COVID-19/Coronavirus Information and Support Thread (see OP for useful links)

[UKMikey]

It's Thursday night, it's 8pm, we're in the UK... time to give NHS workers the Clap!!!

err....

A bunch of people on my street just came out to clap and cheer.

 

[Danoff]

I can only give you numbers for the USA as I only know the numbers for this country. As stated before, which you must have overlooked, forgot or didn't bother to read, in two different posts here.

I'll run through this somewhat quick for you. The VSL is $10,000,000/human life, multiply that by (if we are to save 2.5 million human lives) 2.5 million human lives for a whopping $25,000,000,000,000, yes 25 trillion. And of course this is all speculation but not my opinion.
From one of the many articles............

You're missing my point. A lockdown might save 1,000 lives from coronavirus, and cost 1,000 lives in other ways.

The way I read your statement was that there is no problem in your area with beds, or ventilators, correct?

It's not correct that this was my statement. It is correct that it is apparently not a problem at the moment.

If you don't understand that social distancing is working, which schooling is part of, then you really need to educate yourself with what is actually happening, it's not only my opinion but it's what our nation's leading doctors and experts are saying, unless the media outlets and all the (must be actors) experts are lying. Today's news cycle is praising the distancing.

I think social distancing has to be working, at least to a degree. I've posted that here before. I'm saying that it's not the only possible thing that could work. I'm also saying that schooling being shut down, which is indeed a part of social distancing, may not be effective enough to warrant its high cost. There are other aspects of social distancing that have high cost (such as restaurant closures) which may have significantly more benefit. Other social distancing may have less. I think schooling being shut, especially elementary schools, has HUGE cost and may be offering minimal benefit. In short, it may be costing more lives than it saves (if that's your utilitarian cost function).

You seem to forget in your statement that even if (according to you, and yes I read your article link) kids may not contract the virus, they can still spread it. Stop the spread.

Can you elaborate more on this? I fail to see how kids are spreading it without getting it. From everything I've read, an elementary school is actually a terrible place for the virus to spread, because kids seem to not catch the virus. It's not a wonderful environment for the virus to thrive and spread in. A nursing home, on the otherhand, now that's perfect.

So are you thinking that a kid gets coughed on by a teacher or parent that has it, and then the mucus gets shared with another kid, and then that kid takes the actual mucus home and shares it with their parents? Because that's highly improbable. The virus doesn't live that long on clothing.

but we are doing our part to keep others safe

Sounds like you need to keep yourselves safe. Nobody can isolate you like you can isolate you. Take personal responsibility for this. Don't rely on the rest of the world to keep you healthy.

 

[Robin]

Boris Johnson is out of ICU

Good to hear he's on the mend.

 

[DesertPenguin]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-52232747

In case anyone wanted a quick link

 

[UKMikey]

Looks like he is the one doing the knocking down in that clip. Still, congrats on beating the virus.

 

[Famine]

Who said he isn't?

Where is she saying you can't be brave?

What?

I already laid this out in the first post.

Maitlis is attacking the language used by the PM's office - which was that he's a fighter, and so on. This is the exact same language as used in people with cancer - that they are a fighter, and so on.

If it cannot be used for the former, it cannot be used for the latter. It's plainly obvious why the language is being attacked in this instance: because it's Boris Johnson who is ill.


I'm not sure why you quoted me asking the question of "what?" after your statement about us having "an acting Prime Minster who's openly said he's against human rights" then didn't answer it, but in case of confusion, here's an expanded version:

Who are you talking about? We don't have an acting PM, and neither Boris Johnson or - I assume - Dominic Raab, have ever to my knowledge said openly that they are "against human rights", so what makes you say otherwise? Raab is actually known for his work in human rights, and Johnson is a small government, one-nation Conservative - one that emphasises individual rights (and responsibilities) over "social contract". Though at the moment it looks quite like we're living in a police state from the outside (though we aren't).

Correct, and we never will... however our own Prime Minster wilfully ignored and belittled the danger of a deadly virus outbreak and openly and arrogantly boasted physical contact with people who carried the virus.

I remember people saying the same about Diana.

Even if he didn't contract it from those sources he helped spread the virus throughout the lower house and put our own democracy at risk.

It's easy for you or I to say "act like you're infected", but less easy for the leader of a nation to do so. Besides, there's that pesky asymptomatic infectious period - I seriously doubt that Johnson did, at any point, believe that he had been exposed to the virus, then become infected by the virus through failing to get rid of it, then continue to work with others in that belief.

As things stand, it doesn't look like he's had any effect on the lower house either (I'm surprised that more MPs haven't been diagnosed; probably an indication of how many actually show up to the Commons), and isolated as soon as symptoms developed.

He isn't ill because millionaire's are just as at risk as NHS Nurses, or postmen, or delivery drivers or shelf stackers... he's at risk due to his own ignorance.

Do you not think that the PM - someone who meets hundreds of people a day from all over the world - is not as exposed as an Amazon delivery driver if he's also rich?

Really?

Edit: further more, the PM ‘ran’ the country from home while sick with the effects of the virus. He continued to do the most important and delicate job in the country, while ill. That’s idiotic and dangerous. If you are ill you cannot just get on with it (as she suggests). The context is direct and pointed. If you are sick you need to stop and recover, not carry on as normal, potentially making your sickness worse and require hospital treatment.

It surely depends on the severity of symptoms and the job. Most people do not develop symptoms which require further treatment outside the home, and to most of those it varies between a cold and a very bad cold. I could carry on doing my job through that.

Cancer in this instance isn’t similar and the comparison is largely pointless.

I also laid out for you how cancer is very similar - it's a disease that, outside of the generally terrible early-onset flavour, is quite closely linked to lifestyle, specifically that of the poorer section of society. That same section Maitlis is pointing to.

Later on, she says that people "serving on the front line" (we've already been told by the Guardian that using the language of war is bad when talking about COVID, twice - and it is far from alone in doing so - which Maitlis seems to be out of the loop for) are "disproportionately the lower paid members of our workforce. They are more likely to catch the disease because they are more exposed.". That also applies to cancer; after the early-onset, heritable flavors, cancer is a lifestyle disorder. The poor* are disproportionately likely to suffer from it because it comes down to poor diet and poor lifestyle habits like smoking and drinking, or living or working in areas with high air pollution levels. The very wealthy get it by living long enough.

In fact the poor are disproportionately exposed to most common premature death factors - including heart disease and car accidents - because they can't afford not to be exposed to it. If you're poor you're also disproportionately like to be sexually or physically abused as a child, stabbed to death (or shot in the USA), and a drug addict.

 

[baldgye]

I already laid this out in the first post.

Maitlis is attacking the language used by the PM's office - which was that he's a fighter, and so on. This is the exact same language as used in people with cancer - that they are a fighter, and so on.

If it cannot be used for the former, it cannot be used for the latter. It's plainly obvious why the language is being attacked in this instance: because it's Boris Johnson who is ill.


I'm not sure why you quoted me asking the question of "what?" after your statement about us having "an acting Prime Minster who's openly said he's against human rights" then didn't answer it, but in case of confusion, here's an expanded version:

Who are you talking about? We don't have an acting PM, and neither Boris Johnson or - I assume - Dominic Raab, have ever to my knowledge said openly that they are "against human rights", so what makes you say otherwise? Raab is actually known for his work in human rights, and Johnson is a small government, one-nation Conservative - one that emphasises individual rights (and responsibilities) over "social contract". Though at the moment it looks quite like we're living in a police state from the outside (though we aren't).

I remember people saying the same about Diana.

It's easy for you or I to say "act like you're infected", but less easy for the leader of a nation to do so. Besides, there's that pesky asymptomatic infectious period - I seriously doubt that Johnson did, at any point, believe that he had been exposed to the virus, then become infected by the virus through failing to get rid of it, then continue to work with others in that belief.

As things stand, it doesn't look like he's had any effect on the lower house either (I'm surprised that more MPs haven't been diagnosed; probably an indication of how many actually show up to the Commons), and isolated as soon as symptoms developed.

Do you not think that the PM - someone who meets hundreds of people a day from all over the world - is not as exposed as an Amazon delivery driver if he's also rich?

Really?

It surely depends on the severity of symptoms and the job. Most people do not develop symptoms which require further treatment outside the home, and to most of those it varies between a cold and a very bad cold. I could carry on doing my job through that.

I also laid out for you how cancer is very similar - it's a disease that, outside of the generally terrible early-onset flavour, is quite closely linked to lifestyle, specifically that of the poorer section of society. That same section Maitlis is pointing to.

I really don’t understand the world you live in, clearly it isn’t anything like the world I live in.
I can’t really relate to or agree with any point(s) you raised or any of the questions you bring up.

It sounds like ‘shower thoughts’ that you’ve somehow gotten super invested in? Like, I’m still trying to grasp the mental gymnastics of her speech belying the governments approach to COVID-19, and children dying of cancer... so yeah.

 

[Famine]

Like, I’m still trying to grasp the mental gymnastics of her speech belying the governments approach to COVID-19, and children dying of cancer... so yeah.

Try reading the posts rather than just skimming, and reflexively posting brief responses. I've walked you right through it. Twice.

I watched this clip, and my immediate first thought was "well, why do we always say that people - especially kids - are brave and fighters when they "battling" and "beating" cancer?" Cancer doesn't give a **** about who you are just as much as COVID-19 doesn't, and you don't survive it through fortitude and strength of character either.

Or is it just offensive to suggest that people who die of something didn't fight hard enough when they aren't a public figure you don't like?

Later on, she says that people "serving on the front line" (we've already been told by the Guardian that using the language of war is bad when talking about COVID, twice - and it is far from alone in doing so - which Maitlis seems to be out of the loop for) are "disproportionately the lower paid members of our workforce. They are more likely to catch the disease because they are more exposed.". That also applies to cancer; after the early-onset, heritable flavors, cancer is a lifestyle disorder. The poor* are disproportionately likely to suffer from it because it comes down to poor diet and poor lifestyle habits like smoking and drinking, or living or working in areas with high air pollution levels. The very wealthy get it by living long enough.

In fact the poor are disproportionately exposed to most common premature death factors - including heart disease and car accidents - because they can't afford not to be exposed to it. If you're poor you're also disproportionately like to be sexually or physically abused as a child, stabbed to death (or shot in the USA), and a drug addict.

Maitlis is specifically attacking the language of the PM's office - as spoken by Dominic Raab, the Foreign Secretary, in the Downing Street Press Briefing on Tuesday - in describing Boris Johnson as follows:

"And I'm confident he will pull through because if there is one thing that I know about this Prime Minister is he is a fighter and he will be back leading us through this crisis in short order."

Which she further states is not relevant to one's survival from this disease. She is, of course, correct - COVID-19 doesn't care.

Nor does cancer, also a disease to which the poor are disproportionately exposed. Thus I expect her to be similarly withering about anyone described as "a fighter" in the face of cancer in the future.

There's no mental gymnastics. It's barely even a mental step. The things are directly linked.


You didn't answer again, by the way. Who is the acting Prime Minister who's openly said he's against human rights, and when did he say it?

 

[twitcher]

So apparently Orthodox Jews in New York City have been holding large gatherings (100+) in the streets, both weddings and funerals.

This story from CBS (April 7) describes the scene as NYPD attempted to break up a funeral...for an 80 year old man who died of cornonavirus.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbs...ews-rabbi-funeral-brooklyn-social-distancing/

This page, which is linked in the CBS article, contains several videos of the of proceedings.

https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/new...urg-to-stop-levaya-of-shopron-rov-videos.html

I only started looking into this because this tweet came up on my twitter feed. This must be from a different gathering, I’m not sure exactly when (I don’t support the emojies in the tweet, nothing funny about this).



This tweet is in the replies to the above tweet, says it’s a continuation of events, I can’t confirm or deny that. Police only use a water cannon, but some people get hit by it pretty hard and get swept off their feet.


This isn’t meant to point a finger at any one religious community, but just the idea that people are still gathering in large groups...in New York City....for a funeral for someone who died from COVID-19!!!!

Seriously, what is wrong with people??

I think the situation also illustrates (and let’s remember the “I’m covered in Jesus’s blood” lady too) that the state is going to have to use force to enforce social distancing and quarantine rules, at least in some areas.

The CBS article also mentions that in New York, fines for violating social distancing rules are up to $1000.

 

[DesertPenguin]

It's the same as that stupid news anchor going out for a haircut or that pastor who got arrested. Disgusting. I'm in Nassau County. Suffolk County is considered the major epicenter of the entire country now. The epicenter in Nassau is only a few towns away from me in Hempstead. This is getting really stupid

 

[Joey D]

This isn’t meant to point a finger at any one religious community, but just the idea that people are still gathering in large groups...in New York City....for a funeral for someone who died from COVID-19!!!!

My wife's family is Jewish and they live in one of the largest Jewish communities in the country right outside Detroit. They said they are seeing similar things going on there as well since it's Pesach right now, but it doesn't sound like it's to the degree of NYC. They hate it because it gives their whole community a bad name (they're reformed, not orthodox though). Thankfully, there are very few New York license plates on their street this year, when in previous years they way outnumber the Michigan ones.

It's also interesting that when we had the measles outbreak a year or two back, it was traced to Orthodox Jews coming from Israel. I'm not sure why that sect of Judaism doesn't believe in vaccines but for some reason they don't. I asked my wife and she was mystified by it as well since so many members of that community work in the medical profession.

 

[GranTurNismo]

All School's in Pennsylvania closed for the rest of the year due to the virus. Strange, considering that there's rural counties in PA with literally 0 cases.

https://www.inquirer.com/health/cor...osed-governor-wolf-philadelphia-20200409.html

 

[Chrunch Houston]

Sad times.

 

[Danoff]

Costco is doing a thing where you can get toilet paper in stores (if you're lucky), but not by ordering it online.... uh... shouldn't it be the other way around?

 

[sirjim73]

Costco is doing a thing where you can get toilet paper in stores (if you're lucky), but not by ordering it online.... uh... shouldn't it be the other way around?

In the UK, online deliveries can only serve about 10% of the population max. I'm guessing it's a similar percentage in the US. If the stores are stocked instead, there's more people that have access to them if they need them, I would guess.

 

[GTsail]

Costco is doing a thing where you can get toilet paper in stores (if you're lucky), but not by ordering it online.... uh... shouldn't it be the other way around?

I have noticed that CVS has this same policy for some of its online products as well.

Maybe because of our social distancing, the store's employees are getting lonely and this is a way to find some company for the lonely employees.

Or perhaps CVS figures that once they have you in their store, they will encourage you to buy some junk food or other stuff that you wouldn't have ordered thru their online system.

 

[Famine]

I have noticed that CVS has this same policy for some of its online products as well.

Maybe because of our social distancing, the store's employees are getting lonely and this is a way to find some company for the lonely employees.

Or perhaps CVS figures that once they have you in their store, they will encourage you to buy some junk food or other stuff that you wouldn't have ordered thru their online system.

With CVS you only have to buy one item in store and you get a roll of toilet paper free...

 

[baldgye]

Coronavirus: Doctor who warned prime minister about PPE dies with COVID-19
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-doctor-who-warned-prime-minister-about-ppe-dies-with-covid-19-11971068

 

[PzR Slim]

Seems we aren't being told the truth.

https://bylinetimes.com/2020/04/09/...e-running-as-we-will-all-get-covid-19-anyway/

 

[Famine]

Seems we aren't being told the truth.

https://bylinetimes.com/2020/04/09/...e-running-as-we-will-all-get-covid-19-anyway/

Leaked recordings of a Home Office conference call on Tuesday, exclusively obtained by Byline Times, reveal that the Government has all but given up in its fight against the Coronavirus and is intent on simply finding “a method of managing it within the population”.

The recordings show Home Office Deputy Science Advisor Rupert Shute stating repeatedly that the Government believes “we will all get” COVID-19 eventually. The call further implied that the Government now considers hundreds of thousands of deaths unavoidable over a long-term period consisting of multiple peaks of the disease.

That's incisive journalism and all, but it's about three weeks late.

We're in the "Delay" phase of response, which is the point at which "Containment" has failed and the virus is so prevalent in the population that it's inevitable that an overwhelming majority of people will get it, so we try to delay its spread (hence the name) with quarantines and limitations on movement in order that public services can continue to operate without being overwhelmed by huge numbers of simultaneously sick people.

It's an underpinning principle of the Delay phase that the majority of people will catch the virus.

I doubt we will all get it, but we're certainly talking about millions of cases, if not tens of millions. If we operate on the principle that 80% of cases are never even recorded (due to the mildness of the disease and general reluctance to be tested), then we're already at 375,000 cases in the UK (though at present still only 65% of the way to that magic 0.1% case prevalence figure).

 

[EngieDiesel]

Good advice even when there isn't a pandemic going on, I'd say.

 

[01GTP]

Cathy Newman, is that you?

Is that you, Jordan, Jordan Peterson.

You are talking about having no problem with the health care system in your area, yes?

It's not correct that this was my statement. It is correct that it is apparently not a problem at the moment.

Danoff is in Colorado, and currently, they are not in any danger of running out of beds, ICU beds, or ventilators: https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america/colorado

So we all agree, thank you for clearing that up. 👍

*** Again as in previous posts I'll be using SD as to include social distancing, lockdown and isolation as a whole. ****

According to data from New York, if you could effectively quarantine everyone over 70 years old, you'd cut the death count to less than half. If you could do it for everyone over 50, you'd cut the death count by 93%.

Your link has no mention of quarantining said people, though it does confirm the numbers that you stated, nothing more. It is correct that currently (at time of posted link) 93% of cases are of people over 50.

So Sweden is practicing your/that method of quarantine containment and now has a higher death toll than all the other Scandinavian countries combined. Sweden is not practicing new ways of containing the virus by SD, it's the majority of the world that is using SD. So out of 25,607 Scandinavian cases Sweden has 793 deaths out of a total of 1186 deaths or nearly 67%. Sweden's death/capita equates to .000077517%, the remaining numbers...............00002332% or less than 1/2 in comparison.

Sweden has more than double the deaths (including the death rate/capita) as it's Scandinavian neighbors. That plan is failing in regards to deaths.

UCL study shows that school closures are having little impact on the coronavirus outbreak...

https://www.theguardian.com/educati...-little-impact-on-spread-of-coronavirus-study

From your link........... And like I said before it is not negated.

“We know from previous studies that school closures are likely to have the greatest effect if the virus has low transmissibility and attack rates are higher in children. This is the opposite of Covid-19,” said thereview’s lead author, Prof Russell Viner, of UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health.

“Data on the benefit of school closures in the Covid-19 outbreak is limited but what we know shows that their impact is likely to be only small compared with other infection-control measures such as case isolation and is only effective when other social isolating measures are adhered to.”

Basically closing the schools alone has little impact but with the other practices on limiting the spread of the virus it is effective. As stated the effect is small but it is not negated.
From article

So carry on with the school closings.

#StayhomeStaysafe

EDIT
Treed like a forest,sorry

You're missing my point. A lockdown might save 1,000 lives from coronavirus, and cost 1,000 lives in other ways.

Do you believe that for every life saved during this crisis that a life will be lost? I'm assuming you mainly mean suicide over domestic abuse. Please clarify I want to know more.

I am missing your point along with the rest of the world as I'm sure we would here about suicides during these daily briefings and we are not. Yes officials are helping with mental health issues, but they are not saying anything about suicides, at all.

Social distancing (inc lockdown) is saving lives. In USA alone the health experts are using a max death toll of 2.5 million people. These experts now believe our death toll will be around 60,000 which has been dropping quit a bit in recent days and even from 100,000 a week ago. They say it's due to SD. Yes suicide hot line calls are on the rise but actual suicides are not. According to studies suicides tend to drop during times of high unemployment. During crises like this one the rate doesn't change much either.
Neither employment status nor the interaction between employment status and health status contributed to the difference between the suicide rate before and during the economic crisis after 2008.

I'm sure people will be killing themselves but not 60,000 of them, over this crises. I'm using your 1:1 ratio of 1000 lives saved compared to 1000 lives lost.

I think social distancing has to be working, at least to a degree. I've posted that here before. I'm saying that it's not the only possible thing that could work. I'm also saying that schooling being shut down, which is indeed a part of social distancing, may not be effective enough to warrant its high cost. There are other aspects of social distancing that have high cost (such as restaurant closures) which may have significantly more benefit. Other social distancing may have less. I think schooling being shut, especially elementary schools, has HUGE cost and may be offering minimal benefit. In short, it may be costing more lives than it saves (if that's your utilitarian cost function).

Please see above about SD.

The costs of this crisis and SD are HUGE but the experts believe that the SD is the only way to combat this health/economic crisis. Sweden's approach is proving to be a failure.

I/we should not evaluate what we think is essential (restaurants, etc.) as that is the job of experts at the CDC and so on.

Can you elaborate more on this? I fail to see how kids are spreading it without getting it. From everything I've read, an elementary school is actually a terrible place for the virus to spread, because kids seem to not catch the virus. It's not a wonderful environment for the virus to thrive and spread in. A nursing home, on the otherhand, now that's perfect.

So are you thinking that a kid gets coughed on by a teacher or parent that has it, and then the mucus gets shared with another kid, and then that kid takes the actual mucus home and shares it with their parents? Because that's highly improbable. The virus doesn't live that long on clothing.

That is not at all what I'm thinking. It's often said we catch viruses from other people but really we give them to ourselves. Wash your hands and don't touch your face. We all have heard that.

My thinking is (and you seem to be forgetting (or just didn't mention)) that people are spreading the virus asymptomatically. So little Johnny or Susan could be going to school and spreading the virus because of others at home that don't even know they're infected, and sent Johnny off to school, maybe even of a bus, with other students. Johnny or Susan could be infected by others at school that are spreading the virus asymptomatically and visa-versa. Johnny then goes home, infected but showing no symptoms and has a chance of spreading the virus, especially when he (may) sneeze, cough and/or start touching things like loved ones.
The jury is out on the topic of clothing as research has not been done with this virus/disease. The CDC is recommending to keep an infected person's clothing separate from non infected clothing when you wash it. That might be just being cautious (due to other viruses that were studied) but there are not saying that the infected person's clothing is a none issue, like you are stating.

Children do get the virus, though they are not as badly effected as others, but they still are getting infected. That's a fact, even though data may not support that. Testing is not being done on those age groups as much as others and with them out of school not really needed until schools open, if needed at all.

My opinion is test everybody multiple times during this crisis but as of now we can barely test the infected. Yeah, so unfortunate.

Stop spreading the virus.

Some areas in the world that didn't shut down schools are facing the problem that in those areas a lot are reporting staff shortages (due to sickness) and people just keeping their children out of school. Other areas are keeping schools open for the children of essential workers or other health issues. Around here school meal programs are still feeding children that need it. Home schooling and distance learning is not everywhere but it is being used.
I couldn't imagine trying to keep students at a safe distance from others in a school environment Let's not even go into sports, especially contact sports.

I don't see the HIGH cost you seem to be worried over in just the school aspect of social distancing. You agree SD is working, and schools are part of that.
You agree SD is working, and the health and economic experts praise the SD, as I explained in past posts. Experts agree on this SD kind of containment as stated numerous times over numerous posts.

Gov. Lamont of Connecticut has extended school closings in Connecticut are now until May 20th rather than deciding now to keep schools closed for the remainder of the school year in an effort to keep parents, students and educators engaged in learning. Officials feared that cancelling school for the whole year would lead to students becoming disengaged until a new school year begins in late August. I remember reading skeptics about kicking the can down the road idea, this may shed some light behind those kind of decisions.

He also stated that they are concerned about a second and third wave. He said "we're never going to get this economy going again unless we make sure that we do it on a safe basis, and we don't have a false start which we're worried about.". Gov. Cuomo of New York stated today in his briefing " I don't want the second wave, that's in my, I don't want a second wave, I don't want a third wave, I don't want a one and a half wave , I want this to be it.", so officials are well aware of that effect as well.

Testing is needed to aid in that decision. We now need the tests and staff. Um hello Mr Trump, you're needed.

Sounds like you need to keep yourselves safe. Nobody can isolate you like you can isolate you. Take personal responsibility for this. Don't rely on the rest of the world to keep you healthy.

I believe we all need to keep ourselves safe, don't you agree?

I never rely on anyone else in matters that I can control. It's what I can't control like anyone else's lack of responsibility, especially during a world crisis, that I am concerned about. I'll do my part to help this crisis by staying home and not infecting others, be it a new born or someone who's 98. I can not control what other's do, I can only hope the're educated about the virus enough to understand the severity of this crisis.

The health and economy experts say the cost far outweighs the sacrifice. Well those are actually my words but not my opinion alone.


#StayhomeStaysafe

 

[fortbo]

I still find it odd how many people are oblivious to the fact that if there is a major economic collapse, people will die. Large amounts of them at that. This will happen if we continue to have everything locked down for months. It’s not just a matter of people killing themselves or domestic abuse even though there will certainly be large amounts of that, it is also a fact that many people will become homeless. Many people will starve to death. Many people will get killed because of looting and home invasions. This is why we can’t forget about the economy when having a country locked down. Yes, social distancing is saving lives, but we can’t let it continue to the point where the damage caused by it is worse than the virus itself. There will certainly be a point where the economy needs to open back up whether the virus is gone or not.

 

[Joey D]

Do you believe that for every life saved during this crisis that a life will be lost?

If the financial collapse of 2008 is anything to go by, there is a very good likelihood that the economic crash due to our lockdown will be more deadly. I know I looked this up a few weeks back, but trying to sift through and find it is a bit of hassle. Something like 250,000 people died just due to not having the ability to treat their cancer. This isn't even factoring in other diseases, especially lifestyle diseases, that will ultimately harm a ton of people because they're unable to get the care they need. Yes, you can still get charity care, but there's only so much charity to go around.

My opinion is test everybody multiple times during this crisis but as of now we can barely test the infected. Yeah, so unfortunate.

That's not realistic to do. While some health systems have developed their own tests that significantly reduces the turn around time on the virus, the testing supplies are coming up short. When the whole world needs nasal swabs and whatever is in the liquid they use for testing (I honestly don't know) there's way more demand than supply. It doesn't help that FEMA keeps buying things up and keeping them out of the hands of the hospitals.

 

[Dotini]

Connections in Olympia suggest Governor Inslee may be inclined to lift the lockdown here in Washington somewhere around Memorial Day. He is trying to balance the cost in human life with the cost in economic life, the fulcrum being the voters' shifting opinion of him.

 

[MUSC4EVER]

Haven't been posting much about the supermarket where I work because things are more like what it normally is now.

We have got social distancing lines and stickers and people are mostly adhering to them especially at the tills, we now have to keep a record of every time we wash our hands whilst on shift, we are supposed to wash our hands at least every two hours, we do have gloves which I have worn a few times.

We were given a little bonus over the last two weeks and were given £20 to spend in store today, our manager is due back the week after next and my colleague who had suffered from the virus is now back in work.

I was in today but now have the rest of Easter off...hopefully!

 

[TexRex]

We were given a little bonus over the last two weeks and were given £20 to spend in store today.

It makes me happy to see employers acknowledging the extra work people are having to do just because of the current situation, particularly where there's a high rate of interaction with the public, and then making an effort to show appreciation.

 

[Danoff]

Your link has no mention of quarantining said people, though it does confirm the numbers that you stated, nothing more.

...and that's basically all I stated. If we could isolate them effectively, then we would achieve this great result. It's a big if.

So Sweden is practicing your/that method of quarantine containment and now has a higher death toll than all the other Scandinavian countries combined. Sweden is not practicing new ways of containing the virus by SD, it's the majority of the world that is using SD. So out of 25,607 Scandinavian cases Sweden has 793 deaths out of a total of 1186 deaths or nearly 67%. Sweden's death/capita equates to .000077517%, the remaining numbers...............00002332% or less than 1/2 in comparison.

Sweden has more than double the deaths (including the death rate/capita) as it's Scandinavian neighbors. That plan is failing in regards to deaths.

So you mean it has more death than Norway and Denmark? Because....

Sweden is tracking about like the US in terms of death per capita. Similar to Switzerland, less than Netherlands and France. Obviously less than Italy, Begium, Spain, the UK...

What was your point again?

Do you believe that for every life saved during this crisis that a life will be lost? I'm assuming you mainly mean suicide over domestic abuse. Please clarify I want to know more.

I mean this:

GDP and life expectancy have a huge correlation.

Sweden's approach is proving to be a failure.

Only if ours is. Apparently. But perhaps they're a little better off because they're not facing an economic depression?

I/we should not evaluate what we think is essential (restaurants, etc.) as that is the job of experts at the CDC and so on.

We're in a discussion forum. This is where we discuss whether we think the experts are right. And we know there is a lot of guesswork going on with C19.

My thinking is (and you seem to be forgetting (or just didn't mention)) that people are spreading the virus asymptomatically.

You still have to catch it. Even if you're spreading it asymptomatically, you need to be able to test positive (at least if the test is legit) to be spreading it. In other words, you have to catch it to spread it. Not that you have to have symptoms. All evidence points to the fact that kids are fairly resistant at catching it, therefore an elementary school is not a good place for this disease to be spreading.

If I've missed something, let me know. I don't know everything about disease pathology.

Children do get the virus,

Not at a rate consistent with their population footprint. They get it far less often than other age groups (based on South Korean data, which as far as I know is the best data taken to date).

I couldn't imagine trying to keep students at a safe distance from others in a school environment

Apparently you don't need to. Kids don't catch it very easily (based on SK data). This disease is heavily weighted toward older hosts.

I don't see the HIGH cost you seem to be worried over in just the school aspect of social distancing.

I believe we all need to keep ourselves safe, don't you agree?

We all need to honestly assess how much risk we can take with our particular biological situation. That's tougher to do with C19 than usual, but it is the task we are faced with.

I'll do my part to help this crisis by staying home and not infecting others, be it a new born or someone who's 98. I can not control what other's do, I can only hope the're educated about the virus enough to understand the severity of this crisis.

That's why you need to take personal responsibility for your family's well-being and not leave it up to others. They're not all in your situation. In fact, none of them are. You're the only one dealing with your particular biological exposure to this disease.

I still find it odd how many people are oblivious to the fact that if there is a major economic collapse, people will die. Large amounts of them at that. This will happen if we continue to have everything locked down for months. It’s not just a matter of people killing themselves or domestic abuse even though there will certainly be large amounts of that, it is also a fact that many people will become homeless. Many people will starve to death. Many people will get killed because of looting and home invasions. This is why we can’t forget about the economy when having a country locked down. Yes, social distancing is saving lives, but we can’t let it continue to the point where the damage caused by it is worse than the virus itself. There will certainly be a point where the economy needs to open back up whether the virus is gone or not.

It happens in more subtle ways too. Someone loses a job and some new piece of medical technology fails to get invented. A drug trial gets postponed, a company that was producing life-saving technology goes under, and prices rise. It's a thousand paper cuts.

 

[MUSC4EVER]

It makes me happy to see employers acknowledging the extra work people are having to do just because of the current situation, particularly where there's a high rate of interaction with the public, and then making an effort to show appreciation.

It wasn't much, it was two days pay based off what your contracted hours are, but it was greatly appreciated and people have been losing they jobs because of the virus and the lockdowns so myself and my colleagues are very lucky that we are not in that situation.

 

[FPV MIC]

Costco is doing a thing where you can get toilet paper in stores (if you're lucky), but not by ordering it online.... uh... shouldn't it be the other way around?

We ran into this problem with my parents last week. Both major supermarket chains here have an online ordering and delivery service that's only serving aged pensioners, the disabled and people on mandatory lock down so they can stay safely at home or quarantined, but with no TP available online, my elderly parents can't get toilet paper unless they go to the store anyway. Even more stupid is people having to break quarantine rules just for TP.

These major retailers should be holding back enough stocks for the most vulnerable groups otherwise it's pointless if they're still having to go out.