? Why is it unrealistic to think we could isolate and support the high risk demographic while the rest of us (vast majority) continue to work and support everything that makes our society function?

 

[thegock]

This is going to take 3-6 more months. The whole point of social distancing is to make this take longer. If we just went about our daily lives this would be over much sooner, albeit with a presumably much larger death toll.

The vast majority of people will get this virus and have minor or moderate symptoms and recover just fine with no medical care whatsoever.

My earlier question was serious. Why are we potentially devastating our economy which will have long lasting effects on society and all of our future health and well being by shutting everything down? Why is it unrealistic to think we could isolate and support the high risk demographic while the rest of us (vast majority) continue to work and support everything that makes our society function?

The more people who have it, the quicker it spreads.

Look up "flattening the curve" or scroll above.

 

[Patrick]

This is going to take 3-6 more months. The whole point of social distancing is to make this take longer. If we just went about our daily lives this would be over much sooner, albeit with a presumably much larger death toll.

The vast majority of people will get this virus and have minor or moderate symptoms and recover just fine with no medical care whatsoever.

My earlier question was serious. Why are we potentially devastating our economy which will have long lasting effects on society and all of our future health and well being by shutting everything down? Why is it unrealistic to think we could isolate and support the high risk demographic while the rest of us (vast majority) continue to work and support everything that makes our society function?

because people will die that don't have to because of the lack of available medical services.
that is why.

PS - my throat now itches/burning.

 

[Norm]

I'll buy the other three books and then give you all fifteen.

K. Waiting then.

 

[Sevenz]

I've got a middle schooler and a high schooler, and yesterday was Day 1 of "Distance Learning". Our district used two days to help the teachers prep, plus two half days last week. I'm sure they're overwhelmed, but day one seemed to go well. Both kids have to follow a bell schedule, and sign into each class in real time. Some classes the teachers have set up livestreams, while others post assignments to be completed within the "class time". Scheduled break for lunch. It seems to be very well thought out, logistics wise. I'm sure next week will be the real test content wise.

Dan - Wife is asking what platform they are using? Google Classroom?

 

[Tim]

The more people who have it, the quicker it spreads.

Look up "flattening the curve" or scroll above.

Fully understood.

because people will die that don't have to because of the lack of available medical services.
that is why.

I debated even posting that. Maybe I shouldn't have. I am not advocating unnecessary death. My strategy would be to isolate those at an increased risk of death from those that aren't

For example, I am 37, pretty active, and in good health. I have very little chance of developing a severe case. I could go to work on a daily basis and even if I get sick it wouldn't pose an undue burden on me or the system. Someone in their 60s or with a compromised immune system might have a very different outcome. Is it unreasonable to think we could effectively isolate those people, with full support, while low risk individuals carry on?

I guess it's just a different way to skin the cat and potentially get a good outcome. Again, I'm not advocating we just let a million or two people die. Not at all.

I'm gonna check out for a while. I'm not trying to stir this up.

 

[JerseyPete]

Dan - Wife is asking what platform they are using? Google Classroom?

My son's high school uses schoology.

 

[TimBay]

Fully understood.

I debated even posting that. Maybe I shouldn't have. I am not advocating unnecessary death. My strategy would be to isolate those at an increased risk of death from those that aren't

For example, I am 37, pretty active, and in good health. I have very little chance of developing a severe case. I could go to work on a daily basis and even if I get sick it wouldn't pose an undue burden on me or the system. Someone in their 60s or with a compromised immune system might have a very different outcome. Is it unreasonable to think we could effectively isolate those people, with full support, while low risk individuals carry on?

I guess it's just a different way to skin the cat and potentially get a good outcome. Again, I'm not advocating we just let a million or two people die. Not at all.

I'm gonna check out for a while. I'm not trying to stir this up.

You're expressing ideas...nothing bad about that. There's 2 problems I see though. 1. Low risk vs no risk. If you get infected and have bad luck where you need hospitalization, you now become a stressor on the system. 2. People are dumb pack animals. You set a rule that everyone must follow and you have a better chance they follow it. You tell the boomers who are buying superpower vitamins from Alex Jones that they can't go out while young people can and they will say screw you fake news libtards I'm gonna do what I want.

 

[Patrick]

I debated even posting that. Maybe I shouldn't have. I am not advocating unnecessary death. My strategy would be to isolate those at an increased risk of death from those that aren't

using the article i quoted earlier.

The percentage of people hospitalized with the virus rose with age, from 2% to 3% of those 9 years and younger to 31% of those 85 and older. The percentage of patients admitted to an ICU ranged from 2% to 4% among those 20 to 44 years to 11% to 31% of those 75 to 84 years.

Of the 2,449 infected patients whose age was known, 6% were 85 years or older, 26% were 65 to 84, 18% were 45 to 54, 17% were 55 to 64, and 20% were 20 to 44. Only 5% of infections occurred in people 19 years and younger.

backing out the numbers lets say we protect everyone over 70, and don't worry about anyone under 20.
and conservatively put 4% of the people who get it into ICU.
Then let's conservatively say 10% of the people in that age range contract it.

so 60% of the pop of the US is in that range - or 180,000,000 people (this was a quick lookup - 300M population)
18,000,000 contract the virus over the next 3 months (note there are models that predict 100,000,000)
720,000 require ICU of the 16,000 46,000 current icu beds available (quick lookup ymmv). Can we multiple that by 10 in the next month? doubtful, but we can try.
of the 460,000 icu potential beds we have, 1% die
of the other 260,000, isn't looking good.

and that was conservative -> ICU and optimistic about the number of beds. and the people trained to handle it.

 

[mattybfat]

The one analyst I have gotten out of this thread is who I want to strap a weapon on and take to the mountain top during a real crisis. Procreation for the new world needs logical thinking not fear and loathing

 

[one piece crank]

There is such a thing as mental fatigue which leads to other problems. @Norm said this many posts ago, go read a fiction book. I suggest ...Have a beer, with some vitamin c, stay to yourself.

I'm partial to reading Workshop Manuals for one of my fleet, and squeezing in garage time...