Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Lurker

New numbers(c19)

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, red blades said:

Some of you may recognize this - my daughter home from college sees me somewhat obsessively checking up on the latest COVID 19 stats, comparing charts and graphs, and asks, "Is this what guys do now that there are no sports or sports stats to analyze?"

I have to admit in my own case - it does seem she has a point.

 

I work in sports...planning, scheduling, updating, operations...

So yeah I guess your daughter makes and excellent point. Work is a little slow right now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/19/2020 at 3:27 PM, vegetable lasagna said:

U.S. flu season (Oct 1, 2019 thru March 7, 2020): 36 to 51 Million flu illnesses, 17 to 24 Million flu medical visits, 370,000 to 670,000 flu hospitalizations, 22,000 to 55,000 flu deaths (Because influenza surveillance does not capture all cases of flu that occur in the U.S., CDC provides these estimated ranges to better reflect the larger burden of influenza.)

The impact, in terms of illnesses and deaths, of the flu is much greater than CV19. More people have died from flu in the U.S. this season than have died worldwide from CV19. Why don't we take these extreme measures every year to contain the flu?

Hopefully you have changed your mind on this take. But if not, you mentioned 22k-55k deaths from the flu. Many epidemiologist have suggested if we don’t take drastic steps we could easily have 2 million deaths in the USA from Coronavirus. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/19/2020 at 3:27 PM, vegetable lasagna said:

U.S. flu season (Oct 1, 2019 thru March 7, 2020): 36 to 51 Million flu illnesses, 17 to 24 Million flu medical visits, 370,000 to 670,000 flu hospitalizations, 22,000 to 55,000 flu deaths (Because influenza surveillance does not capture all cases of flu that occur in the U.S., CDC provides these estimated ranges to better reflect the larger burden of influenza.)

The impact, in terms of illnesses and deaths, of the flu is much greater than CV19. More people have died from flu in the U.S. this season than have died worldwide from CV19. Why don't we take these extreme measures every year to contain the flu?

Ironically on the day you wrote this post, covid took over the flu in world deaths per day. It has continued to rise in those four days to the point that yesterday, covid killed twice as many people worldwide as the flu. And that’s WITH these measures in place. Hopefully you are starting to realize what the really smart people who deal with this for a living have been saying for weeks. Basing your decisions for this virus on the common flu is very, very dangerous. 

Edited by Lurker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, ugarte said:

if elon musk said it there's literally no reason to trust it. the point of that article is "elon musk wanted to see his name in the newspaper again."  chorloquine (and hydrochloriquine) paired with an antibacterial are not novel suggestions and worth investigating but also have known serious side effects and dangers. naturally, people WITH CERTAIN PERSONALITIES AND A HIGH PROFILE have decided to tweet that Americans should be turned into a massive experimental study .

on the other hand, virologists at Pitt appear to have been doing interesting stuff.

I don’t care for Musk but this is also a path which Stanford Medical School is on so I’m not as negative as you on it. https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTi-g18ftNZUMRAj2SwRPodtscFio7bJ7GdNgbJAGbdfF67WuRJB3ZsidgpidB2eocFHAVjIL-7deJ7/pub

Edited by wrestlingnerd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, red blades said:

Some of you may recognize this - my daughter home from college sees me somewhat obsessively checking up on the latest COVID 19 stats, comparing charts and graphs, and asks, "Is this what guys do now that there are no sports or sports stats to analyze?"

I have to admit in my own case - it does seem she has a point.

 

Redblades, keep doing what you’re doing. That’s what a caring Dad does for his family under any difficult situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Regulator said:

Hopefully you have changed your mind on this take. But if not, you mentioned 22k-55k deaths from the flu. Many epidemiologist have suggested if we don’t take drastic steps we could easily have 2 million deaths in the USA from Coronavirus. 

This virus - which IS accelerating is one thing, but what this has and will continue to do to the economy and peoples life savings is a whole another ball game. Many of these companies that have shut down may not open back up. What will happen to those employees? Add to this the amount of people who have no savings to get them by.  What about them? Who is going to pay their rent, mortgage, utilities, etc? I once heard a stat that 60% of the nation does not have a $1000 in their savings account in case of an emergency. Those who doubt the severity of this situation will soon be on the same page. There will be no other choice.

Edited by Marcus Cisero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Marcus Cisero said:

This virus - which IS accelerating is one thing, but what this has and will continue to do to the economy and peoples life savings is a whole another ball game. Many of these companies that have shut down may not open back up. What will happen to those employees? Add to this the amount of people who have no savings to get them by.  What about them? Who is going to pay their rent, mortgage, utilities, etc? I once heard a stat that 60% of the nation does not have a $1000 in their savings account in case of an emergency. Those who doubt the severity of this situation will soon be on the same page. There will be no other choice.

I don’t disagree with your take. I’m referencing him saying the flu kills more people and not taking Covid19 more serious. 
 

But I would add if people don’t stay home while healthy. People will all get sick and be home or in the hospital at the same time being sick. Which would do the same thing to the economy but have far worse outcomes for those needing hospitalization. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Marcus Cisero said:

This virus is one thing, but what this has and will continue to do to the economy and peoples life savings is a whole another ball game. Many of these companies that have shut down may not open back up. What will happen to those employees? Add to this the amount of people who have no savings to get them by.  What about them? Who is going to pay their rent, mortgage, utilities, etc? I once heard a stat that 60% of the nation does not have a $1000 in their savings account in case of an emergency. Those who doubt the severity of this situation will soon be on the same page. There will be no other choice.

You're right, there's a huge economic cost to prevention but it would be far worse if c19 were left uncontrolled and the pandemic ran wild. That would fully thrust global markets into a depression. IMO the mitigation measures are there to prevent healthcare systems from being overwhelmed and collapsing (and so that contact tracing can be employed effectively), and to buy time until there's solid medical intervention. There was going to be an economic impact no matter what, it's all about minimizing the damage without risking public safety, even though the costs may not seem so minimal. That's where economic stim comes in. Our government can stimulate demand and employment by making changes to monetary policy, quantitative easing, providing disposable income to consumers, heck our administration could even reestablish a New Deal style WPA and put people to work on infrastructure and other much needed projects while softening the financial blow to everyday folks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Regulator said:

I don’t disagree with your take. I’m referencing him saying the flu kills more people and not taking Covid19 more serious. 
 

But I would add if people don’t stay home while healthy. People will all get sick and be home or in the hospital at the same time being sick. Which would do the same thing to the economy but have far worse outcomes for those needing hospitalization. 

Listen, I have very strong feelings about this virus - I just did not want to come off like an alarmist here. We have family in NY, my brother in particular, who drives a truck back and forth throughout Long Island where there are currently 1400 cases and multiple deaths. My 86 yr old Mom and I here in PA are more and more fearful with each passing day, and I’ll just leave at that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, pamela said:

This online tool pairs well with @Lurker’s numbers updates. It lets you click on a state then predictively models the point of no return moment for different actions (e.g., social distancing, shelter in place, doing nothing) before the c19 case curve moves past the point of hospital overload. For some places, that moment has already passed:

https://covidactnow.org/

 

(also FYI for @shieldofpistis)

Pamela, thank you.  I looked at my state and it had overload if nothing was done and if social distancing....and it seemed that social distancing would slow it down but we would still run out of hospital beds. 

Is the only way to drastically reduce having people stay at homes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, shieldofpistis said:

Pamela, thank you.  I looked at my state and it had overload if nothing was done and if social distancing....and it seemed that social distancing would slow it down but we would still run out of hospital beds. 

Is the only way to drastically reduce having people stay at homes?

I don't have any expertise at all in this, but IMO the distancing and sheltering seem to be our best option at the moment until more testing and testing infrastructure is available and a treatment is ready.

The reason why SARS, another type of Coronavirus, was halted so quickly without these measures was because many of its viral characteristics (overt symptoms, short incubation period, straightforward social footprint, interruptable transmission path) played right into the hands of those trying to stop it. Basically, it was easy to identify who had SARS and the way it was spread and the virus' lifespan outside the host was limited. Unfortunately C19 isn't like that, which is why it has been so difficult to get a handle on how to stop its spread.

If you're looking for something interesting to read while sheltering-in, check out Viruses: A Very Short Introduction (Dorothy Crawford) and Pandemics: A Very Short Introduction (Christian McMillen). Both are very informative, and there are links on both of those pages to online bookstores and libraries in your area that carry the book or ebook.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shieldofpistis said:

Is the only way to drastically reduce having people stay at homes?

Yes. We are past the point where containment is possible. Too many people have it now to track it with testing along. Many people will get corona virus; we just need to try to spread it out over time.

Edited by russelscout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to suppress Covid-19 without testing in masse is like fighting a wildfire and not knowing where it’s at; everyone ends up getting wet. So yes, this is our only option until testing improves.

Edited by Force118

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, wrestlingnerd said:

I don’t care for Musk but this is also a path which Stanford Medical School is on so I’m not as negative as you on it. https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTi-g18ftNZUMRAj2SwRPodtscFio7bJ7GdNgbJAGbdfF67WuRJB3ZsidgpidB2eocFHAVjIL-7deJ7/pub

i'm not negative on the research. i'm negative on people with massive megaphones getting ahead of the research. there are pharmacies running short because rich people who aren't sick are hoarding chloroquine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ugarte said:

i'm not negative on the research. i'm negative on people with massive megaphones getting ahead of the research. there are pharmacies running short because rich people who aren't sick are hoarding chloroquine.

Except you said there is literally no reason to trust it. Maybe it's a hoax, maybe not, but evidence so far is highly supportive of further research and trial. The point of my post was not that it was promising because Musk thought so. I googled the drug name and clipped the first link that came up with the Stanford research on it (which was on Musk's tweet). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They’re running a clinical trial on hydroxychloroquine, just like they are on a number of other repurposed drugs. There isn’t any reliable clinical data yet that supports the use of any of these compounds, but there are a number that have the potential to have some efficacy-which is why they are running the trials. It’s pointless to speculate about what may or may not work until we see the results from the trials. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Billyhoyle said:

They’re running a clinical trial on hydroxychloroquine, just like they are on a number of other repurposed drugs. There isn’t any reliable clinical data yet that supports the use of any of these compounds, but there are a number that have the potential to have some efficacy-which is why they are running the trials. It’s pointless to speculate about what may or may not work until we see the results from the trials. 

that's all i'm saying. thanks billy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is also a run on it nationwide and many of us need it for autoimmune conditions which it is known to work for. It’s now almost impossible to get. Maybe they should figure out if it actually works for covid-19 before hoarding it.

Edited by Force118

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, ugarte said:

that's all i'm saying. thanks billy.

I don't have it out for you but you changed your tune pretty quickly. There is a difference between "promising" and ready for FDA approval. Nobody said anything was ready for mass distribution. Whether something is promising is subjective. Whether it passes clinical trials is not. We were discussing the former, not the latter, so to suggest that something has no merit and cannot be trusted just because a guy you dislike tweeted about it is totally missing the point. There is obviously some merit to the drug's potential to help or it wouldn't be seriously researched by credible doctors and scientists with finite resources under intense time pressure.

Edited by wrestlingnerd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion the most promising drugs currently in trial are remdesivir to be broadly used and anti IL-6 mAbs to be used in the subset of patients suffering from cytokine release syndrome (aka cytokine storm). I think the drug that will eventually prove most effective is the mAb pair in development by Regeneron that specifically targets the virus (will enter clinical trials in June). The entire pandemic will end completely though with the introduction of a vaccine in 12 to 24 months. 

 

The people hoarding hydroxychloroquine are in my opinion absolutely idiotic and cruel, since some people rely on it for indications for which it has shown efficacy. And the risks of taking the drug at this point probably aren’t worth it until efficacy is proven given the low mortality rate of covid. In other words, if you expect 5 deaths per 1000 patients with covid, I’d be very hesitant to take a drug with the side effects of hydroxychloroquine prior to seeing the clinical data. It is probably worth administering to those who are almost out of options though, which is how I think it is presently being applied. Definitely not first line yet though, that’s for sure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since we're speculating, I also want to throw out the possibility that post-April, warmer and more humid weather, as opposed to drugs or policy, will be the biggest help to tame the spread. It's of course possible that the virus is at such a point past containment by then that the effect will be about the same either way, but there is some credible research that supports cold and dry weather seasonality of respiratory infections caused by viruses, especially coronaviruses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wrestlingnerd said:

Since we're speculating, I also want to throw out the possibility that post-April, warmer and more humid weather, as opposed to drugs or policy, will be the biggest help to tame the spread. It's of course possible that the virus is at such a point past containment by then that the effect will be about the same either way, but there is some credible research that supports cold and dry weather seasonality of respiratory infections caused by viruses, especially coronaviruses. 

It should definitely help some, but I hope people won’t be dumb enough to let their guards down because of it. Otherwise it will be back with a fury in September. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wrestlingnerd said:

I don't have it out for you but you changed your tune pretty quickly. There is a difference between "promising" and ready for FDA approval. Nobody said anything was ready for mass distribution. Whether something is promising is subjective. Whether it passes clinical trials is not. We were discussing the former, not the latter, so to suggest that something has no merit and cannot be trusted just because a guy you dislike tweeted about it is totally missing the point. There is obviously some merit to the drug's potential to help or it wouldn't be seriously researched by credible doctors and scientists with finite resources under intense time pressure.

what we disagree on is the merits of a loudmouth promoting cures before they're cures. the adults are doing the work of science. that's not what musk's tweet was. I don't know why you think I'm saying, or have been saying anything other than that. I'm sorry if I insulted your car or something. 

Edited by ugarte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, ugarte said:

what we disagree on is the merits of a loudmouth promoting cures before they're cures. the adults are doing the work of science. that's not what musk's tweet was. I don't know why you think I'm saying, or have been saying anything other than that. I'm sorry if I insulted your car or something. 

I don't have a car. I don't care for either Tesla or Musk. I already explained that, but for a lawyer, your reading comp needs some work. That reading comp deficiency applies to your own writing, by the way, since you said that nothing Musk says, including that tweet, can ever be trusted. He may have had ulterior motives for sharing the research which wasn't even his, I have no idea, nor do I really care. The point of referencing his tweet was that it linked that specific research doc before Google took it down for whatever reason. NOT Musk. The research he linked was interesting. ALL I SAID was that the drug has potential. That was a lightly informed opinion, like that of anyone else's here since I'm assuming nobody here is literally working at the labs doing the research. Can you chill now? Isn't it past midnight in NYC? For a guy accusing me of having loyalty to Musk, it is you who clearly appears to have some emotional connection to him, not me. I couldn't care less about Musk or anything he does or says, but you clearly do. At least he's trying to help produce respirators now. He can't be that bad a guy, right?

Edited by wrestlingnerd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...