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

  • Thread starter baldgye
  • 13,264 comments
  • 591,585 views
who will take the Honor of first GT Planet user with Covid-19?

If someone actually does please explain the experience.

Can't say that I have it, but I might just be the closest member to a known infected patient! The CDC has moved one of the Diamond Cruise ship patients to a hospital just a mile from my house, in San Rafael.
 
Can't say that I have it, but I might just be the closest member to a known infected patient! The CDC has moved one of the Diamond Cruise ship patients to a hospital just a mile from my house, in San Rafael.

Run over there and start kissing people so that you can win the GTP internet cookies. :P
 
38% of Americans are idiots.

That number is way off lol
Indeed - such as ones who take headlines at face value with zero examination.

My first thought is why "under any circumstances" is in quotes, but "because of the coronavirus" is not. My second is "what's the sample size, and who did you ask?".

The second thought has an answer fortunately:

5W Public Relations, one of the top 15 independently-owned PR agencies in the U.S., has conducted a survey via phone of 737 American beer drinkers over the age of 21 on February 25 & 26, 2020, regarding their opinions about the popular Mexican beer brand, Corona, as a result of the deadly coronavirus that's spreading around the world.

According to SEMrush, a trends data provider, and multiple media reports, there has been a consistent uptick in searches for "corona beer virus" and "beer coronavirus" over the past few weeks.

5WPR's survey found that:
* 38% of beer-drinking Americans would not buy Corona under any circumstances now
* Among those who said they usually drink Corona, only 4% said they would stop drinking Corona, but 14% said they wouldn't order Corona in a public venue
* 16% of beer drinking Americans were confused about whether Corona beer is related to the coronavirus
So 125 million people won't buy Corona beer under any circumstances because of the coronavirus, based on 280 beer drinkers saying they won't buy Corona beer under any circumstances "now" in a phone interview of which we're not party to the actual question?

"Among those who said they usually drink Corona" isn't quantified, so we don't know how many that 4% who said they'd stop is, nor how many that 14% who wouldn't order it in public is. Meanwhile 118 people are confused about whether Corona beer and coronavirus are related. Of those who aren't confused, how many are sure that they are related?


Terrible survey with terrible methodology, badly recorded at source, and badly reported by junk journalists trying to sell a clickbait headline to people who want to feel superior.
 
@Joey D As our resident Overlanding-adjacent member, is that community getting excited? I feel like there is a definite prepper element to that whole scene.

Some are, but the overlanding community is weird since it brings together people from all walks of life and vastly different mindsets.

The ones that are anticipating some sort of global apocalypse are sort of verging on a bit extreme. One guy here in Utah that posts in a group I'm still apart of has outfitted his early 2000's Tacoma with tens of thousands of dollars worth of crap because he's certain he's going to need to live in the desert for months. He has water tanks, an onboard water filtration system, a long-range fuel tank, countless dodads strapped to a bed rack, and the most expensive rooftop tent I've ever seen. Most guys I know that still overland are pretty much wondering if they'll be able to keep their beer cold if they have to go off the grid.

The weirdest of the bunch are those stockpiling ammunition over everything else, it's like are you going to murder the virus to death or what? I get wanting to defend yourself if society breaks down, but I feel like your pretty paranoid if you think CoV-19 is going to collapse society to the point where you're going to have to go to war with your neighbors.

It seems like if you really want to prep for a pending plague, you should probably buy some electrolyte solution and Tylenol since those are going to be the two things you need if you get sick. If you stay hydrated and use Tylenol to manage the fever, you'll probably be ok. If you happen to be asthmatic, you'll probably want some extra albuterol on hand as well.

If I still had my truck, I don't think I'd bother doing anything different or buying anything over what I already had. I still have a bag of stuff that I used to take with me in case I broke down far away from anything. It consisted of a first aid kit, a Life Straw for drinking water, a couple of pairs of socks, a space blanket, a knife, a flint/steel, and a small fishing tackle set. I figured I could probably survive long enough with that stuff and I think I could still probably survive with it today.
 
Can we get someone like Joey in front of the media cameras and share with everyone how you’re going to feel if you do somehow catch the virus? It seems our media barely even acknowledges that people have fully recovered from the virus.
 
Can we get someone like Joey in front of the media cameras and share with everyone how you’re going to feel if you do somehow catch the virus? It seems our media barely even acknowledges that people have fully recovered from the virus.

But panic sells.
 
Can we get someone like Joey in front of the media cameras and share with everyone how you’re going to feel if you do somehow catch the virus? It seems our media barely even acknowledges that people have fully recovered from the virus.

The whole thing is really not helping the media credibility problem.
 
Saw a news headline that it's predicted that 10% of the UK will end up hospitalised and 70% infected. I'm don't even think that happened during the Black Death so I think not...
 
Sorry I'm pretty gullible about how the other side of the world deal with this virus after watching the mock training video from China the other day :lol:



I assume you mean "skeptical", rather than "gullible"?

The whole process would go much quicker in the US, as the SWAT team would likely just shoot the person at the first sign of non-compliance. :ouch:
 
The death rate is increasing it's nearly 3.5%(3.417%)
I saw this death rate per age (data from China) a few hours ago on TV:
upload_2020-2-29_2-35-36.png
 
I'm curious how accurate the mortality rate is. With CoV-19 being relatively new, it's hard to say how many people have it or had it with relatively mild symptoms. They could've easily assumed it was a cold or the flu and spent a few days in bed before getting back to their daily lives. So really the mortality rate is 3.5% for the percentage of the population that reported the illness. The same thing happened with the H1N1 outbreak in 2009. The CDC reported something like 43,000 cases but it was assumed to be significantly underreported. This all goes back into the whole fearmongering thing the media is pushing because 3.5% sounds scarier than 0.9% or whatever the real number might be.

Also, I don't believe any numbers coming out of China. My guess is that way more people contracted the virus than its official numbers are saying. I think it was probably prevalent prior to December but just not known or misdiagnosed as something else.
 
I'm curious how accurate the mortality rate is. With CoV-19 being relatively new, it's hard to say how many people have it or had it with relatively mild symptoms. They could've easily assumed it was a cold or the flu and spent a few days in bed before getting back to their daily lives. So really the mortality rate is 3.5% for the percentage of the population that reported the illness. The same thing happened with the H1N1 outbreak in 2009. The CDC reported something like 43,000 cases but it was assumed to be significantly underreported. This all goes back into the whole fearmongering thing the media is pushing because 3.5% sounds scarier than 0.9% or whatever the real number might be.

Also, I don't believe any numbers coming out of China. My guess is that way more people contracted the virus than its official numbers are saying. I think it was probably prevalent prior to December but just not known or misdiagnosed as something else.
The mortality rate for any given strain of a virus is an inherently uncertain number - esp. in the early stages of an epidemic/pandemic.

But 'official' figures can only report on confirmed cases - it is well understood that the 'real' number of infections is probably much, much higher. But you seem to be implying that this makes the reported mortality rate figures much higher than they really are, but fail to point out that the official figures are based only on confirmed cases and known deaths. If, as you suspect, there are actually far more cases of infection than have currently been confirmed (as is almost certainly the case), then that means there is very likely far more deaths that can be attributed to the virus as well, but you seem to ignore that second bit in favour of the hypothesis that the media would rather report a higher number because they like fear-mongering.

I would stick to the scientific literature on the subject. The mortality rate of the virus thus far from all known infections and related deaths is estimated to be around 2%, but that percentage varies significantly depending on age and pre-existing health conditions.
 
The mortality rate for any given strain of a virus is an inherently uncertain number - esp. in the early stages of an epidemic/pandemic.

But 'official' figures can only report on confirmed cases - it is well understood that the 'real' number of infections is probably much, much higher. But you seem to be implying that this makes the reported mortality rate figures much higher than they really are, but fail to point out that the official figures are based only on confirmed cases and known deaths. If, as you suspect, there are actually far more cases of infection than have currently been confirmed (as is almost certainly the case), then that means there is very likely far more deaths that can be attributed to the virus as well, but you seem to ignore that second bit in favour of the hypothesis that the media would rather report a higher number because they like fear-mongering.

I would stick to the scientific literature on the subject. The mortality rate of the virus thus far from all known infections and related deaths is estimated to be around 2%, but that percentage varies significantly depending on age and pre-existing health conditions.
Just like with the 2009 swine flu the deaths could be attributed to other complications arising aside the infection. Official figures for 2009 swine flu is around 14k deaths but some estimates put the figure at 300k when the main cause of death was something else than the flu but it was a contributing factor.
 
The media coverage of this thing is far more lethal the disease itself. **** I’m tired of hearing about it.
I mean, it really depends on what it is you read.
Most of the coverage I've read has been fairly matter of fact and most articles featured extensive explanations of what the symptoms are and what to do if you where worried you had caught it and what the chances are, what to do if you'd recently travelled to infected areas etc... I'm talking; BBC News, Sky News, The Guardian, The Independent, The FT, Reuters etc... if you look for nonsense you'll find it, as you will with almost anything.
 
Back