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

[McLaren]

Good, because Alex Roy is a monumental d-bag and deserves to be dethroned.

You can already see him & others whining about the record not being "valid" & somehow being more dangerous to the public than his or any other attempts.

 

[Tornado]

Including Jalopnik throwing a fit about how awful it is that they did it now when the roads are mostly empty when they were falling over themselves to say how impressive the previous record was just a few months ago, because of the hospitals.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Was Alex planning on another run? His record has been broken a couple of times since he did it.

 

[TexRex]

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/492525-fauci-at-center-of-conservative-storm

Yet the criticism of Fauci by two conservative lawmakers in a Saturday op-ed and Trump's retweet of a conservative’s call to "#FireFauci" were unmistakable signs that the public health official is coming under pressure from some on the right to be loyal to the president.

Nailed it.

 

[McLaren]

Was Alex planning on another run? His record has been broken a couple of times since he did it.

Doesn't appear so. He released a documentary fairly recently about his run & works in automotive safety now according to him, but you can tell he still references the run as his way to stay relevant in the automotive world.

 

[Joey D]

Trump: It’s my decision, not governors’, to reopen countryhttps://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/13/trump-governors-decision-reopen-183405

*Laughs in 10th Amendment*

 

[Touring Mars]

Revised figures for the last few days show that the UK and the US are both seeing a consistent reduction in the growth rate of new cases.

In fact, the growth rate in both countries has been almost identical for the last 4 days, with both countries now down to nearly 5% growth rate.

Hopefully, this pattern will persist - for reference, Spain had a near identical 4 day period 10 days ago... and now their growth rate is under 2%, and some lockdown restrictions are expected to be lifted this week.

I don't personally think that lifting any restrictions so soon is a good idea just yet... but it will be very interesting to see what happens in Spain and how/if they can keep that growth rate coming down, while re-opening some businesses/workplaces etc.

 

[Submerged]

This is so bizarre.

More context for anyone wondering.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/soc...americans-avoid-guangzhou-after-reports-black

Turns out that it was actually legit: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/wor...94a23aeac8420673fda252&pinned_post_type=share

 

[baldgye]

some lockdown restrictions are expected to be lifted this week.

For the U.K.?
Raab doesn't seem to think so and with France extending their lockdown until May 11th, I’d be surprised if we don’t follow suit

 

[Famine]

For the U.K.?

For Spain:

Hopefully, this pattern will persist - for reference, Spain had a near identical 4 day period 10 days ago... and now their growth rate is under 2%, and some lockdown restrictions are expected to be lifted this week.

Raab doesn't seem to think so and with France extending their lockdown until May 11th, I’d be surprised if we don’t follow suit

Given that there's a two-week lag with COVID-19 figures (generally you don't see the results of an action until two weeks after the action), we'll need to see at least two weeks of not only dwindling growth rate, but a negative growth rate, before we see much shift in lockdown restrictions. That's at least four weeks away, so yes, May 11th or May 18th is the next likely point.

Edit: And don't expect that to be a return to normal. There'll be something in the region of another four weeks before we see restrictions on gatherings eased. Assuming it's not shuffled in the new calendar, the current schedule for the British GP is I think about the earliest we'll see large gatherings again.

 

[sirjim73]

For Spain:


Given that there's a two-week lag with COVID-19 figures (generally you don't see the results of an action until two weeks after the action), we'll need to see at least two weeks of not only dwindling growth rate, but a negative growth rate, before we see much shift in lockdown restrictions. That's at least four weeks away, so yes, May 11th or May 18th is the next likely point.

Edit: And don't expect that to be a return to normal. There'll be something in the region of another four weeks before we see restrictions on gatherings eased. Assuming it's not shuffled in the new calendar, the current schedule for the British GP is I think about the earliest we'll see large gatherings again.

That timescale sounds logical. We are around 2 to 3 weeks behind Italy and Spain it seems in terms of the curve.

Interestingly, if you add the 3 weeks of lockdown so far to 4 weeks before any (albeit minor) change in restrictions and then another 4 weeks before any other change, you basically get to 12 weeks.

Remember, at the start of all this those who were vulnerable were told to stay indoors at all costs for 12 weeks. Which suggests that the timescale so far is bang on in line with the government's/scientists' original modelling projections. And if we continue to follow the pattern in Spain and Italy, that timescale continues to match.

Interestingly, I noted today that the Italian footballers have been indicated to restart training in early May, ready for a potential restart to their season ( presumably around end of May/early June). With the UK lagging behind Italy 2 to 3 weeks, that suggests a possible timetable for end of June for the UK season to restart?

Of course, if the cases go back into too much growth too soon, then all those plans go tits up again...

 

[Danoff]

I was watching a modern movie a few days ago. One of the protagonists got out of her car and quickly went over to greet her friend with a hug. The proceeded to talk to each other about a foot apart, and I instinctively cringed.

I think the world has changed for a lot of people, at least until a vaccine.

 

[Dennisch]

Dutch numbers are dropping fast too. Number of new cases in the hospital went down from 260 last Monday to 147 today. Deaths dropped from 101 to 86. The fears of maxing out the IC capacity have all but disappeared. And as a real bonus, most people seem to understand (finally) that social distancing and staying at home is a must, apart from the idiots who decided to go watch flowers grow in the Bollenstreek (where we grow our flowers). Our "intelligent" lockdown seems to be working. It has also shown that a lot of office jobs can be done from home, removing a lot of people from the streets during peak hours. I hope that companies understand this and do something with it.

I think we should see a slow relaxation of the measures at the start of May.

 

[35mm]

apart from the idiots who decided to go watch flowers grow in the Bollenstreek (where we grow our flowers).

That's nothing!

How does keeping the "kissing the cross" tradition alive sounds?

https://semanariov.pt/2020/04/13/vi...-freiriz-cumpre-tradicao-e-deu-cruz-a-beijar/

In a nursing home, no less!

 

[Dennisch]

That's nothing!

How does keeping the "kissing the cross" tradition alive sounds?

https://semanariov.pt/2020/04/13/vi...-freiriz-cumpre-tradicao-e-deu-cruz-a-beijar/

In a nursing home, no more!

That's even better than only allowing gatherings if they are religious.

 

[01GTP]

We were informed today that a worker at the nursing home (private not state) has tested for corona on April 2nd and her family members at her house have been tested too. No results yet. Not looking for sympathy at all (especially as no patients have shown symptoms) just thought others would like to see how this unravels. No visitors have been allowed since March 5th. This is more about nursing home problems in this pandemic.

You made it about you in order to encourage me to spread a social distancing message and somehow (as if it were possible) practice more social distancing myself. In order to keep your wife safe. And I'm saying that you can never trust others to protect you or your family. Their biology is not yours, their decisions are not yours. Take personal responsibility for your safety and the safety of your family.

Aren't we talking about the same pandemic or are you on a different planet. It's not about me, though as you and I have noted some personal aspects of this pandemic it's really about saving others.

My schools, my city, my state, told me they were shut for 2 weeks, resuming in March... then they moved it to April 17, now it's April 30. So what confidence do I have in this number.

If you tell me "look we're shut till June", I'd already have hired someone and have them working in my house, and I'd be back to full time, not losing vacation, not stringing along my job, and I'd spend the money (and employ someone). The kick the can thing is awful.

We're all working like crazy. Now I'm taking care of kids while trying to work full time. It's more than is sustainable.

I realize it's more than is sustainable on you with work and children as stated. I won't mention other family members, work associates or friends, I don't know your actual work situation, only you do, that is your biological war to fight. Once I heard about Wuhan I stared my biological war then, I prepared my business strategy and personal plans in days of hearing about their lockdown. I knew then this s..t was real. If this lockdown looks to be continued past September I need to implement plan B then. Even if it doesn't I could actually work if I kick everyone off the job site if need be.
We all have regular issues and unless people I know start dying my biggest problem seems to be not going to the track for IMSA and SRO GT World races 5 times this summer. Though today there were a lot of tree falling due to weather. What would be your biggest problem if you lose anyone you know to covid-19, especially a family member?
It's time to save other people's lives.

You actually still don't seem to be taking my point, which is that statistically we can determine some demographics that will make up the bulk of the need in the healthcare system, and should focus on isolating those people instead of what we're doing.

I'm going to try to open my mind, why not, I have a couple months, at least. (SD) is to include social distancing, isolation and lockdown

Isolation,

Spoiler

that is what we're doing now for the people with health risk's, the elderly, and the children. We are using SD too. IMO we should add everyone that smokes too as they are at risk also. There are 20,372,700 people who smoke between the ages of 18 and 64. There are 16 million people in the USA that live with smoking related disease (included in the unhealthy demographic). As of now it's hard to tell out of the 4 million other smokers how many of them are essential workers I don't know, but isolate them. I'm sure someone else can pick up their slack at work. It's a time to help save lives. Lives = $
I didn't include the others (under 18 & over 65) as I'll consider under 18 the children demographic (school kids) and over 65 in the elder demographic. Using more consistent data the number of children under 18 is 75,877,700. Population over 65 is 34,991,753. I won't go into the current African-American (are we all ok with that terminology?) debate but we have to isolate them too, another 34,658,190.

4,000,000 healthy smokers isolated
34,658,190 African Americans isolated


The more people we isolate the less people die, agree? I'm sure I've forgotten some other risky demographics (please critic) but someone will correct me. I have to add school children because as you even said..........

Yea kids are super-spreaders for sure.

Spoiler

According to this, of the more than 105 million adults at higher risk if infected with coronavirus, most, 76.3 million, are age 60 or older. However, the remaining 29.2 million adults in this group are ages 18-59 and are at higher risk if infected due to an underlying medical condition such as heart disease, cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or diabetes.

So add up 105 million unhealthy, 4 million smokers without issues(still at risk), 34.6 million African-Americans. This includes Af-Am ages up to 18 and over 65 and includes those Af-Am that are part of the 105 mil unhealthy demographic. That also aides in raising the isolated numbers (not people) and lowering the death toll. That totals 143.6 million people in isolation. Out of those 143.6 million in isolation 80 million (from above) are not working to begin with. So the remaining 68 million are out a job. Essential unhealthy workers are to be isolated in this exercise. We are isolating the unhealthy demographics. Agree so far?

So far we have.............

63.6 million jobless
105 million unhealthy isolated
4 million smokers healthy isolate
34.6 African American isolated
143.6 million unhealthy isolated which 80 million are not working to begin with, so 63,6000,000 jobless

63.6 million jobless
Using the current unemployment numbers ((I'll use 20 million as bias in this exercise) which is likely those that can't work at home and/or are non essential) I'll deduct that number from the 63.6 mil. We still have 43.6 million unemployed. Do you agree?

43.6 million unemployed in this exercise.

If we were to isolate the over 50 (50 - 65) healthy demographic ((as you mentioned in your link here)

Spoiler

another 108.7 million people and omitting the already accounted for unhealthy above) as well that would be another 63,160,000 people unemployed. 63 mil added to 43.6 mi is 110,600,000 unemployed. 110.6 million unemployed total. Economy crusher for sure. World economy? Let's drop the 50+ demo as that number unemployed is way too high. Still 47.6 million unemployed. Currently the actual number is under 20 million.

43.6 million jobless or 110.6 million if we include the over 50 club.
Currently under 20 million unemployed .


Subtract that (143.6 mil unhealthy) from 331,002,651 people and we get 187,402,651 healthy people not in isolation and with little safety against the virus. If we use a 3% +- average mortality rate of cases (all age demographics) as first predicted (using SD methods)) that would lead to 5,622,079 deaths. We'll cut that in 1/2 as not all people would (?) contract the virus..?? Maybe they will (really no data to go by) maybe not as there is no social distancing or lockdown. Isolation is in effect. That's 2,811,039 deaths.

2.8 million dead.
143.6 million in isolation
43.6 million jobless

2.8 million deaths. Close to the figure of 2.2 million in a worst case scenario with no interaction is what the Federal Government's experts was predicting. Maybe we aren't to far off in this exercise. Good, I think..?? Do you agree?




As been stated kids do spread the virus albeit less than others. It wouldn't be my recommendation but being that school buildings aren't a great place for the corona virus to incubate and spread, read below.

Spoiler

Yes. Children can get it. I believe I said that. But they don't get it nearly in proportion to the rest of the population based on their numbers. In other words, as I said early, an elementary school is not a great place for this virus to spread, because kids don't catch it in proportion to their population footprint. Now before you start saying anything about asymptomatics or presymptomatics... keep in mind what I just said, which had nothing to do with symptoms. They don't contract the virus at the rate that other demographics do.

Maybe we should keep the kids in school and don't let them go home in order to contain the virus at school. It'd take a long time for the virus to run it's course. I can't imagine what pandemonium that would lead to. Kids on a bus are bad enough to control let alone feeding and lodging them 24/7. Cost, ??? I'm sure the Government and/or National Guard could help with that. I still found no information about proportion to their footprint info-data. It must have a different term for it..??

Yes. Children can get it. I believe I said that. But they don't get it nearly in proportion to the rest of the population based on their numbers. In other words, as I said early, an elementary school is not a great place for this virus to spread, because kids don't catch it in proportion to their population footprint. Now before you start saying anything about asymptomatics or presymptomatics... keep in mind what I just said, which had nothing to do with symptoms. They don't contract the virus at the rate that other demographics do.

We are talking about slowing the spread, if they spread it, they spread it. If it were impossible for them to spread the virus, well that's a different story. We should be concerned with overwhelming the HCS .

I will add (subtract) the children demographic to that number above (187.4 million) for a total of 111,524,951 not in isolation. At 1.5% that's a total of 1,672.874 million dead.
Let the kids stay in school and it's 2.8 million dead, stay home and it's 1.67 million.

1.67 million dead with kids in isolation.
2.8 million dead with kids in school.
143.6 million isolated
43.6 million jobless

Isolating children saves 1.14 million people. With 1.67 million deaths the HCS would be @#$%^ let alone over 2.5 million deaths. That's not even counting those that are hospitalized and released. We don't have enough medical supplies either. Currently we're struggling.
People aren't getting the treatment they need (no elective surgery) now and they certainly wouldn't in our exercise. More may die than our exercise shows as the HCS will be overwhelmed. I'm not even going to try to calculate that number. Just more dead bodies.

So far do you agree with this exercise?

In trying to find out how many will be hospitalized I started with the following.........

Spoiler

The overall cumulative hospitalization rate is 12.3 per 100,000 . To my understanding and according to that only 40,713 need hospitalization if I did the math correct. That does not seem correct as 22,109 have died nationwide already. From data....................

Cumulative COVID-19-associated hospitalization rates since March 1, 2020, will be updated weekly. The overall cumulative hospitalization rate is 12.3 per 100,000

Using a population of 331,002,651, I divide that by 100,000 for 3310 and then multiplied that by 12.3 for a total 40,713. If that number is correct it correlates to 1/2 of hospitalized patients dying. As shown that is not correct at all, not even close.
Currently in Connecticut we have 12,035 cases, 1645 currently in hospitals (no recovered) and 554 deaths. Our population is 3.56 million, multiply that by the cumulative hospitalization rate of 12.3 per 100,000 and it totals 439, way short of our dead, not to mention the hospitalized.
Nationwide there are 41,871 recovered cases out of 92,523 hospitalized. Connecticut has no recovery's to date.

Help needed with those figures. I'll have to use a different means. I'll use population numbers and compare CT and the nation.

The nations population is 331,002,651 with 557,663 cases currently. That equates to app .16755%.
The nations # of hospitalized is 92,523, that equates to app .02785%
The count on dead is 23,078 currently.
Connecticut's population 3,563,007 that equates to 5969 cases with 992 deaths. We'll see in time. Certainly more on track than using the cumulative hospitalization rate.
These numbers will rise but it's too much already for this exercise.
In our exercise we have 1.67 million dead (or more w/ kids in school).
Using current hosp/death (92,631 : 23,078) ratio of 4:1 we should expect 6.68 million hospitalizations.
Agree with those numbers?

6.68 million hospitalized and released. How many die to overwhelming the HCS? Why bother, too many dead already.
1.67 million dead with kids in isolation.
2.8 million dead with kids in school.
143.6 million isolated
52 million jobless

These are the totals using isolation methods only, and heightened hygiene. If you are concerned with the current SD methods this should floor you. How much would these conditions strain the economy. Compared to our current situation we'd end up with 32 million more jobless and 1.5 million more deaths. You tell me what the trade off is here.

32 million more jobless
1.5 million more deaths

Here's the paradox as we haven't even put a dollar amount on this yet. To put a monetary amount on the dead would certainly bury us economically. Be that as it may.

Spoiler

A dollar amount that is always used when figuring "is the cost worth it" by economy experts, companies, as you eluded to lawyers and governments etc. use to calculate just that. Is the cost worth the cost of effort? Here our effort is to save 2.2 million people without killing the economy. I have already showed you that economist say it's worth it and at a $3.4 trillion benefit. Again here you go.

So, we decided to run the numbers for a scientific article that’s currently under peer review. And we found, using a figure known as the “value of a statistical life” (VSL), that the value of lives saved through distancing measures exceeds the value of lost GDP by almost $3.4 trillion. In other words, yes, social distancing is “worth it,” also from an economist’s point of view, based on the current information about the economic consequences and disease spread.

This report has a benefit of more than $5 trillion and includes (besides other data) a reduction of infection by 38% using SD. It also includes overwhelming the HCS which currently we are not. It includes future costs, mortality, loss GDP and the shape of recovery which is estimated to be 5 years and so on.

Info.

We are asking is the cost worth it. In order to do that you have to have a dollar amount to start with, yes? That dollar amount (as stated numerous times) is called the VSL. Not a number I made up or the experts either. To not use the VSL is like playing baseball with no baseball.
A good analogy but using 1,000,000,lives/deaths......

One is to assume we save a million lives and value everyone’s life equally. In this case we’ve preserved $9 trillion in value, more than 40 percent of a year’s GDP — before we try tallying all the health-care costs of an uncontrolled pandemic and the suffering we avert among nonfatal cases. Starting with these numbers I suspect it would be very, very difficult to make the costs add up to more than the benefits.

The USA is looking to save twice as many people.

Our exercise net (your choice 1.67 mil (kids home) or 2.8 mil (in school) 1.67 million deaths. multiply that by $10,000,000 and that equates to $16,728.740,000,000, Yes $16.7 trillion.

$16.7 trillion VSL
6.68 million hospitalized and released. How many die to overwhelming the HCS? Why bother, too many dead already. Add 3 mil?
1.67 million dead with kids in isolation.
2.8 million dead with kids in school.
143.6 million isolated
52 million jobless

The USA estimated 2.2 (revised) million deaths to be a worst case scenario using no actions. 2.2 million dead. Last week Trump went on about 100,00 - 250,000 deaths. Now the estimate is as low 60,000, (even lower) yet to be seen. I stated before that to save 2.2 million lives the government (using the VSL) has to figure is it worth it.

That cost is $22 trillion. And 60,000 - 100,000 dead with 20 million jobless
Our exercise, the cost is $16.7 trillion and over 1.67 million dead and 52 million jobless
Kids in school and it's $28 trillion and 2.8 million dead. Agree?

Though a lot of us are sheltering (not isolation) the only ones currently in isolation are in nursing homes and sick at home. I think isolation for international travelers is low at this time. Everyone else is free to take the risk if they choose to leave their house. Isolated currently in nursing homes are 1,7 million. Add 300,000 for others..??

Using SD methods
$22 trillion VSL
250,000 hospitalized and released, currently 93,000
100,000 dead currently 23,622
2 million isolated
22 million jobless

With a monetary gain difference of $6 trillion our exercise caused 1.5 more million deaths, at least (did't add for overwhelming HCS). Also an extra 32 million jobless. 6.68 million hospitalizations as well.

There are a lot of car pictures in this thread.

Maybe if the Trump administration had ended every press conference with a slideshow of Porsches, the whole disaster could have been avoided.

You're words.

Yeah, I guess these are better. Weird of me to put auto pics at a forum called gtplanet. Sham on me.

#StayhomeStaysafe

 

[Sander 001]

• Researchers in China and the US find that the virus that causes Covid-19 can destroy the T cells that are supposed to protect the body from harmful invaders
• One doctor said concern is growing in medical circles that effect could be similar to HIV

https://amp.scmp.com/news/china/soc...argeting-protective?__twitter_impression=true

This was brought to our attention, no idea about this source but

 

[Touring Mars]

Here is the source paper (open access) for the above article...

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41423-020-0424-9

 

[Tired Tyres]

So I've been in two weeks self isolation. I went to work this morning and the boss looks surprised and says we are on lockdown.

Good idea to let me know about that. At some point. In the last two weeks. I said.

Still at least I got a six mile round trip walk out of it and managed to get some much needed shopping done.

 

[Touring Mars]

So I've been in two weeks self isolation. I went to work this morning and the boss looks surprised and says we are on lockdown.

So why was he there??

 

[Tired Tyres]

So why was he there??

Good question. Self made Small businessman. They are a different breed.

 

[Touring Mars]

That timescale sounds logical. We are around 2 to 3 weeks behind Italy and Spain it seems in terms of the curve.

Interestingly, if you add the 3 weeks of lockdown so far to 4 weeks before any (albeit minor) change in restrictions and then another 4 weeks before any other change, you basically get to 12 weeks.

Remember, at the start of all this those who were vulnerable were told to stay indoors at all costs for 12 weeks. Which suggests that the timescale so far is bang on in line with the government's/scientists' original modelling projections. And if we continue to follow the pattern in Spain and Italy, that timescale continues to match.

Interestingly, I noted today that the Italian footballers have been indicated to restart training in early May, ready for a potential restart to their season ( presumably around end of May/early June). With the UK lagging behind Italy 2 to 3 weeks, that suggests a possible timetable for end of June for the UK season to restart?

Of course, if the cases go back into too much growth too soon, then all those plans go tits up again...

Having spoken to various family members, the penny still hasn't completely dropped yet that there could/will be multiple waves of this, even if everything goes to plan.

But.. it is important not to over-emphasise the negatives and to convey such negative news in a way that makes it less painful a prospect.

A second wave is likely but it is also likely/probable that a second wave will be quite different... more data, more information, better preparation, better understanding of the issues etc..

-

In terms of Italy and Spain 'lifting restrictions', I hope they are ready for it. I reckon it is a bit early - they could use a couple more weeks, but then again, if they are prepared in terms of availability of PPE, enforcement of social distancing etc., better protection for medical staff and other key workers etc., then hopefully any second wave could be controlled in a similar manner to how the first was brought under control.

 

[sirjim73]

Having spoken to various family members, the penny still hasn't completely dropped yet that there could/will be multiple waves of this, even if everything goes to plan.

But.. it is important not to over-emphasise the negatives and to convey such negative news in a way that makes it less painful a prospect.

A second wave is likely but it is also likely/probable that a second wave will be quite different... more data, more information, better preparation, better understanding of the issues etc..

-

In terms of Italy and Spain 'lifting restrictions', I hope they are ready for it. I reckon it is a bit early - they could use a couple more weeks, but then again, if they are prepared in terms of availability of PPE, enforcement of social distancing etc., better protection for medical staff and other key workers etc., then hopefully any second wave could be controlled in a similar manner to how the first was brought under control.

I think we're all having conversations with family members along the same lines right now. The difficulty is that they are not mentally able to take a hit like that right now.

Having to stay at home for 12 weeks already, being over 70, the only thing that keeps them going is the thought that it will improve at the end of those 12 weeks. I think they actually have some idea that things will go on longer than that, but the 12 weeks gives them hope.

So, for the moment, they choose to ignore the fact that 12 weeks won't be long enough, because the alternative is just unbearable.

That could be construed as "head in the sand", but I think right now it's just "survival mode" kicking in. When in survival mode you don't think more than a few weeks ahead, you can't. I had a bad time a couple of years ago and can read the signs in others more clearly having been through it myself.

Towards the end of the 12 weeks, is the better time to have that sort of conversation about the longer term, for the older generation/at risk I think. In the meantime, for me it's about being a shoulder to lean on when needed.

 

[Famine]

Having spoken to various family members, the penny still hasn't completely dropped yet that there could/will be multiple waves of this, even if everything goes to plan.

But.. it is important not to over-emphasise the negatives and to convey such negative news in a way that makes it less painful a prospect.

A second wave is likely but it is also likely/probable that a second wave will be quite different... more data, more information, better preparation, better understanding of the issues etc..

-

In terms of Italy and Spain 'lifting restrictions', I hope they are ready for it. I reckon it is a bit early - they could use a couple more weeks, but then again, if they are prepared in terms of availability of PPE, enforcement of social distancing etc., better protection for medical staff and other key workers etc., then hopefully any second wave could be controlled in a similar manner to how the first was brought under control.

I think we're all having conversations with family members along the same lines right now. The difficulty is that they are not mentally able to take a hit like that right now.

Having to stay at home for 12 weeks already, being over 70, the only thing that keeps them going is the thought that it will improve at the end of those 12 weeks. I think they actually have some idea that things will go on longer than that, but the 12 weeks gives them hope.

So, for the moment, they choose to ignore the fact that 12 weeks won't be long enough, because the alternative is just unbearable.

That could be construed as "head in the sand", but I think right now it's just "survival mode" kicking in. When in survival mode you don't think more than a few weeks ahead, you can't. I had a bad time a couple of years ago and can read the signs in others more clearly having been through it myself.

Towards the end of the 12 weeks, is the better time to have that sort of conversation about the longer term, for the older generation/at risk I think. In the meantime, for me it's about being a shoulder to lean on when needed.

The one big thing that seems to be escaping people is that flattening the curve still means that the same number of people die. It's not for the benefit of people, but for the benefit of infrastructure - flattening the curve almost certainly won't save any lives, it'll just make a lot of the deaths less uncomfortable.

Weird of me to put auto pics at a forum called gtplanet. Sham on me.

 

[Blitz24]

Is the fact that there are now reports of re-infections of previously affected COVID-19 patients AND a hotspot in Asia again more evidence that the only cure is a vaccine?

 

[Dotini]

Can viruses come from the sky? Yes.
"Approximately 800 million viruses fall on every square meter of Earth every day."



Viruses have electrical properties.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3474603/

Viruses may be at the foundation of human consciousness.
https://www.livescience.com/61627-ancient-virus-brain.html

According to this article, viruses may be the root of conscious thought, and if they do indeed have consciousness, then they have “free will”. Clearly, the virus demonstrates it when it invades a host, injects its genetic code into the host’s cells, and “hijacks them, turning them to its own purposes”.
https://www.quora.com/Biology-Does-bacteria-or-virus-have-a-free-will-Does-it-have-consciousness

 

[Danoff]

We were informed today that a worker at the nursing home (private not state) has tested for corona on April 2nd and her family members at her house have been tested too. No results yet. Not looking for sympathy at all (especially as no patients have shown symptoms) just thought others would like to see how this unravels. No visitors have been allowed since March 5th. This is more about nursing home problems in this pandemic.



Aren't we talking about the same pandemic or are you on a different planet. It's not about me, though as you and I have noted some personal aspects of this pandemic it's really about saving others.





I realize it's more than is sustainable on you with work and children as stated. I won't mention other family members, work associates or friends, I don't know your actual work situation, only you do, that is your biological war to fight. Once I heard about Wuhan I stared my biological war then, I prepared my business strategy and personal plans in days of hearing about their lockdown. I knew then this s..t was real. If this lockdown looks to be continued past September I need to implement plan B then. Even if it doesn't I could actually work if I kick everyone off the job site if need be.
We all have regular issues and unless people I know start dying my biggest problem seems to be not going to the track for IMSA and SRO GT World races 5 times this summer. Though today there were a lot of tree falling due to weather. What would be your biggest problem if you lose anyone you know to covid-19, especially a family member?
It's time to save other people's lives.



I'm going to try to open my mind, why not, I have a couple months, at least. (SD) is to include social distancing, isolation and lockdown

Isolation,

Spoiler

that is what we're doing now for the people with health risk's, the elderly, and the children. We are using SD too. IMO we should add everyone that smokes too as they are at risk also. There are 20,372,700 people who smoke between the ages of 18 and 64. There are 16 million people in the USA that live with smoking related disease (included in the unhealthy demographic). As of now it's hard to tell out of the 4 million other smokers how many of them are essential workers I don't know, but isolate them. I'm sure someone else can pick up their slack at work. It's a time to help save lives. Lives = $
I didn't include the others (under 18 & over 65) as I'll consider under 18 the children demographic (school kids) and over 65 in the elder demographic. Using more consistent data the number of children under 18 is 75,877,700. Population over 65 is 34,991,753. I won't go into the current African-American (are we all ok with that terminology?) debate but we have to isolate them too, another 34,658,190.

4,000,000 healthy smokers isolated
34,658,190 African Americans isolated


The more people we isolate the less people die, agree? I'm sure I've forgotten some other risky demographics (please critic) but someone will correct me. I have to add school children because as you even said..........

Spoiler

According to this, of the more than 105 million adults at higher risk if infected with coronavirus, most, 76.3 million, are age 60 or older. However, the remaining 29.2 million adults in this group are ages 18-59 and are at higher risk if infected due to an underlying medical condition such as heart disease, cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or diabetes.

So add up 105 million unhealthy, 4 million smokers without issues(still at risk), 34.6 million African-Americans. This includes Af-Am ages up to 18 and over 65 and includes those Af-Am that are part of the 105 mil unhealthy demographic. That also aides in raising the isolated numbers (not people) and lowering the death toll. That totals 143.6 million people in isolation. Out of those 143.6 million in isolation 80 million (from above) are not working to begin with. So the remaining 68 million are out a job. Essential unhealthy workers are to be isolated in this exercise. We are isolating the unhealthy demographics. Agree so far?

So far we have.............

63.6 million jobless
105 million unhealthy isolated
4 million smokers healthy isolate
34.6 African American isolated
143.6 million unhealthy isolated which 80 million are not working to begin with, so 63,6000,000 jobless

63.6 million jobless
Using the current unemployment numbers ((I'll use 20 million as bias in this exercise) which is likely those that can't work at home and/or are non essential) I'll deduct that number from the 63.6 mil. We still have 43.6 million unemployed. Do you agree?

43.6 million unemployed in this exercise.

If we were to isolate the over 50 (50 - 65) healthy demographic ((as you mentioned in your link here)

Spoiler

another 108.7 million people and omitting the already accounted for unhealthy above) as well that would be another 63,160,000 people unemployed. 63 mil added to 43.6 mi is 110,600,000 unemployed. 110.6 million unemployed total. Economy crusher for sure. World economy? Let's drop the 50+ demo as that number unemployed is way too high. Still 47.6 million unemployed. Currently the actual number is under 20 million.

43.6 million jobless or 110.6 million if we include the over 50 club.
Currently under 20 million unemployed .


Subtract that (143.6 mil unhealthy) from 331,002,651 people and we get 187,402,651 healthy people not in isolation and with little safety against the virus. If we use a 3% +- average mortality rate of cases (all age demographics) as first predicted (using SD methods)) that would lead to 5,622,079 deaths. We'll cut that in 1/2 as not all people would (?) contract the virus..?? Maybe they will (really no data to go by) maybe not as there is no social distancing or lockdown. Isolation is in effect. That's 2,811,039 deaths.

2.8 million dead.
143.6 million in isolation
43.6 million jobless

2.8 million deaths. Close to the figure of 2.2 million in a worst case scenario with no interaction is what the Federal Government's experts was predicting. Maybe we aren't to far off in this exercise. Good, I think..?? Do you agree?




As been stated kids do spread the virus albeit less than others. It wouldn't be my recommendation but being that school buildings aren't a great place for the corona virus to incubate and spread, read below.

Spoiler

Maybe we should keep the kids in school and don't let them go home in order to contain the virus at school. It'd take a long time for the virus to run it's course. I can't imagine what pandemonium that would lead to. Kids on a bus are bad enough to control let alone feeding and lodging them 24/7. Cost, ??? I'm sure the Government and/or National Guard could help with that. I still found no information about proportion to their footprint info-data. It must have a different term for it..??



We are talking about slowing the spread, if they spread it, they spread it. If it were impossible for them to spread the virus, well that's a different story. We should be concerned with overwhelming the HCS .

I will add (subtract) the children demographic to that number above (187.4 million) for a total of 111,524,951 not in isolation. At 1.5% that's a total of 1,672.874 million dead.
Let the kids stay in school and it's 2.8 million dead, stay home and it's 1.67 million.

1.67 million dead with kids in isolation.
2.8 million dead with kids in school.
143.6 million isolated
43.6 million jobless

Isolating children saves 1.14 million people. With 1.67 million deaths the HCS would be @#$%^ let alone over 2.5 million deaths. That's not even counting those that are hospitalized and released. We don't have enough medical supplies either. Currently we're struggling.
People aren't getting the treatment they need (no elective surgery) now and they certainly wouldn't in our exercise. More may die than our exercise shows as the HCS will be overwhelmed. I'm not even going to try to calculate that number. Just more dead bodies.

So far do you agree with this exercise?

In trying to find out how many will be hospitalized I started with the following.........

Spoiler

The overall cumulative hospitalization rate is 12.3 per 100,000 . To my understanding and according to that only 40,713 need hospitalization if I did the math correct. That does not seem correct as 22,109 have died nationwide already. From data....................


Using a population of 331,002,651, I divide that by 100,000 for 3310 and then multiplied that by 12.3 for a total 40,713. If that number is correct it correlates to 1/2 of hospitalized patients dying. As shown that is not correct at all, not even close.
Currently in Connecticut we have 12,035 cases, 1645 currently in hospitals (no recovered) and 554 deaths. Our population is 3.56 million, multiply that by the cumulative hospitalization rate of 12.3 per 100,000 and it totals 439, way short of our dead, not to mention the hospitalized.
Nationwide there are 41,871 recovered cases out of 92,523 hospitalized. Connecticut has no recovery's to date.

Help needed with those figures. I'll have to use a different means. I'll use population numbers and compare CT and the nation.

The nations population is 331,002,651 with 557,663 cases currently. That equates to app .16755%.
The nations # of hospitalized is 92,523, that equates to app .02785%
The count on dead is 23,078 currently.
Connecticut's population 3,563,007 that equates to 5969 cases with 992 deaths. We'll see in time. Certainly more on track than using the cumulative hospitalization rate.
These numbers will rise but it's too much already for this exercise.
In our exercise we have 1.67 million dead (or more w/ kids in school).
Using current hosp/death (92,631 : 23,078) ratio of 4:1 we should expect 6.68 million hospitalizations.
Agree with those numbers?

6.68 million hospitalized and released. How many die to overwhelming the HCS? Why bother, too many dead already.
1.67 million dead with kids in isolation.
2.8 million dead with kids in school.
143.6 million isolated
52 million jobless

These are the totals using isolation methods only, and heightened hygiene. If you are concerned with the current SD methods this should floor you. How much would these conditions strain the economy. Compared to our current situation we'd end up with 32 million more jobless and 1.5 million more deaths. You tell me what the trade off is here.

32 million more jobless
1.5 million more deaths

Here's the paradox as we haven't even put a dollar amount on this yet. To put a monetary amount on the dead would certainly bury us economically. Be that as it may.

Spoiler

A dollar amount that is always used when figuring "is the cost worth it" by economy experts, companies, as you eluded to lawyers and governments etc. use to calculate just that. Is the cost worth the cost of effort? Here our effort is to save 2.2 million people without killing the economy. I have already showed you that economist say it's worth it and at a $3.4 trillion benefit. Again here you go.



This report has a benefit of more than $5 trillion and includes (besides other data) a reduction of infection by 38% using SD. It also includes overwhelming the HCS which currently we are not. It includes future costs, mortality, loss GDP and the shape of recovery which is estimated to be 5 years and so on.

Info.

We are asking is the cost worth it. In order to do that you have to have a dollar amount to start with, yes? That dollar amount (as stated numerous times) is called the VSL. Not a number I made up or the experts either. To not use the VSL is like playing baseball with no baseball.
A good analogy but using 1,000,000,lives/deaths......


The USA is looking to save twice as many people.

Our exercise net (your choice 1.67 mil (kids home) or 2.8 mil (in school) 1.67 million deaths. multiply that by $10,000,000 and that equates to $16,728.740,000,000, Yes $16.7 trillion.

$16.7 trillion VSL
6.68 million hospitalized and released. How many die to overwhelming the HCS? Why bother, too many dead already. Add 3 mil?
1.67 million dead with kids in isolation.
2.8 million dead with kids in school.
143.6 million isolated
52 million jobless

The USA estimated 2.2 (revised) million deaths to be a worst case scenario using no actions. 2.2 million dead. Last week Trump went on about 100,00 - 250,000 deaths. Now the estimate is as low 60,000, (even lower) yet to be seen. I stated before that to save 2.2 million lives the government (using the VSL) has to figure is it worth it.

That cost is $22 trillion. And 60,000 - 100,000 dead with 20 million jobless
Our exercise, the cost is $16.7 trillion and over 1.67 million dead and 52 million jobless
Kids in school and it's $28 trillion and 2.8 million dead. Agree?

Though a lot of us are sheltering (not isolation) the only ones currently in isolation are in nursing homes and sick at home. I think isolation for international travelers is low at this time. Everyone else is free to take the risk if they choose to leave their house. Isolated currently in nursing homes are 1,7 million. Add 300,000 for others..??

Using SD methods
$22 trillion VSL
250,000 hospitalized and released, currently 93,000
100,000 dead currently 23,622
2 million isolated
22 million jobless

With a monetary gain difference of $6 trillion our exercise caused 1.5 more million deaths, at least (did't add for overwhelming HCS). Also an extra 32 million jobless. 6.68 million hospitalizations as well.



You're words.

Yeah, I guess these are better. Weird of me to put auto pics at a forum called gtplanet. Sham on me.



View attachment 910147


#StayhomeStaysafe

That was some sloooopy back of the envelope....

Let me just demonstrate how nonsensical this is with the following portion.

So add up 105 million unhealthy, 4 million smokers without issues(still at risk), 34.6 million African-Americans. This includes Af-Am ages up to 18 and over 65 and includes those Af-Am that are part of the 105 mil unhealthy demographic. That also aides in raising the isolated numbers (not people) and lowering the death toll. That totals 143.6 million people in isolation. Out of those 143.6 million in isolation 80 million (from above) are not working to begin with. So the remaining 68 million are out a job. Essential unhealthy workers are to be isolated in this exercise. We are isolating the unhealthy demographics. Agree so far?[/SPOILER]
So far we have.............

63.6 million jobless
105 million unhealthy isolated
4 million smokers healthy isolate
34.6 African American isolated
143.6 million unhealthy isolated which 80 million are not working to begin with, so 63,6000,000 jobless

How on earth are you assuming that everyone isolated is out of a job? I'm supposed to be isolated (along with everyone in the state of Colorado and everyone in just about every other state) except for "essential" activities. But none of those essential activities include me going to work. If you eliminate that part (and I have, because it costs like a few bucks a week to do it) that doesn't help me work.

So using your math, we could take the entire employed population of Colorado (or any state under stay-at-home), and say that all of them who are not considered "essential workers" today are out of a job. That'd be more than just the unhealthy population, smokers, and for some reason you include black people.

So... your jobless numbers are nonsense.

Also, how much of your demographics overlap? You admit that they do, and then add them together anyway. Which is phenomenally sloppy. Here's your only real argument:

According to this, of the more than 105 million adults at higher risk if infected with coronavirus, most, 76.3 million, are age 60 or older. However, the remaining 29.2 million adults in this group are ages 18-59 and are at higher risk if infected due to an underlying medical condition such as heart disease, cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or diabetes.

The rest of that your post appears to be nonsensical. This figure presumably includes African Americans, and accounts for health issues caused by smoking. So you have 29.2 million adults who are aged 18-59 that you're worried about losing their jobs. Right now we have stay-at-home orders for a huge portion of the country, but you're suddenly worried about jobs when we're talking about 29.2 million people. So how many of them would lose their jobs right now in isolation? Well, less than the number of people losing their jobs right now regardless. How many of those 29.2 million actually work? And let's consider for a moment what the alternative is, to send those people into public, to their jobs, and expose them right? I thought you wanted to save lives...

Also, I didn't say anything about forcing them to isolate.

 

[Touring Mars]

The one big thing that seems to be escaping people is that flattening the curve still means that the same number of people die. It's not for the benefit of people, but for the benefit of infrastructure - flattening the curve almost certainly won't save any lives, it'll just make a lot of the deaths less uncomfortable.

I mostly agree, except that I think that flattening the curve will save lives... it just won't change the number of people who get infected.

But the more the curve is flattened, the more people who need serious treatment will get it (i.e. saving lives) plus the less damage will be done to non-COVID related patients who require healthcare (which is already a problem...).

Also, with a bit of luck, we won't have to rely on the virus itself generating herd immunity (which would entail ca. 70% of the entire country/world getting the virus), but that a vaccine will be available long before that... and that is only possible if we flatten the curve too i.e. if a vaccine becomes available when, say, only 20-30% of the population have been infected.

 

[Famine]

**** me:



(I hope that "Legit.ng" is a spoof news site, but it looks genuine)

 

[Daz555]

Is the fact that there are now reports of re-infections of previously affected COVID-19 patients AND a hotspot in Asia again more evidence that the only cure is a vaccine?

People getting reinfected means a vaccine is less likely to be developed. The news that this virus may be damaging T-cells combined with other news of significant numbers of recovered people having little to no antibodies is extremely worrying.

Too early to call but a highly infectious, T-cell damaging virus that can be contracted again after recovery is just about the worse possible outcome for all of this.

I remain hopeful that this is not the case and that science will find us the answers and the treatment strategy we need.