COVID-19 Talk

[SomeguyfromTakomaPark]

8 minutes ago, Yeoman said:

Stop posting fear mongering BS.. 20% don't end up in the hospital. The hospitalization rate is 2.6% for those 18-49 years old.. The highest number is 17% for those 85 years old or above

If you want to sit in your house 24/7 for the next 18 months and eat government cheese hoping you don't get evicted, more power to you. If you're healthy and want to take your own risks while following sanitary guidelines, let people get on with their lives. 

The average hospitalization rate has been 17%, but of course that sample is biased because mostly only the very sick get tested.  I think the framing you’ve presented is incorrect.  I don’t believe people can “get on with their lives” in the midst of this epidemic until we limit the spread significantly.  We need to limit it at least to the point that our hospitals aren’t in jeopardy of being overwhelmed.  

[ErinInTheSky]

Just now, DCTeacherman said:

The average hospitalization rate has been 17%, but of course that sample is biased because mostly only the very sick get tested.  I think the framing you’ve presented is incorrect.  I don’t believe people can “get on with their lives” in the midst of this epidemic until we limit the spread significantly.  We need to limit it at least to the point that our hospitals aren’t in jeopardy of being overwhelmed.  

Agreed.

[gymengineer]

This twitter thread gets at what a couple of us have been saying about the IHME model’s limitations on getting the backside of the curve correct based on data from Spain, Italy, and now New York: 

https://mobile.twitter.com/CT_Bergstrom/status/1250369165984010241

(Click on the tweet #26 itself to see the rest of the thread)

[Yeoman]

Just now, DCTeacherman said:

The average hospitalization rate has been 17%, but of course that sample is biased because mostly only the very sick get tested.  I think the framing you’ve presented is incorrect.  I don’t believe people can “get on with their lives” in the midst of this epidemic until we limit the spread significantly.  We need to limit it at least to the point that our hospitals aren’t in jeopardy of being overwhelmed.  

No it hasn't been 17% unless you're over 85 - read the link I posted which has the most recent information. 

You're welcome to stay at home until kingdom come under your TP bunker.. no problem from me!

[ErinInTheSky]

Just now, Yeoman said:

 

Besides the fact that it's looking at data between Feb 12 - March 16 when very few if any were getting tested for COVID. Nice cherry picking

It's directly from the CDC, and a number around 20% has been reported from many countries all over the world ever since China. 20% of people with this disease seem to develop a "severe form of illness" with the numbers we have available to us.

 

It's not worth fighting over. You can work with whatever you want to work with, I'm working with what we can verify, and the state is taking all of this stuff into account when making lockdown decisions. They have scientists who I am sure know way more than you and I combined or so I hope.

[PhineasC]

1 minute ago, DCTeacherman said:

The average hospitalization rate has been 17%, but of course that sample is biased because mostly only the very sick get tested.  I think the framing you’ve presented is incorrect.  I don’t believe people can “get on with their lives” in the midst of this epidemic until we limit the spread significantly.  We need to limit it at least to the point that our hospitals aren’t in jeopardy of being overwhelmed.  

Hospital capacity in the vast majority of the US outside a tiny segment is way underutilized right now. Hospitals are laying off staff due to lack of patients.

The initial push from Cuomo and others that we needed a bazillion ventilators turned out to be wildly unrealistic and the governors have already started moving away from that idea.

[PhineasC]

Just now, Yeoman said:

No it hasn't been 17% unless you're over 85 - read the link I posted which has the most recent information. 

You're welcome to stay at home until kingdom come under your TP bunker.. no problem from me!

The infected fatality ratio (IFR) for those under 65 with no major complications has been steadily dropping and is approaching regular flu territory (0.2%).

[ErinInTheSky]

Just now, PhineasC said:

Hospital capacity in the vast majority of the US outside a tiny segment is way underutilized right now. Hospitals are laying off staff due to lack of patients.

The initial push from Cuomo and others that we needed a bazillion ventilators turned out to be wildly unrealistic and the governors have already started moving away from that idea.

It's because we are socially distancing and it's working. Even still we're getting 2k deaths in the country every day while socially distanced.

 

Again, governments have the info to make these decisions. 

[ErinInTheSky]

Just now, PhineasC said:

The infected fatality ratio (IFR) for those under 65 with no major complications has been steadily dropping and is approaching regular flu territory (0.2%).

I don't see how you or anyone can be confident in IFR numbers right now when Fauci and basically all scientists out there are saying that "we don't know." 

[Yeoman]

Just now, supernovasky said:

It's directly from the CDC, and a number around 20% has been reported from many countries all over the world ever since China. 20% of people with this disease seem to develop a "severe form of illness" with the numbers we have available to us.

 

It's not worth fighting over. You can work with whatever you want to work with, I'm working with what we can verify, and the state is taking all of this stuff into account when making lockdown decisions. They have scientists who I am sure know way more than you and I combined or so I hope.

You clearly don't understand how lack of testing unrealistically skews the numbers so it's a lost cause. Between 2/12 - 3/16 only those who were sick enough to go to the hospital were getting tested, so of course the numbers are higher for that period. The FDA didn't even approve a test until well into that period.

[jaydreb]

3 minutes ago, supernovasky said:

It's directly from the CDC, and a number around 20% has been reported from many countries all over the world ever since China. 20% of people with this disease seem to develop a "severe form of illness" with the numbers we have available to us.

 

It's not worth fighting over. You can work with whatever you want to work with, I'm working with what we can verify, and the state is taking all of this stuff into account when making lockdown decisions. They have scientists who I am sure know way more than you and I combined or so I hope.

It’s around 20% of reported cases, not ALL cases, which is a big difference.  Again, we simply don’t know the true hospitalization rate - just as we don’t know the true death rate.  

[PhineasC]

5 minutes ago, supernovasky said:

It's because we are socially distancing and it's working. Even still we're getting 2k deaths in the country every day while socially distanced.

 

Again, governments have the info to make these decisions. 

But even in hard-hit NYC they are nowhere near regional capacity. Meanwhile, many people with cancer, kidney disease, and other very serious illnesses can't get treatment and/r have been laid off and lost their coverage.

And I have zero faith the political leaders have the best info or have processed it all yet when making decisions. This entire pandemic has become totally politicized now, which is a shame but to be expected.

[ErinInTheSky]

Just now, jaydreb said:

It’s around 20% of reported cases, not ALL cases, which is a big difference.  Again, we simply don’t know the true hospitalization rate - just as we don’t know the true death rate.  

Right, of course. It all depends on how big that iceberg is.

Either way though, at this point "rates" are kind of moot, real rates will be determined when this is all said and done. At this point it's raw numbers.

The raw numbers are, a month into lockdown, 2k people a day are still dying. Imagine what those numbers would be with things opened back up for busines.

So I am not seeing things open back up for at least another month, possibly longer, and it seems most of the general public is fine with that and supports it. Myself included.

 

Thankfully.

[PhineasC]

1 minute ago, supernovasky said:

I don't see how you or anyone can be confident in IFR numbers right now when Fauci and basically all scientists out there are saying that "we don't know." 

I can see the trends in the data in the papers coming out now. There have been solid studies from Germany, Iceland, and China on this topic. Even your vaunted CDC CFR numbers have been steadily moving downwards. The next update will definitely be even lower. But CFR is totally useless right now.

[ErinInTheSky]

1 minute ago, PhineasC said:

But even in hard-hit NYC they are nowhere near regional capacity. Meanwhile, many people with cancer, kidney disease, and other very serious illnesses can't get treatment and/r have bene laid off and lost their coverage.

And I have zero faith the political leaders have the best info or have processed it all yet when making decisions. This entire pandemic has become totally politicized now, which is a shame but to be expected.

Oh I have a surgery that is delayed. It definitely sucks. I'm terrified for my dad should he need a heart stint.

 

But I don't think that gets any better opening up the country again.

[ErinInTheSky]

Just now, PhineasC said:

I can see the trends in the data in the papers coming out now. There have been solid studies from Germany, Iceland, and China on this topic. Even your vaunted CDC CFR numbers have been steadily moving downwards. The next update will definitely be even lower. But CFR is totally useless right now.

We'll figure the rates out looking back after this is all said and done. Someone posted the Iceland study a few days ago but their CFR's are going up. Germany's have gone up too. Both of those countries have sentinel testing, which is awesome. Both will be able to have short lockdowns and come back to work early because they have a massive testing infrastructure. Good on them. 

[SomeguyfromTakomaPark]

8 minutes ago, Yeoman said:

No it hasn't been 17% unless you're over 85 - read the link I posted which has the most recent information. 

You're welcome to stay at home until kingdom come under your TP bunker.. no problem from me!

Well I’m not “welcome to”, actually I’ve been ordered to.  And judging by the fact that you’re in this subforum, so have you.  
 

 

[PhineasC]

1 minute ago, supernovasky said:

Right, of course. It all depends on how big that iceberg is.

Either way though, at this point "rates" are kind of moot, real rates will be determined when this is all said and done. At this point it's raw numbers.

The raw numbers are, a month into lockdown, 2k people a day are still dying. Imagine what those numbers would be with things opened back up for busines.

So I am not seeing things open back up for at least another month, possibly longer, and it seems most of the general public is fine with that and supports it. Myself included.

 

Thankfully.

Many of those dying are elderly with major underlying complications. Look at the Italy data. The vast majority of those who died were very old and had 2+ major comorbidities. This disease is not any more dangerous for healthy people under 40 than something like swine flu.

[ErinInTheSky]

Just now, PhineasC said:

Many of those dying are elderly with major underlying complications. Look at the Italy data. The vast majority of those who died were very old and had 2+ major comorbidities. This disease is not any more dangerous for healthy people under 40 than something like swine flu.

The elderly with underlying conditions matter.

My dad matters. And the more we pack hospitals, and the less access we all have to hospitals when they are slammed by covid patients, the worse this gets for all of us.

[PhineasC]

2 minutes ago, supernovasky said:

Oh I have a surgery that is delayed. It definitely sucks. I'm terrified for my dad should he need a heart stint.

 

But I don't think that gets any better opening up the country again.

So why can't you simply quarantine yourself until a vaccine is available and the rest of us go back to work?

[ErinInTheSky]

1 minute ago, DCTeacherman said:

Well I’m not “welcome to”, actually I’ve been ordered to.  And judging by the fact that you’re in this subforum, so have you.  
 

 

I think some people feel like debating here and other places means they'll somehow be allowed to go outside and go to BBQs and movie theatres and restaurants again.

[jaydreb]

4 minutes ago, supernovasky said:

Right, of course. It all depends on how big that iceberg is.

Either way though, at this point "rates" are kind of moot, real rates will be determined when this is all said and done. At this point it's raw numbers.

The raw numbers are, a month into lockdown, 2k people a day are still dying. Imagine what those numbers would be with things opened back up for busines.

So I am not seeing things open back up for at least another month, possibly longer, and it seems most of the general public is fine with that and supports it. Myself included.

 

Thankfully.

Now I agree with pretty much all of this.  I don’t see things starting to open up in our area until around June 1 - and even then it will be a gradual process.  

[ErinInTheSky]

Just now, PhineasC said:

So why can't you simply quarantine yourself until a vaccine is available and the rest of us go back to work?

Because public health dictates that this is a societal problem and not an individual one.

 

The more people pack hospitals with coronavirus, the more it easily spreads among our healthcare workers, the less PPE we have, the more deaths we have, the more closures we need again in the future.

 

We're in this together for better or worse.

[SomeguyfromTakomaPark]

Just now, PhineasC said:

So why can't you simply quarantine yourself until a vaccine is available and the rest of us go back to work?

That’s just not how it works.  Too high a percentage of our population is old or has comorbidity.   It isn’t feasible to do that.  

[PhineasC]

Just now, supernovasky said:

The elderly with underlying conditions matter.

My dad matters. And the more we pack hospitals, and the less access we all have to hospitals when they are slammed by covid patients, the worse this gets for all of us.

This is not a good argument for shutting down the entire planet. The common cold frequently kills this population. The flu ravages them every single year. Thousands upon thousands of deaths. I suspect most 80 year olds don't want the earth shut down and people's lives ruined to ensure they get a few more months of life locked in their houses...

[PhineasC]

2 minutes ago, supernovasky said:

I think some people feel like debating here and other places means they'll somehow be allowed to go outside and go to BBQs and movie theatres and restaurants again.

These lockdowns are completely unprecedented in world history. It's amazing they have worked as much as they have. Just because you are scared and want to stay home for a few years doesn't mean most people want that or it should be mandated by law.

[ErinInTheSky]

2 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

This is not a good argument for shutting down the entire planet. The common cold frequently kills this population. The flu ravages them every single year. Thousands upon thousands of deaths. I suspect most 80 year olds don't want the earth shut down and people's lives ruined to ensure they get a few more months of life locked in their houses...

This isn’t the flu.

[SnowGolfBro]

Just now, PhineasC said:

Many of those dying are elderly with major underlying complications. Look at the Italy data. The vast majority of those who died were very old and had 2+ major comorbidities. This disease is not any more dangerous for healthy people under 40 than something like swine flu.

What is not easily discernible from the data is how many people dying from Covid would have been likely to die from another disease within say a 12 month time period.  This does not diminish the lives of these individuals, but it would have an effect on how the rest of us go about our lives.  We have to be careful not to forget that there is a circle of life component to all of these data points.  We all have to go sometime.  And those of us over 65 years of age with underlying conditions are going to be at the top of nature’s list.  It is not a fun topic to discuss, but these are challenging times.  

[ErinInTheSky]

2 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

These lockdowns are completely unprecedented in world history. It's amazing they have worked as much as they have. Just because you are scared and want to stay home for a few years doesn't mean most people want that or it should be mandated by law.

The vast majority of people support staying home for the time being, and it’s currently the law, and science and public health support it.

I know you want to get out. We all do. But it’s not going to happen when there is a disease spreading that kills 2k a day while under lockdown.

Not until we can mitigate.

[PhineasC]

2 minutes ago, DCTeacherman said:

That’s just not how it works.  Too high a percentage of our population is old or has comorbidity.   It isn’t feasible to do that.  

It has to work. We can't stay locked down until we get a vaccine and/or testing like South Korea (which will never work here). At some point we will need to start to reopen and accept some deaths and hope the IFR is more like 0.2%. Otherwise many, many more will die from the economic and social impacts of the lockdown. All we are ding is punting the football while our hose burns down.