The coronavirus

bbiggs

pjl44 said:

bbiggs said:

Osterholm again predicting that 60-70% of the entire planet gets infected with Covid-19.  I'd much rather be in the 30-40% camp, but ominous predictions like this really make me wonder if all of this effort is simply prolonging the inevitable. 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/health/health-news/covid-19-expert-coronavirus-will-rage-until-it-infects-everybody-it-possibly-can/ar-BB13VCoX?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp

Vaccine(s) and/or highly effective treatment(s) are, I think, the biggest wildcards in this whole thing. If we wind up with one or both by the fall, the low end looks like reality and we'll feel pretty great about lockdown efforts. If we're looking back 18 months from now and neither materialized, we're probably looking at the higher end and wondering if we ultimately would have been better off accepting more risk. This is what drives me nuts about people angrily arguing for a particular approach - each one comes with risk and trade-offs. I don't see an objectively correct (or even most likely correct) path.

I could not agree more.  I certainly understand, and support, the need for the initial lockdowns to prevent overwhelming the healthcare system.  The harsh reality is that we cannot keep the economy locked down for much longer.  It is simply unsustainable.  If this thing continues to decimate the global population for 12-18 months, we're going to need to open up and simply accept the risk.  No one knows the right answer.  I certainly don't. 

FiveBelow

bbiggs said:

pjl44 said:

bbiggs said:

Osterholm again predicting that 60-70% of the entire planet gets infected with Covid-19.  I'd much rather be in the 30-40% camp, but ominous predictions like this really make me wonder if all of this effort is simply prolonging the inevitable. 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/health/health-news/covid-19-expert-coronavirus-will-rage-until-it-infects-everybody-it-possibly-can/ar-BB13VCoX?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp

Vaccine(s) and/or highly effective treatment(s) are, I think, the biggest wildcards in this whole thing. If we wind up with one or both by the fall, the low end looks like reality and we'll feel pretty great about lockdown efforts. If we're looking back 18 months from now and neither materialized, we're probably looking at the higher end and wondering if we ultimately would have been better off accepting more risk. This is what drives me nuts about people angrily arguing for a particular approach - each one comes with risk and trade-offs. I don't see an objectively correct (or even most likely correct) path.

I could not agree more.  I certainly understand, and support, the need for the initial lockdowns to prevent overwhelming the healthcare system.  The harsh reality is that we cannot keep the economy locked down for much longer.  It is simply unsustainable.  If this thing continues to decimate the global population for 12-18 months, we're going to need to open up and simply accept the risk.  No one knows the right answer.  I certainly don't. 

You guys need to stop being so realistic and start casting harsh criticism at every decision being made. I've realized in the last 2 months that 98% of Americans have received a degree in the field of Epidemiology, we should be listening to every single one of them. I have also learned that the best way to come together in a time like this is to judge everyone else.

Halifax2TheMax

Thanks numb nuts. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/05/12/coronavirus-update-us/#link-TJY7DDP3LBAKNNCS44MYNV2FMY
 
Accidental poisonings rose after Trump suggested injecting disinfectant could thwart coronavirus

Accidental poisonings in the country from disinfectants and bleach increased in April, the month when President Trump mused that people might be able to fight the novel coronavirus by injecting themselves with disinfectant, new data show.

The American Association of Poison Control Centers reported a 121 percent increase in poisonings from disinfectants and a 77 percent spike in bleach poisonings in April, compared with the same month last year. The April 2020 data included the seven days that followed Trump’s false and dangerous comment about disinfectant, which he made April 23.

The percentage increase in poisonings in the first 10 days of May was lower. Reports of accidental poisonings from disinfectants increased 69 percent and reports of poisonings from bleach increased 51 percent over the same period in 2019.

The AAPCC did not draw conclusions about what may have caused the significant increase in poisonings in April. Time magazine conducted the first analysis of the statistics as they relate to Trump.

Additionally, poisonings from disinfectant and bleach were already increasing before the president’s remark. Disinfectant poisonings increased by 5 percent in January, 17 percent in February and 94 percent in March, compared with the same months last year. The rise in poisonings hit 121 percent in April and 69 percent in May.

Compared with the same months last year, bleach poisonings increased by 7 percent in January, 1 percent in February and 59 percent in March before reaching 77 percent in April and 51 percent in May.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention concluded that although it could not prove a causal relationship between increased poisonings and more frequent cleaning because of the coronavirus, the periods overlapped.

brianlux

bbiggs said:

Osterholm again predicting that 60-70% of the entire planet gets infected with Covid-19.  I'd much rather be in the 30-40% camp, but ominous predictions like this really make me wonder if all of this effort is simply prolonging the inevitable. 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/health/health-news/covid-19-expert-coronavirus-will-rage-until-it-infects-everybody-it-possibly-can/ar-BB13VCoX?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp

I hesitate to say this for fear of coming off as pessimistic or alarmist, but I've read and listened to much of what Osterholm has said about COVID-19 and I haven't seen a thing he's has said that has been erroneous. 

gimmesometruth27 said:

brianlux said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

NYT is reporting that fauci has stated that he is going to testify to the senate about the dangers of reopening things too early. trump may have known this so that is why he exploded today and has forbid fauci from testifying to the house.

at any rate, i am betting trump will fire fauci after tomorrow.

I'm surprised Fauci hasn't been canned already.  Most likely the only reason is that Trump knows that doing so would probably result is a lot of bad press for him yet again. 

I sure hope Fauci gets his day in front of the Senate. 

trump does not care about bad press. he craves any press.

fauci is testifying in the senate today.

Yeah, he's like that obnoxious kid in the class who will do anything to get negative attention and be disruptive. 

I'm glad Fauci is getting a chance to speak.

josevolution

brianlux said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

NYT is reporting that fauci has stated that he is going to testify to the senate about the dangers of reopening things too early. trump may have known this so that is why he exploded today and has forbid fauci from testifying to the house.

at any rate, i am betting trump will fire fauci after tomorrow.

I'm surprised Fauci hasn't been canned already.  Most likely the only reason is that Trump knows that doing so would probably result is a lot of bad press for him yet again. 

I sure hope Fauci gets his day in front of the Senate. 

If the Baffoon can fire him he will! 

pjl44

Good question and the answer is....about what most of us are thinking, no?

https://twitter.com/robbysoave/status/1260252836245524483?s=19

HughFreakingDillon

i think this is important for people to be able to separate the political from the medical: realize who is speaking, and what they are advising on. medical experts have a responsibility to give facts based on public health only, which fauci reiterates he is doing, politicians have the unenviable position of having to balance the public health with the economy and even how those two intersect and how one can affect the other; make no mistake, that's a difficult position to be in, whether you like trump or not. but it's obvious to me all trump cares about is economics:

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/05/12/fauci-rand-paul-coronavirus-senate-committee-testimony-vpx.cnn

JPPJ84

A nice story: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-52634397

Spiritual_Chaos

pjl44 said:

Good question and the answer is....about what most of us are thinking, no?

https://twitter.com/robbysoave/status/1260252836245524483?s=19

And should be noted, Giesecke says that would pretty much be a record for getting a vaccin out (12-18 months). But with white western people dying the time frame would be shorter than for e.g. Ebola, AIDS etc.

What about the stories of a vaccin coming out in the fall? Any more on that?

mrussel1

Spiritual_Chaos said:

pjl44 said:

Good question and the answer is....about what most of us are thinking, no?

https://twitter.com/robbysoave/status/1260252836245524483?s=19

And should be noted, Giesecke says that would pretty much be a record for getting a vaccin out (12-18 months). But with white western people dying the time frame would be shorter than for e.g. Ebola, AIDS etc.

What about the stories of a vaccin coming out in the fall? Any more on that?

I'm not a scientist, but AIDS was killing white people a long time ago.  And it strikes me as a far more complex disease than a Coronavirus, of which there have been 19 (thanks Kellyanne for that talking point!).  

pjl44

Spiritual_Chaos said:

pjl44 said:

Good question and the answer is....about what most of us are thinking, no?

https://twitter.com/robbysoave/status/1260252836245524483?s=19

And should be noted, Giesecke says that would pretty much be a record for getting a vaccin out (12-18 months). But with white western people dying the time frame would be shorter than for e.g. Ebola, AIDS etc.

What about the stories of a vaccin coming out in the fall? Any more on that?

There are a couple/few in human trials now with others moving in that direction. Would have to go back and look but I think they estimated a couple months before looking at results. 

pjl44

Spiritual_Chaos said:

pjl44 said:

Good question and the answer is....about what most of us are thinking, no?

https://twitter.com/robbysoave/status/1260252836245524483?s=19

And should be noted, Giesecke says that would pretty much be a record for getting a vaccin out (12-18 months). But with white western people dying the time frame would be shorter than for e.g. Ebola, AIDS etc.

What about the stories of a vaccin coming out in the fall? Any more on that?

Here's a recent article about the Pfizer vaccine. They get into why it could be faster than normal, mainly due to a technology that already exists and isn't a traditional low dose of virus. Plus the viruses you mentioned are all different. There are several variables in play to consider before lamenting the whites.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/05/health/pfizer-vaccine-coronavirus.html

Bentleyspop

Someone's gonna get fired.....

Fauci warns quick reopening could spark another coronavirus outbreak https://news.yahoo.com/fauci-warns-quick-reopening-could-spark-another-coronavirus-outbreak-172313231.html

bootlegger10

bbiggs said:

pjl44 said:

bbiggs said:

Osterholm again predicting that 60-70% of the entire planet gets infected with Covid-19.  I'd much rather be in the 30-40% camp, but ominous predictions like this really make me wonder if all of this effort is simply prolonging the inevitable. 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/health/health-news/covid-19-expert-coronavirus-will-rage-until-it-infects-everybody-it-possibly-can/ar-BB13VCoX?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp

Vaccine(s) and/or highly effective treatment(s) are, I think, the biggest wildcards in this whole thing. If we wind up with one or both by the fall, the low end looks like reality and we'll feel pretty great about lockdown efforts. If we're looking back 18 months from now and neither materialized, we're probably looking at the higher end and wondering if we ultimately would have been better off accepting more risk. This is what drives me nuts about people angrily arguing for a particular approach - each one comes with risk and trade-offs. I don't see an objectively correct (or even most likely correct) path.

I could not agree more.  I certainly understand, and support, the need for the initial lockdowns to prevent overwhelming the healthcare system.  The harsh reality is that we cannot keep the economy locked down for much longer.  It is simply unsustainable.  If this thing continues to decimate the global population for 12-18 months, we're going to need to open up and simply accept the risk.  No one knows the right answer.  I certainly don't. 

I agree. We are six weeks into at least a 12 month period before a vaccine which I think is a pipe dream.  We are going to have to accept risk or keep shelter in place which seems unrealistic.   

SHZA

pjl44 said:

Good question and the answer is....about what most of us are thinking, no?

https://twitter.com/robbysoave/status/1260252836245524483?s=19

Clearly much more likely than not, but not quite very likely hmm 

pjl44

SHZA said:

pjl44 said:

Good question and the answer is....about what most of us are thinking, no?

https://twitter.com/robbysoave/status/1260252836245524483?s=19

Clearly much more likely than not, but not quite very likely hmm 

Right? Just hedged enough to not really make you feel terribly confident either way.

Jason P

I think my area is in a stage 2 reopening, although if someone from Cali was here they would assume we were in stage 17 already.  Things never really halted.  Everyone seems to be dutifully obeying social distancing norms, although I would put masks wearing at about 75% which is actually higher then I expected (mostly 20-40 yr old that don't wear)  Again this is rural, so it is pretty easy to avoid close contact with people.

F Me In The Brain

Just watched the video clip of that absolute moron Rand Paul trying to lay into Dr Fauci.
Moron says that outside of New England most of the states had no real issue with Covid-19.
Does anyone find humor in that statement?
How about the fact that only 1 of the top 5 states in deaths from Covid-19 are in New England?
And, that the top two states, far and away, are not in New England?
Does anyone find it humiliating to think that a US Senator does not know what states make up New England?  I will refrain from making jokes about the state he represents....but they deserve them for electing that idiot.

Fauci's responses were great.

Anyone who supports Rand Paul is a complete mystery to me.  How many times must this guy prove how dumb he is?

jeffbr

F Me In The Brain said:

Just watched the video clip of that absolute moron Rand Paul trying to lay into Dr Fauci.
Moron says that outside of New England most of the states had no real issue with Covid-19.
Does anyone find humor in that statement?
How about the fact that only 1 of the top 5 states in deaths from Covid-19 are in New England?
And, that the top two states, far and away, are not in New England?
Does anyone find it humiliating to think that a US Senator does not know what states make up New England?  I will refrain from making jokes about the state he represents....but they deserve them for electing that idiot.

Fauci's responses were great.

Anyone who supports Rand Paul is a complete mystery to me.  How many times must this guy prove how dumb he is?

Good ol' Kentukistan. They gifted us both Rand and MoscowMitch. From their awful choice of senators to being bottom dwellers in education and healthcare, it is hard to find anything nice to say about that state, other than I appreciate the bourbon that they produce.

F Me In The Brain

I forgot Mitch Crappile was from there as well.
Truly remarkable that probably the worst two Senators are from the same state.