The coronavirus

mrussel1

Matts3221 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJNB said:

I do not trust any numbers on this virus just yet. How many people have been infected and either did not show signs or symptoms of the virus or did and did not bother to see medical attention? The people that have unfortunately died from this virus are probably all accounted for. Those that have the virus however are not. 

especially when you can be contagious without any symptoms whatsoever. that's kinda scary. 

This to me is the one thing that does scary me a bit , low 40's no health issues that would complicate things , so with that said my worry would be more that I would have it months from now and not realize it thinking it is just a cold and a bunch of old folks die because of it. At least that is were I see this getting scary , it seems under 60 you are pretty much good ( I know some have passed that are younger but much like the flu sometimes you can be totally health get the flu and that is it ) but those over are much more at risk.

Our CEO sent out a company wide email today asking that if you have a cold to please stay home , just in case.

We're deploying an application that allows people to log into from home, into a remote desktop.  So if you're sick, even a little, but don't want to take PTO, you have an option.  

mrussel1

WHO announced that the mortality is at 3.4%

CM189191

mrussel1 said:

WHO announced that the mortality is at 3.4%

WHO announced it won't get fooled again

RunIntoTheRain

CM189191 said:

mrussel1 said:

WHO announced that the mortality is at 3.4%

WHO announced it won't get fooled again

@CM189191 no question, you win the day with that one.

RunIntoTheRain

This is a good site with current numbers of confirmed cases and deaths by country https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

jeffbr

PJNB said:

I do not trust any numbers on this virus just yet. How many people have been infected and either did not show signs or symptoms of the virus or did and did not bother to see medical attention? The people that have unfortunately died from this virus are probably all accounted for. Those that have the virus however are not. 

I don't think we know that quite yet. The latest death in my county (King County, WA) was reported today, but occurred six days ago.
"One of the deaths confirmed Tuesday happened six days ago at Harborview Medical Center, but the coronavirus diagnosis wasn't made until well after the person's death, said Harborview spokesperson Susan Gregg."  https://komonews.com/news/coronavirus/7th-coronavirus-death-reported-in-puget-sound-region  The situation is such that the link shows "7th", but the article has been updated to reflect the 9 known COVID-19 deaths here.

If people didn't fit the age demographic, or show severe symptoms they weren't tested due to the limited number of tests and the time it took to get tests back. Now in my area we can test >200/day, and they expect to get to 1,000/day between the state lab, the UW medical center, and other facilities they're bringing on board. But until this past weekend, testing wasn't really being done for COVID-19 except in extreme cases because there was such limited capacity. 

brianlux

hedonist said:

brianlux said:

hedonist said:

So...common sense shit we’ve heard time and again. 

What shit, Hedonist?  What Oliver said or what I wrote?

I didn’t mean “shit” in a disparaging way...just that these are basic common sense precautions that the reputable organizations have been touting. 

Oh, cool.  Thanks for verifying.   You're talking about good shit! 

brianlux

PJNB said:

I do not trust any numbers on this virus just yet. How many people have been infected and either did not show signs or symptoms of the virus or did and did not bother to see medical attention? The people that have unfortunately died from this virus are probably all accounted for. Those that have the virus however are not. 

Yeah, I agree, PJNB.  It's probably too early to be able to accurately assess the numbers for reasons you mentioned.  I figure, this thing is going to spread, we should take the usual precautions, and I assume most of us will survive this like we did all the other scares.  At least that's my hope. 

Thoughts_Arrive

Panic buying here in my city.
Toilet rolls, tissues, pasta, rice, hand sanitiser are all cleaned off supermarket shelves.

brianlux

Thoughts_Arrive said:

Panic buying here in my city.
Toilet rolls, tissues, pasta, rice, hand sanitiser are all cleaned off supermarket shelves.

That sucks, Thoughts.  I was just reading about that on The Guardian website.  I hope you have enough basics to get by with until things cool off. 

Panic buying has not hit our area yet although had sanitizer is nowhere to be found these days. 

I think the news media- and how people react to it- is driving a lot of people to over-react.  I was in Davis, California yesterday (about and hour and a quarter drive from here) and some people were walking around outside wearing masks.  They were all Asian students near the campus of UC Davis.  I don't know what's up with that but it's really dumb.  These people were walking by themselves, nowhere near anyone else and it was a beautiful day outside.  What were they trying to avoid?  No one else was wearing masks- not in the park we walked around, nor the restaurant where we had lunch, nor anywhere else.  Some people are not thinking clearly. 

Thoughts_Arrive

Thanks Brian.
We have plenty of toilet rolls.

Thoughts_Arrive

People are so stupid.
And Asians are being abused in public here, even if they are not from China.
A fellow student from Malaysia had some guy giving her stupid comments after she sneezed on public transport.

Spiritual_Chaos

Northern Italy is the Joe Biden of swedish Corona. Dominating.

1. Woman in Jönköping who has been to China (31/1)
2. Man in Västra Götaland who has been in northern Italy (26/2)
3. Woman in Uppsala who has been to Germany (27/2)
4. Person in Västra Götaland who has been to Northern Italy (27/2)
5. Person in Västra Götaland who is linked to number 2 (27/2)
6. Person in Västra Götaland who is linked to number 2 (27/2)
7. Woman in Stockholm who has been to Iran (27/2)
8. Man in Jönköping who has been in northern Italy (28/2)
9. Woman in Uppsala who has been to Iran (28/2)
10. Person in Stockholm linked to number 7 (28/2)
11. Person in Stockholm linked to number 7 (28/2)
12. Person in West Götaland who has been to Iran (29/2)
13. Person in Stockholm who is linked to number 7 (29/2)
14. Person in Västra Götaland who is connected to cases in the region (1/3)
15. Person in Stockholm who has been in northern Italy (2/3)
16. Woman in Jönköping who has been in northern Italy together with number 8 (3/3)
17. Person in the Gothenburg area who has been in northern Italy together with 18 and 19. (3/3)
18. Person in the Gothenburg area who has been in northern Italy together with 17 and 19. (3/3)
19. Person in the Gothenburg area who has been in northern Italy together with 17 and 18. (3/3)
20. Person in Skåne who has been in northern Italy. (3/3).
21. Person in Stockholm who has been in northern Italy (3/3)
22. Person in Stockholm who has been in northern Italy (3/3)
23. Person in Stockholm who has been in northern Italy (3/3)
24. Person in Stockholm who has been in northern Italy (3/3)
25. Person in Stockholm who has been in northern Italy (3/3)
26. Person in Stockholm who has been in northern Italy (3/3)
27. Person in Stockholm who has been in northern Italy (3/3)
28. Person in Stockholm who has been in northern Italy (3/3)
29. Person in Stockholm who is related to a person who has been in northern Italy (3/3)
30. Person in Stockholm who has been to Iran (3/3)
31. Person in Västra Götaland who has been to Iran (4/3)
32. Person in Västra Götaland who has been to Northern Italy (4/3)
33. Person in Region Skåne who has been in northern Italy (4/3)
34. Person in Region Värmland who has been in northern Italy (4/3)
35. Person in Region Värmland who has been in northern Italy (4/3)

k63wilson

Hi, Debbie Downer here, think any chance that the MSG or other US shows gets postponed/cancelled b/c of coronavirus?

CM189191

Our entire executive management team is in Las Vegas for a convention this week

Good thing nobody travels through there

I'm looking for another promotion in the near future, maybe this will speed things up

mrussel1

k63wilson said:

Hi, Debbie Downer here, think any chance that the MSG or other US shows gets postponed/cancelled b/c of coronavirus?

I'm worried about Oakland.

mace1229

I think this should be taken seriously. But at the same time I don't understand the hysteria or the need to cancel major events. To me this seems to be played up by nearly every news and public organization. I don't agree that it is deadlier than the flu, it is not.
9 people have died in the US, that is all. There are 120 known cases, so even using 7.5% death rate for US I don't see how that makes it deadlier. Really for 2 reasons.
1) We have no idea if that number is anywhere near accurate. We don't know how many people are undiagnosed, how many are asymptomatic. That number can be off by 10, even 100 times or more. We really just have no idea.
2) Assume those numbers are correct. How is that more deadly? Disease A infects 120 people and 9 die. Disease B infects 18 million people and 18,000 die. Which is more deadly, A or B? I would argue B every single time. Sure, disease A had a higher "death rate," but in no way would I consider it more deadly. 

I'm not saying we shouldn't take it seriously. But just don't see it warranting canceling major events or the hysteria that is starting to pop up. The morning news told me to go to the store and buy a week's worth of food, water and supplies just in case. Seriously? 

dignin

mace1229 said:

I think this should be taken seriously. But at the same time I don't understand the hysteria or the need to cancel major events. To me this seems to be played up by nearly every news and public organization. I don't agree that it is deadlier than the flu, it is not.
9 people have died in the US, that is all. There are 120 known cases, so even using 7.5% death rate for US I don't see how that makes it deadlier. Really for 2 reasons.
1) We have no idea if that number is anywhere near accurate. We don't know how many people are undiagnosed, how many are asymptomatic. That number can be off by 10, even 100 times or more. We really just have no idea.
2) Assume those numbers are correct. How is that more deadly? Disease A infects 120 people and 9 die. Disease B infects 18 million people and 18,000 die. Which is more deadly, A or B? I would argue B every single time. Sure, disease A had a higher "death rate," but in no way would I consider it more deadly. 

I'm not saying we shouldn't take it seriously. But just don't see it warranting canceling major events or the hysteria that is starting to pop up. The morning news told me to go to the store and buy a week's worth of food, water and supplies just in case. Seriously? 

Shouldn't you always have a week's worth of food in your house? I don't think that's hysteria.

And the US is only seeing the start of this so your numbers comparing this to a whole flu season pretty off.

I suggest everyone listen to the professionals.

mace1229

dignin said:

mace1229 said:

I think this should be taken seriously. But at the same time I don't understand the hysteria or the need to cancel major events. To me this seems to be played up by nearly every news and public organization. I don't agree that it is deadlier than the flu, it is not.
9 people have died in the US, that is all. There are 120 known cases, so even using 7.5% death rate for US I don't see how that makes it deadlier. Really for 2 reasons.
1) We have no idea if that number is anywhere near accurate. We don't know how many people are undiagnosed, how many are asymptomatic. That number can be off by 10, even 100 times or more. We really just have no idea.
2) Assume those numbers are correct. How is that more deadly? Disease A infects 120 people and 9 die. Disease B infects 18 million people and 18,000 die. Which is more deadly, A or B? I would argue B every single time. Sure, disease A had a higher "death rate," but in no way would I consider it more deadly. 

I'm not saying we shouldn't take it seriously. But just don't see it warranting canceling major events or the hysteria that is starting to pop up. The morning news told me to go to the store and buy a week's worth of food, water and supplies just in case. Seriously? 

Shouldn't you always have a week's worth of food in your house? I don't think that's hysteria.

And the US is only seeing the start of this so your numbers comparing this to a whole flu season pretty off.

I suggest everyone listen to the professionals.

I agree. That was part of my point though, we just don't know. But even China doesn't have number that compare to the flu. So treating it like its the next plaque also seems excessive. 

Having a regular supply of food and the local news (of a state where we haven't even seen 1 case yet) encouraging people to stock up on toilet paper, wipes, food and bottles water (we've never had an issue with tap water here by the way) seems like 2 completely different things.

I am a professional....just not om this subject. Does that count?

HughFreakingDillon

mace1229 said:

I think this should be taken seriously. But at the same time I don't understand the hysteria or the need to cancel major events. To me this seems to be played up by nearly every news and public organization. I don't agree that it is deadlier than the flu, it is not.
9 people have died in the US, that is all. There are 120 known cases, so even using 7.5% death rate for US I don't see how that makes it deadlier. Really for 2 reasons.
1) We have no idea if that number is anywhere near accurate. We don't know how many people are undiagnosed, how many are asymptomatic. That number can be off by 10, even 100 times or more. We really just have no idea.
2) Assume those numbers are correct. How is that more deadly? Disease A infects 120 people and 9 die. Disease B infects 18 million people and 18,000 die. Which is more deadly, A or B? I would argue B every single time. Sure, disease A had a higher "death rate," but in no way would I consider it more deadly. 

I'm not saying we shouldn't take it seriously. But just don't see it warranting canceling major events or the hysteria that is starting to pop up. The morning news told me to go to the store and buy a week's worth of food, water and supplies just in case. Seriously? 

it IS more deadly. it is at least as contagious, possibly more contagious. the death rate is 20 times higher. 

it's like when people say "don't be afraid of flying, you are more likely to die in car accident than a plane crash". not totally true. sure, i'm in a car several times a day, and a plane once or twice a year. so if you are talking how many times I get in a car vs how many times I get in a plane and take that as your comparison, sure, but that's comparing apples to oranges. so I'm also less likely to die by swallowing sword on fire, since I never do that either.

if all things were equal, the death toll in a plane would be infinitely higher. it's not safer than a car, you just don't travel by plane nearly as much as by car. people rarely survive plane crashes. there are no airplane fender benders. 

this virus is way deadlier than the seasonal flu. does it match the hysteria? not quite. But it's not to be written off as "nothing" quite yet (which you aren't, but others are). 

and that idiot president is making it worse.