Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I haven't read through all the replies, but my understanding is that the problem is not the percentage of people who die or get very ill, per se. So all the stats about morbidity rates and age groups miss the point-- plus, it seems far too early to really know what those numbers are anyway. The problem is that large numbers of people require intensive care quickly, which health systems are unable to provide. Hospitals and medical staff are getting overwhelmed, are unable to care for everyone, and consequently many patients are dying, particularly those weakened by age or other illness. We have seen numerous countries encounter this situation, some adapting better than others. So the "hysteria" as some call it is about relieving the stress on our capacity to respond by slowing down the rate of infection. The only way to slow transmission is to limit human interaction. This is complicated by a relatively long incubation period of 14-20 days (compared to Ebola, which incubates and produces debilitating symptoms within one week). Other ramifications are that it limits our ability to treat other medical needs, interrupts the blood supply, and reduces availability of medical professionals. In sum, it's not a matter of an absolute, objective, biological measure of lethality, but the challenges it presents to public health apparatus. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, Puwa said:

I haven't read through all the replies, but my understanding is that the problem is not the percentage of people who die or get very ill, per se. So all the stats about morbidity rates and age groups miss the point-- plus, it seems far too early to really know what those numbers are anyway. The problem is that large numbers of people require intensive care quickly, which health systems are unable to provide. Hospitals and medical staff are getting overwhelmed, are unable to care for everyone, and consequently many patients are dying, particularly those weakened by age or other illness. We have seen numerous countries encounter this situation, some adapting better than others. So the "hysteria" as some call it is about relieving the stress on our capacity to respond by slowing down the rate of infection. The only way to slow transmission is to limit human interaction. This is complicated by a relatively long incubation period of 14-20 days (compared to Ebola, which incubates and produces debilitating symptoms within one week). Other ramifications are that it limits our ability to treat other medical needs, interrupts the blood supply, and reduces availability of medical professionals. In sum, it's not a matter of an absolute, objective, biological measure of lethality, but the challenges it presents to public health apparatus. 

Flattening the curve to avoid overwhelming the health system is conceptually sound — in theory. A visual that has become viral in media and social media shows how flattening the curve reduces the volume of the epidemic that is above the threshold of what the health system can handle at any moment.

 

Yet if the health system does become overwhelmed, the majority of the extra deaths may not be due to coronavirus but to other common diseases and conditions such as heart attacks, strokes, trauma, bleeding, and the like that are not adequately treated. If the level of the epidemic does overwhelm the health system and extreme measures have only modest effectiveness, then flattening the curve may make things worse: Instead of being overwhelmed during a short, acute phase, the health system will remain overwhelmed for a more protracted period. That’s another reason we need data about the exact level of the epidemic activity.

 

One of the bottom lines is that we don’t know how long social distancing measures and lockdowns can be maintained without major consequences to the economy, society, and mental health. Unpredictable evolutions may ensue, including financial crisis, unrest, civil strife, war, and a meltdown of the social fabric. At a minimum, we need unbiased prevalence and incidence data for the evolving infectious load to guide decision-making.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-fiasco-in-the-making-as-the-coronavirus-pandemic-takes-hold-we-are-making-decisions-without-reliable-data/

 

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, FarFlungFalang said:

Death rates: Italy 10% Germany 0.5%,there is a twenty fold difference?I've read that both have a mean age of 81 years for fatalities so whats the go with that?Surely Italy doesn't have a twenty fold difference in the number of 81 year olds?

Okay, when you see the words 'death rate' or 'mortality rate', you need to be very careful.

 

In most cases those figures merely count 'identified cases'.

 

Germany and the UK have a totally different approach. In Germany Prof Wieler insists he will only look at confirmed, identified cases. Typical German, only verified data. However, the UK's Sir Patrick Vallance says 'we identified x number' but the real number is more likely x times 10 or x times 20'.

 

I believe the UK approach is the correct approach. Because even in the absence of hard, verified data, we can look at past pandemics and extrapolate from numbers of infected and deaths there, fairly good models about the numbers of dead now. Yes, those are guesstimates, but they are incredibly sophisticated models using very well thought out equations.

 

Bearing this in mind you need to adjust the death rates that you found. 

 

Also bear in mind that only a minority of the population requires hospitalisation for Covid 19. And of those a minority again will die. A fairly small percentage. This will inevitably be skewed towards older people.

 

 

Edited by Logosone
  • Like 2
Posted
2 hours ago, saengd said:

Do you really think that just because the corona virus is no longer classified in the same category as ebola or lassa fever that it is not a massive danger to life, as such  do you really think the current actions are not warranted......really, you really believe that!

The world was faced with a very difficult choice: either lose one arm now, or lose two legs later. 

 

It has chosen the second option because it is how world leaders have been acting for decades: let's make the present as comfortable as possible, and damn the future... others will deal with it... 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted

Here are the latest mortality rates. 

 

In the US, for example, the rate is barely above that of the common flu... in Germany it is lower... 

2020-03-25_16-26-37.jpg

  • Thanks 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

The world was faced with a very difficult choice: either lose one arm now, or lose two legs later. 

 

It has chosen the second option because it is how world leaders have been acting for decades: let's make the present as comfortable as possible, and damn the future... others will deal with it... 

That is so true. Everything is always put on the shoulders of future generations to pay. We are living on credit from people who are not born yet.

  • Like 2
Posted
Just now, Brunolem said:

Here are the latest mortality rates. 

 

In the US, for example, the rate is barely above that of the common flu... in Germany it is lower... 

2020-03-25_16-26-37.jpg

I have to say I am very surprised Switzerland is performing so badly. 

 

Wonder why that is.

Posted
2 hours ago, geisha said:

logosone , It also states that all confirmed cases of the virus should be sent to the treatment centers and hospitals. So what do you, or they, suggest one does when these centers and hospitals are full to overflowing with very sick patients ? 

Actually the official advise in the UK states that you should not go to a hospital or GP surgery unless you are experiencing respiratory problems or under a high risk category, i.e. older people.

if you have coronavirus symptoms:

  • do not go to a GP surgery, pharmacy or hospital
  • you do not need to contact 111 to tell them you’re staying at home
  • testing for coronavirus is not needed if you’re staying at home
  • Like 1
Posted

thanks, but they are all english, so they know how to think calmly.

most countries who are being destroyed by hysteria are small weak countries like

thailand , s. american countries ext.. they have no choice but to

obey the hysteric WHO.

WHO is destroying economies and millions of jobs with his unprecedented powers 

to impose it's hysteric policies. 

WHO officials say that only total shutdown of all life aspects and all movements will 

bring to victory over the virus.

we know FOR A FACT that this is not true !!

FACT NO. 1   : GERMANY - only 107 deaths (in total, not per day!) without total shutdown.

FACT NO. 2: U,K. - chose the herd immunity approach and seems to be winning.

 

Posted
37 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Actually the flu can be worse than this and have greater mortality by far.

 

That Italian convoy was carrying 61 dead, not 60,000. 

 

There have been football stadium disasters with similar numbers of casualties.

 

Obviously every instance of unexpected deaths can overwhelm a system geared to a certain number.

 

As a bodybuilder you learn that you can either train hard or long. But not both. That golden rule will most likely apply to this pandemic as well, there will be peaks of dead, but those death peaks will be over relatively quickly.

 

Italy, China all made that experience. That bag of pebbles maybe fatal for one. Not for 7 billion.

Al these might be true , but it does not answer my question. was it the same every flue season, did NYC run out of room to store the dead last year, were the hospitals overwhelmed, did we ever rum out of ventilators? 

or would you rather argue how many dead were in the Italian convoy?

  • Thanks 1
Posted
19 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Al these might be true , but it does not answer my question. was it the same every flue season, did NYC run out of room to store the dead last year, were the hospitals overwhelmed, did we ever rum out of ventilators? 

or would you rather argue how many dead were in the Italian convoy?

But that's comparing apples with mangosteens, this is a pandemic, not a flu season. Yes, as a matter of fact there have been several flu pandemics that have been worse and considerably worse. 

Posted

If you leave bags of pebbles out of it and don't talk in riddles, too many will get ill and a system that wasn't designed to care for you, the unwashed masses, will fail you,as it was always designed to. And it's always somebody else's fault.

 

Put short they don't care about you, they never did and they still dont. You are a nuisance except at voting time which makes communism the superior system. They have to worry about you all the time in case you burn down their house.

  • Haha 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, Logosone said:

But that's comparing apples with mangosteens, this is a pandemic, not a flu season. Yes, as a matter of fact there have been several flu pandemics that have been worse and considerably worse. 

Why isn't seasonal flu a yearly pandemic?

 

Because they fudged the definition?

 

Apples, mangosteens, bags of pebbles? Is everyone drunk tonight?

  • Like 1
Posted
20 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

Rubbish. We are only a few months into this, and we already see the devastating impact on the population as  thousands fight for their lives on respirators. We  see the significantly higher rate of death and you dismiss this as no worse than the flu. You are not even making an intelligent comparison, because you look at seasonal flu  which has a mortality calculation based upon multiple strains over multiple years vs. the Covid 19 pandemic at 3 months.  It is infuriating when sudden catastrophic incidents are tossed out to  diminish the impact of a deadly infection. A stadium catastrophe is avoidable and preventable. It is not a continuing event. A deadly infection continues. Your attempt to  make a comparison defies logic and is invalid.  You talk of death peaks as if you understand the impact of a deadly respiratory illness. Well, you do not. For a significant number of patients, including the young, a respiratory illness leaves long term damage in the lungs and leaves the patient susceptible to future infections and other diseases. That is a medical fact. 

 

The disconnect is that some people do not appreciate that a respiratory infection can persist. Unless stopped, it returns to ravage the population.  there is no demonstrable long term immunity, which means that if a person  was infected once, that person can be infected again. If left with lung damage from a  previous infection, that patient will most die with the next infection. Lungs need time to heal.  Yes, many people have lost their employment, but better a short term disruption than their death or long term disability. Some people want an immediate solution. It can't happen. All we can do is  wait this out. Another month or two of short term pain for long term  gain. Westerners are too focused on short term gains and not the long term. This is where China has the world beat. China plans for 10 years, 20 years, another generation in the future. The US driven mentality is to have a profit a gain now. That doesn't work with  deadly diseases.

 

 

There are so many errors and falsehoods in your above posts, I will try just to address the main ones:

 

It is not a significantly higher rate of death, there have been flu pandemics with a much worse rate of death.

 

The flu pandemics are actually much worse than Covid19. 

 

Of course Covid19 also has multiple strains. And will have many more.

 

A stadium catastrophe is indeed avoidable, and so was this pandemic. In 2012 the Robert Koch Institute warned about this pandemic. In 2015 Bill Gates warned about a coming pandemic. And those are just the ones who went on record.

 

And you're telling me this could not have been prevented by our governments not acting sooner instead of watching Wuhan like paralysed deer?

 

Your medical analysis notwithstanding, in Iceland where thus far the biggest testing effort has been made 2% of those tested had Covid19. A very small number. And of that small number again only half had symptons. Of that even smaller number a fraction had to go to intensive care. Of that even even smaller number a smaller fraction are in mortal danger, mostly those over 80.

 

With due respect, but we've already seen a respiratory disease that persists and keeps returning. It's called the flu. Have we locked the entire planet down for 10 weeks? I don't think so.

 

And your biggest mistake: There is no immunity? Of course there is immunity.

 

Prof Jon Cohen, emeritus professor of infectious diseases at Brighton and Sussex Medical School, said: 

“However, it is very likely, based on other viral infections, that yes, once a person has had the infection they will generally be immune and won’t get it again. There will always be the odd exception, but that is certainly a reasonable expectation.”

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/the-big-question-over-coronavirus-can-a-person-get-it-twice

 

Short term pain? The Great Depression lasted 10 years. Can you guarantee me that the coming depression will not last 10 years?

  • Thanks 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, Logosone said:

There are so many errors and falsehoods in your above posts, I will try just to address the main ones:

 

It is not a significantly higher rate of death, there have been flu pandemics with a much worse rate of death.

 

The flu pandemics are actually much worse than Covid19. 

 

Of course Covid19 also has multiple strains. And will have many more.

 

A stadium catastrophe is indeed avoidable, and so was this pandemic. In 2012 the Robert Koch Institute warned about this pandemic. In 2015 Bill Gates warned about a coming pandemic. And those are just the ones who went on record.

 

And you're telling me this could not have been prevented by our governments not acting sooner instead of watching Wuhan like paralysed deer?

 

Your medical analysis notwithstanding, in Iceland where thus far the biggest testing effort has been made 2% of those tested had Covid19. A very small number. And of that small number again only half had symptons. Of that even smaller number a fraction had to go to intensive care. Of that even even smaller number a smaller fraction are in mortal danger, mostly those over 80.

 

With due respect, but we've already seen a respiratory disease that persists and keeps returning. It's called the flu. Have we locked the entire planet down for 10 weeks? I don't think so.

 

And your biggest mistake: There is no immunity? Of course there is immunity.

 

Prof Jon Cohen, emeritus professor of infectious diseases at Brighton and Sussex Medical School, said: 

“However, it is very likely, based on other viral infections, that yes, once a person has had the infection they will generally be immune and won’t get it again. There will always be the odd exception, but that is certainly a reasonable expectation.”

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/the-big-question-over-coronavirus-can-a-person-get-it-twice

 

Short term pain? The Great Depression lasted 10 years. Can you guarantee me that the coming depression will not last 10 years?

The coming financial collapse is overdue anyway - nothing will stop it. This virus could be stopped in a few weeks but only with great effort.

  • Like 2
Posted
13 minutes ago, nauseus said:

The coming financial collapse is overdue anyway - nothing will stop it. This virus could be stopped in a few weeks but only with great effort.

It need not. After the Spanish Flu pandemic the Dow Jones gained 50% fairly quickly. The roaring Twenties were an age of economic boom time.

 

It will depend on how we handle the economy. But with everyday the biggest economies are put in lock down the damage will get worse.

 

Yes, the virus could have been stopped. The world was watching Wuhan. Our governments watched. Despite the repeated warnings of 2012, 2015 and no doubt many others, they did nothing. They could have isolated when there was time, test early. All lost opportunities.

 

And now, after they failed to isolate themselves, the governments tell the people go isolate yourselves, or else, 25000 Euro fine and imprisonment.

  • Like 1
Posted
9 hours ago, Logosone said:

It need not. After the Spanish Flu pandemic the Dow Jones gained 50% fairly quickly. The roaring Twenties were an age of economic boom time.

 

It will depend on how we handle the economy. But with everyday the biggest economies are put in lock down the damage will get worse.

 

Yes, the virus could have been stopped. The world was watching Wuhan. Our governments watched. Despite the repeated warnings of 2012, 2015 and no doubt many others, they did nothing. They could have isolated when there was time, test early. All lost opportunities.

 

And now, after they failed to isolate themselves, the governments tell the people go isolate yourselves, or else, 25000 Euro fine and imprisonment.

I meant that we were way overdue for a financial crash before the virus problem emerged. Yes the 20's were a boom after WW1 and the Spanish Flu but we are not in the same situation now.

 

Yes, too much gawking at China and hoping for the best by the rest of the world, before it was too late to catch it. China should have been waiving the red flag higher and much earlier, given their extensive history and experience of similar zoonoses. The existence of this virus was identified well before those 5 million were allowed to leave Wuhan, just before Chinese New Year and the lock-down - they dispersed all over China, and beyond - hopeless.

'

 

 

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...