Latest Coronavirus - Yikes

#31,101
#31,101
volfanhill said:
Oh bs LG. You gave him an F grade on this before it was even here. You are incapable of being fair. Now what I mean by deaths and modeling is if it ends in the next few months around or under 100,000 deaths. Then it’s about how quickly the economy rebounds and how does his aid package help. And as far your February comment goes, can you even imagine the shrieking the Dems would have done if he cut off all international travel in January. How many would just default to racist xenophobic ****? All of them. Yet it would have been good.

Now where I will agree with criticism of him is that medical equipment should have been jacked up way earlier.
Click to expand...

You really think anybody here will judge Trump based on this or are speaking more generally?

No matter how many deaths the red hats will say it was that bad because of democrats and would have been worse if not for Trump. The other side will say its all Trump’s fault and it would have been better if not for him.
 
#31,103
#31,103
Had China not lied like dogs about this the entire world could have handled it much better. China waited until the fire was out of control and then pretended like it was a small problem just now emerging. When in reality untold numbers of travelers in and out of China most likely spread this virus around the world while being asymptomatic and before proper testing was even considered. We only know of the few that presented symptoms. This also caused a “slow“ response in retrospect because what we were being told and what had actually occurred were completely different. One of the first statisticians in Washington who modeled this after the Lifecare incident broke said the virus had probably been in the states for weeks. I think he is most likely correct. A third of the initial sickened group in Wuhan never visited the wet markets and had not come in contact with people who had. This points to the virus being brought into the market, not emerging from it. Close contact and unsanitary conditions would have helped it spread quickly through such a situation and could mask the actual initial crossover into humans. It sucks that China isn’t forthcoming about its failings because we may never truly know the origins of this virus. And since they are such a large part of the global market this is bound to happen again and again. It’s unfair to the rest of the world that we have to prepare for full blown pandemics hitting our shores because we have a large and untrustworthy neighbor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DynaLo and allvol123
#31,105
#31,105
RockyTop85 said:
You really think anybody here will judge Trump based on this or are speaking more generally?

No matter how many deaths the red hats will say it was that bad because of democrats and would have been worse if not for Trump. The other side will say its all Trump’s fault and it would have been better if not for him.
Click to expand...
Yep that is exactly what happens.... it gets so tiresome
 
#31,106
#31,106
TennTradition said:
England actually wanted to try something like this. That was the idea.

One thing I’m not certain of is hospitalization rate vs death rate for younger than 50. I know mortality rate seems to be quite low. Not sure of hospitalization rate.

The UK ultimately abandoned this approach but I’m not sure why.

It’s an interesting question, though. One I’ve wondered about.
Click to expand...
Maybe Prince Charles getting it?
 
#31,107
#31,107
TennTradition said:
Test and contain - like we do every potential epidemic.

You can’t know where hotspots are if you aren’t testing.

You can’t enact targeted disease-specific protocols unless you know when and where to act.

You don’t have to test everyone. But you need accurate and available tests to find hotspots and then aggressively pursue cases there. Early.

This has nothing to do with January. The errors were made in February.
Click to expand...
With China not letting anyone in and the only resource being WHO which decided to announce no human to human transmission six days before the first case in the US January 20th, how would viable tests have a production level to meet your demand? It's not feasible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#31,108
#31,108
One thing I’d like to know which I’m sure would never ever be made public, is how many people that have severe symptoms/hospitalization had the flu shot. One of the side effects of the flu shot is that it makes you more susceptible to corona viruses and is listed on the information.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hjeagle1vol, Rasputin_Vol and DynaLo
#31,109
#31,109
davethevol said:
One thing I’d like to know which I’m sure would never ever be made public, is how many people that have severe symptoms/hospitalization had the flu shot. One of the side effects of the flu shot is that it makes you more susceptible to corona viruses and is listed on the information.
Click to expand...
Where did you get that information. I've never heard that before and would just like to read up on it, if you don't mind.
 
#31,110
#31,110
utvols88 said:
Where did you get that information. I've never heard that before and would just like to read up on it, if you don't mind.
Click to expand...
It’s listed on the possible side effects when you sign off for it. I noticed it when I had to sign off for my daughter getting a shot back in the fall.
 
#31,112
#31,112
davethevol said:
One thing I’d like to know which I’m sure would never ever be made public, is how many people that have severe symptoms/hospitalization had the flu shot. One of the side effects of the flu shot is that it makes you more susceptible to corona viruses and is listed on the information.
Click to expand...

Well that creates quite the dilemma come next fall.
 
#31,113
#31,113
allvol123 said:
Well that creates quite the dilemma come next fall.
Click to expand...
Again, I doubt anyone will ever release the info if there is a correlation. When we hear the stories about perfectly healthy people succumbing to it, then maybe that’s part of the reason.
 
#31,115
#31,115
davethevol said:
One thing I’d like to know which I’m sure would never ever be made public, is how many people that have severe symptoms/hospitalization had the flu shot. One of the side effects of the flu shot is that it makes you more susceptible to corona viruses and is listed on the information.
Click to expand...

Interesting... didn't know that.
 
#31,116
#31,116
RockyTop85 said:
You really think anybody here will judge Trump based on this or are speaking more generally?

No matter how many deaths the red hats will say it was that bad because of democrats and would have been worse if not for Trump. The other side will say its all Trump’s fault and it would have been better if not for him.
Click to expand...
There are always undecideds. And if it’s horrific many leaning Trumps way will break for the Dem. Conversely, if it’s not off the rails and the economy is marching up to speed, many leaning Dem will break for Trump. The win/loss is in the margins of about 7 states and handful of counties.
 
#31,117
#31,117
davethevol said:
Again, I doubt anyone will ever release the info if there is a correlation. When we hear the stories about perfectly healthy people succumbing to it, then maybe that’s part of the reason.
Click to expand...
You know what... this brings up another interesting question. Why does it seem like this same virus is hitting some jurisdictions particularly hard, but not as severe in other places?

Italy seems like an outlier and so does New York. We've already been told that Italy is the oldest country demographically in Western Europe. But could there be other factors from a state or national level that could be driving the cases higher in these particular regions?

In other words, could some govt health mandate in either Italy or New York play a factor in their higher rates? Were they given a specific vaccine in the fall that could be driving this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol
#31,118
#31,118
#31,119
#31,119
BeecherVol said:
Given the comparison from day 1. I wonder how many would die from the flu without the vaccine. Considering we ve had as many as 60k die in one year not too long ago with one.
Click to expand...
People that get the flu shot stop die from the flu. There was a kid in East TN that passed away a few months back and they recieved the shot. It’s not as effective as people want to believe it is.
 
#31,120
#31,120
Rasputin_Vol said:
Not every potential pandemic...

Quarantines to help reduce the spread of virus

And what do you mean "contain"? Would that have meant closing all ports of entry as well? In January?
Click to expand...

You identify outbreak clusters and then isolate those individuals and test that community. You aggressively track contacts and test them. Etc. Our testing was not scaled up fast enough to accomplish this. I might be missing key points of test and contain. It’s how we treated SARS and Ebola and were successful. H1N1 - with its emergence here and no head start - meant we never got the chance to contain before it was upon us. I’ve read where Fauci described some aspects of how we ideally do this but I don’t think he went into a ton of detail. I do not think it involves shutting down all travel.
 
#31,124
#31,124
utvols88 said:
With China not letting anyone in and the only resource being WHO which decided to announce no human to human transmission six days before the first case in the US January 20th, how would viable tests have a production level to meet your demand? It's not feasible.
Click to expand...

Testing early and often throughout February would have absolutely helped us contain this.

A bigger head start by China would have absolutely helped. That’s on them.


US and South Korea found out about their first case at the same time and then approved their tests at the same time. The difference is they isn’t bungle their tests kit design and roll-out and we did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: titansvolsfaninga
#31,125
#31,125
BeecherVol said:
Given the comparison from day 1. I wonder how many would die from the flu without the vaccine. Considering we ve had as many as 60k die in one year not too long ago with one.
Click to expand...

It would be higher - but muted by the flu shot’s lack of efficacy some years. In general though it does tend to reduce the worse symptoms, which would make you think the death rate would be higher regardless of whether the right strains are included.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top