Fall Banter and General Discussion

[Baroclinic Zone]

15 minutes ago, HoarfrostHubb said:

Yeah    The two others were confirmed RE infections via genetic analysis or something. 

It’s only been in the US since late January, early February and didn’t explode till March.  We’ll have to start watching to see if people can get re-infected which would give us an idea of how long anti-bodies can last.  Feels like it’s been forever, but we are in the early stages of this pandemic and we have 200k deaths and millions infected.  Would suck to hear ant-bodies only last 6-8mo.

[HoarfrostHubb]

14 minutes ago, Baroclinic Zone said:

It’s only been in the US since late January, early February and didn’t explode till March.  We’ll have to start watching to see if people can get re-infected which would give us an idea of how long anti-bodies can last.  Feels like it’s been forever, but we are in the early stages of this pandemic and we have 200k deaths and millions infected.  Would suck to hear ant-bodies only last 6-8mo.

I’m sure there will be more but it seems to be somewhat rare at this point.  Hopefully our immune systems can squash a second infection.   

[weathafella]

 Reinfection would most assuredly result in miler presentations such that over a relatively short time no one will need to mask.   One of the reasons postulated from the 1918-19 pandemics that affected young people seemingly more severely is the fact that 30 years prior...not sure the year but it could have been 1888 or 1890 a similar but milder flu went through the population.  The older people had some immunity such that if they got the 1918 version, the presentation was much milder.   This isn’t the flu but my guess is the worst is absolutely over and hopefully I’m right.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Chrisrotary12]

49 minutes ago, weathafella said:

 Reinfection would most assuredly result in miler presentations such that over a relatively short time no one will need to mask.   One of the reasons postulated from the 1918-19 pandemics that affected young people seemingly more severely is the fact that 30 years prior...not sure the year but it could have been 1888 or 1890 a similar but milder flu went through the population.  The older people had some immunity such that if they got the 1918 version, the presentation was much milder.   This isn’t the flu but my guess is the worst is absolutely over and hopefully I’m right.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you get it a second time......I'm sure it still sucks if you get it the first time.

[CoastalWx]

Phin has nicely adapted to some of the ball busting and side humor of this forum. I feel like the people in the MA hated us for that reason....felt it was a "boys club." I'm sorry people felt that way, but a lot of us have gotten to know each other. Until recently, we met up at bars, had some drinks and laughs...and weenied out to the Kocin book. Maybe it was the angst from all those years of New England getting snow, but it's a good forum with good people here. 

[PhineasC]

16 minutes ago, CoastalWx said:

Phin has nicely adapted to some of the ball busting and side humor of this forum. I feel like the people in the MA hated us for that reason....felt it was a "boys club." I'm sorry people felt that way, but a lot of us have gotten to know each other. Until recently, we met up at bars, had some drinks and laughs...and weenied out to the Kocin book. Maybe it was the angst from all those years of New England getting snow, but it's a good forum with good people here. 

Things are much more upbeat here. The MA forum has been like a funeral procession for many months now. Several reasons for that both on and off the boards. No need to rehash it here. 

[CoastalWx]

5 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

Things are much more upbeat here. The MA forum has been like a funeral procession for many months now. Several reasons for that both on and off the boards. No need to rehash it here. 

Alright well I haven't been there much so I'm not sure...but for awhile there was a disdain for this area. People are just genuinely social and here to have fun and talk weather. Nobody is here to stir the pot except Kevin.    I know the weenie humor got a little out of hand back then, but when true threats occur...that won't happen. 

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

20 hours ago, Baroclinic Zone said:

It’s only been in the US since late January, early February and didn’t explode till March.  We’ll have to start watching to see if people can get re-infected which would give us an idea of how long anti-bodies can last.  Feels like it’s been forever, but we are in the early stages of this pandemic and we have 200k deaths and millions infected.  Would suck to hear ant-bodies only last 6-8mo.

But...we were told that this ‘hardly affects anyone’.  

[PhineasC]

19 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

But...we were told that this ‘hardly affects anyone’.  

Over 90% of those 200k deaths had other major underlying conditions that are also leading causes of death, such as serious diabetes (85k deaths per year), chronic lower respiratory disease (150k deaths per year), and heart disease (655k deaths per year).

Just throwing out that 200k number with zero context is super misleading. A sizable percent of that 200k were already deathly ill and were destined to die this year no matter what. COVID helped that along just like a cold or pneumonia could.

[WeatherX]

Good news that October appears to be starting out with a nice classic +PNA and downstream trough over the NE. Looks like EPO and WPO will be neg and tend neg throughout (respectively) if progs are right. Back in the old days, eyes were on the prize especially with the October readings. 

 

[DavisStraight]

19 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

Over 90% of those 200k deaths had other major underlying conditions that are also leading causes of death, such as serious diabetes (85k deaths per year), chronic lower respiratory disease (150k deaths per year), and heart disease (655k deaths per year).

Just throwing out that 200k number with zero context is super misleading. A sizable percent of that 200k were already deathly ill and were destined to die this year no matter what. COVID helped that along just like a cold or pneumonia could.

I wonder what the real number of people that died just from covid with no underlying issues.

[PhineasC]

6 minutes ago, DavisStraight said:

I wonder what the real number of people that died just from covid with no underlying issues.

About 4%, according to the CDC.

https://fox8.com/news/coronavirus/new-cdc-report-shows-94-of-covid-19-deaths-in-us-had-underlying-medical-conditions/

[HoarfrostHubb]

52 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

Over 90% of those 200k deaths had other major underlying conditions that are also leading causes of death, such as serious diabetes (85k deaths per year), chronic lower respiratory disease (150k deaths per year), and heart disease (655k deaths per year).

Just throwing out that 200k number with zero context is super misleading. A sizable percent of that 200k were already deathly ill and were destined to die this year no matter what. COVID helped that along just like a cold or pneumonia could.

Excess mortality is a good measure.  It’s a pretty heinous illness and has killed 200k people.   To say those people would have died anyway would apply to any pandemic.  This is up there with some of the worst we have encountered in the US.  And that number is with social distancing, masks, stay at homes etc and modern medical care.      
https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/09/01/comorbidities-and-coronavirus-deaths-cdc/

[powderfreak]

13 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

About 4%, according to the CDC.

https://fox8.com/news/coronavirus/new-cdc-report-shows-94-of-covid-19-deaths-in-us-had-underlying-medical-conditions/

America... where everyone has an underlying condition.  High quality of life where you can have simple hypertension and be fine with a daily pill for decades.  Then COVID comes and pushes you off the cliff.
 

[powderfreak]

32 minutes ago, HoarfrostHubb said:

Excess mortality is a good measure.  It’s a pretty heinous illness and has killed 200k people.   To say those people would have died anyway would apply to any pandemic.  This is up there with some of the worst we have encountered in the US.  And that number is with social distancing, masks, stay at homes etc and modern medical care.      
https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/09/01/comorbidities-and-coronavirus-deaths-cdc/

Regardless of cause, my father who’s a retired physician, on hospital board of directors, etc doesn’t like to discuss the policy side of things but always shares with me the excess deaths data.  The excess deaths metrics are fascinating to look at in the US and other countries... deaths are incredibly stable year to year, almost to an incredible level to me.  Like year over year some very populated cities will be within extremely small variations.

He showed me one of his medical journals with NYC you can see very little variation going back to the point where you can see 9/11 for a spike in unexpected deaths.  Small blips can be traced to even heatwaves too.  Then starting in March it goes way high into April with unexplained spike in deaths, like nothing seen in the relative recent past.  That to me is the proof that those people wouldn’t have just died anyway.

They also looked at Ecuador and some other hard hit less prosperous countries... they compared the deaths to something you’d see from military conflict on excess deaths.

Cause aside, something happened to kill off a lot of people that hadn’t in the past.

Now public policy is a completely separate issue but too many people group the resulting public policy and their view on the illness all together.

 

[powderfreak]

20 minutes ago, WeatherX said:

Thankfully, we'll all be treated to this in the not too distant future. 

No reason for this stuff dude.  Don’t ruin the larger discussion.  

[ORH_wxman]

Yeah let’s keep the politicians out of this thread. We’ve already went down that rabbit hole too far months ago. 

[PhineasC]

42 minutes ago, HoarfrostHubb said:

Excess mortality is a good measure.  It’s a pretty heinous illness and has killed 200k people.   To say those people would have died anyway would apply to any pandemic.  This is up there with some of the worst we have encountered in the US.  And that number is with social distancing, masks, stay at homes etc and modern medical care.      
https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/09/01/comorbidities-and-coronavirus-deaths-cdc/

It’s doesn’t necessarily apply to any pandemic. Past flu pandemics killed healthy young people and children at a much higher rate, for example. 

[ORH_wxman]

10 minutes ago, powderfreak said:

Regardless of cause, my father who’s a retired physician, on hospital board of directors, etc doesn’t like to discuss the policy side of things but always shares with me the excess deaths data.  The excess deaths metrics are fascinating to look at in the US and other countries... deaths are incredibly stable year to year, almost to an incredible level to me.  Like year over year some very populated cities will be within extremely small variations.

He showed me one of his medical journals with NYC you can see very little variation going back to the point where you can see 9/11 for a spike in unexpected deaths.  Small blips can be traced to even heatwaves too.  Then starting in March it goes way high into April with unexplained spike in deaths, like nothing seen in the relative recent past.  That to me is the proof that those people wouldn’t have just died anyway.

They also looked at Ecuador and some other hard hit less prosperous countries... they compared the deaths to something you’d see from military conflict on excess deaths.

Cause aside, something happened to kill off a lot of people that hadn’t in the past.

Now public policy is a completely separate issue but too many people group the resulting public policy and their view on the illness all together.

 

I think a real measure will be if when this virus passes us, do we see a lower number of excess deaths. That would imply we sped up a bunch of deaths that might have occurred in the next, say, 2-3 years. I’ve seen that theory thrown around too. Obviously we wouldn’t be able to do that unless we have a widespread vaccine. 

[WeatherX]

Just now, powderfreak said:

No reason for this stuff dude.  Don’t ruin the larger discussion.

I posted my thoughts already on the weather and my hopes on October. Since this is the banter thread, I thought I would add some imagery and very pointed thoughts,  just to make sure that younger kids understand what is at stake on November 3rd. You are one of my favorite posters! I live vicariously through you up there at Stowe.

 

 

[powderfreak]

37 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

I think a real measure will be if when this virus passes us, do we see a lower number of excess deaths. That would imply we sped up a bunch of deaths that might have occurred in the next, say, 2-3 years. I’ve seen that theory thrown around too. Obviously we wouldn’t be able to do that unless we have a widespread vaccine. 

I guess it makes sense that those dying now can’t be dying later, and everyone alive needs to go at some point, so yeah obviously it’s speeding up death for those it kills... makes sense in that light.  

I guess the question would be how far out do you run it to correlate it with COVID, 2-3 years seems like a decent time frame for elderly populations.

On the human emotion side of it, most people would certainly sign up for another 3-5 years with their loved ones.  But that discussion heads more into the resulting public policy (ie was it worth it yes or no argument) which I’m trying to stay away from.  I think the excess deaths trends are/will be interesting.  

Something happened to push a whole bunch of humans over the cliff edge, will that mean there’s a gap before the next line of people get to the cliff edge?

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

1 hour ago, HoarfrostHubb said:

Excess mortality is a good measure.  It’s a pretty heinous illness and has killed 200k people.   To say those people would have died anyway would apply to any pandemic.  This is up there with some of the worst we have encountered in the US.  And that number is with social distancing, masks, stay at homes etc and modern medical care.      
https://hub.jhu.edu/2020/09/01/comorbidities-and-coronavirus-deaths-cdc/

Plus the below study indicates, on average, ‘victims’ life expectancy was cut short by 11 years and not the ‘would have died this year anyway’ political BS that some like to throw around. But, as always, agendas lead some to disregard science or data while cherry picking misinformation to support their thinking. I’m sure there is info out there that supports the ‘would have died soon anyway’ theory so there is no way for most to change their opinions. The line in the sand has been drawn. 

https://www.pnas.org/content/117/36/22035

[powderfreak]

52 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

It’s doesn’t necessarily apply to any pandemic. Past flu pandemics killed healthy young people and children at a much higher rate, for example. 

Purely curious, in those comparisons is there a modifier that accounts for change in health care, living conditions, etc?  I could certainly see past pandemics hitting those groups harder.

Have people been claiming this one was worse in those age groups?

[ORH_wxman]

23 minutes ago, powderfreak said:

I guess it makes sense that those dying now can’t be dying later, and everyone alive needs to go at some point, so yeah obviously it’s speeding up death for those it kills... makes sense in that light.  

I guess the question would be how far out do you run it to correlate it with COVID, 2-3 years seems like a decent time frame for elderly populations.  On the human emotion side of it, most people would certainly sign up for another 3-5 years with their loved ones.

Yeah I wasn’t making a moral stance on it...death sucks no matter what...just throwing out an empirical way of measuring it. If you all of the sudden had, say, 70k less deaths than usual over the next 2 years after a theoretical vaccine next year, then you would be able to more accurately figure out how many were killed who weren’t likely to die very soon. You just subtract that number from the overall death toll. 

If the virus did not “pull forward” a ton of short terms deaths, and most were medium term on the order of a decade, then you would not see the excess deaths lower much at all.

[Damage In Tolland]

Didn’t we once have a Corona thread? 

[powderfreak]

11 minutes ago, ORH_wxman said:

Yeah I wasn’t making a moral stance on it...death sucks no matter what...just throwing out an empirical way of measuring it. If you all of the sudden had, say, 70k less deaths than usual over the next 2 years after a theoretical vaccine next year, then you would be able to more accurately figure out how many were killed who weren’t likely to die very soon. You just subtract that number from the overall death toll. 

If the virus did not “pull forward” a ton of short terms deaths, and most were medium term on the order of a decade, then you would not see the excess deaths lower much at all.

I really like that line of analysis though, it’ll be interesting to see.

We are certainly a society who continues to move towards keeping people alive as long as humanly possible, ha pun?  We pour billions into medical research, cancer research, complicated procedures, daily medications (some take so many they need trays to organize them), you name it... we are here to get everyone to live a day longer than they would’ve last year.  An early death is unacceptable.

Its an interesting philosophical discussion to have as a country.  It’s not a surprise we react this way.  Without a real discussion, death won’t get any more acceptable in future generations either, in fact it’ll be the opposite as we keep plowing on in medical advancements and expectations grow.  

[RUNNAWAYICEBERG]

Just now, powderfreak said:

I really like that line of analysis though, it’ll be interesting to see.

We are certainly a society who continues to move towards keeping people alive as long as humanly possible, ha pun?  We pour billions into medical research, cancer research, complicated procedures, you name it... we are here to get everyone to live a day longer than they would’ve last year.  An early death is unacceptable.

Its an interesting philosophical discussion to have as a country.  It’s not a surprise we react this way.  Without a real discussion, death won’t get any more acceptable in future generations either, in fact it’ll be the opposite as we keep plowing on in medical advancements and expectations grow.

We don’t keep people alive longer or cure diseases better because we are morally superior then previous generations... we do so because there are billions at stake, billions to be made. 

[powderfreak]

5 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

We don’t keep people alive longer or cure diseases better because we are morally superior then previous generations... we do so because there are billions at stake, billions to be made. 

I didn't think it had anything to do with moral superiority... and I'm not saying there isn't a lot of money at stake... but it's basic anthropology that the more advanced and prosperous a society gets the longer their population lives and in return the more unacceptable early death becomes.  Since the dawn of time people have been trying methods to get themselves and others to live as long as possible... from witch doctors and potions, to the magic elixirs and fountains of youth.  Humans have always had the desire to prolong life as long as possible.  As one of the most prosperous/advanced countries in the world, early death is much more unacceptable here than it is in say West Africa.

We are really in the "banter" zone but I find this stuff interesting to ponder.

[dendrite]

I started a nasty cough last night and my wife started it this morning. No other symptoms.

[Damage In Tolland]

Just now, dendrite said:

I started a nasty cough last night and my wife started it this morning. No other symptoms.

Heavy rrhea?