This Corona Virus Mania is Just Too Much, We All Need to Chill!

[dminches]

You were defending those same numbers just a few posts ago! On the one hand you say that the government hasn't done enough or too late and then you say the states have done great. Leaving that aside the point is that countries are forced to shut down and people's lives ruined based on these false numbers and the word of hardly heard of "experts". I'm not denying that there's a serious pandemic out there but I still have an issue with many see as an unnecessary overreaction based on false and incomplete data.

david

I haven't defended any of these numbers. I keep saying that they were based on assumptions which had no real basis. They were just guesses since there was no past experience to base them on. When data emerges the assumptions are refined.

The decision to shut things down was based on what governors saw as an effective way to reduce the spread in other countries. They did this in Wuhan, Italy and other places. It works.

How many deaths would it take for you think that this wasn't over-hyped and how many deaths do you think we would have seen if nothing shut down? Maybe i can get a sense for your view.

 

[dminches]

I understand this Steve and if you go back a few posts I said exactly this that these models are as flawed as climate change ones used to instill panic and take over, the same thing has happened here. This has always been my point from the start.

david

NYC shut down 2 weeks before the first models predicted 100-240k deaths. They shut down based on what was being done in other countries.

The first time that the 100-240k range of deaths was discussed was at a WH briefing. I am not finding fault with them discussing that number. I just want to lay out the timeline.

 

[PeterA]

WTH

Exactly my point, Tasos. What the hell, indeed?

Thank you.

 

[Gregadd]

I don't know Greg but I still maintain that there's been an overreaction to this pandemic vs previous ones. I'm not diminishing the loss of life just that this isn't the first time nor the worst ones according to the numbers but the reaction is on a different level than thar

j think we continue to stick our head in the sand.
For example three states just blocked social isolation.

 

[ddk]

NYC shut down 2 weeks before the first models predicted 100-240k deaths. They shut down based on what was being done in other countries.

The first time that the 100-240k range of deaths was discussed was at a WH briefing. I am not finding fault with them discussing that number. I just want to lay out the timeline.

You don't know when the models came out they were certainly out long before being publicized. Some of these "experts" have been out there since December in front of cameras changing their "expert" tunes by the minute.

david

 

[ddk]

j think we continue to stick our head in the sand.
For example three states just blocked social isolation.

Not sure if that's a bad thing, many still believe in herd immunization, always worked in the past!

david

 

[steve williams]

I understand this Steve and if you go back a few posts I said exactly this that these models are as flawed as climate change ones used to instill panic and take over, the same thing has happened here. This has always been my point from the start.

david

The modeling has to start somewhere....typically at the beginning with the data we have. The data is like hitting a moving target as it changes from moment to moment

For me I have no problem with what was done. It's a no win situation however as many people will say the measures are working based on the improved modeling results whereas others will use those improve statistics to say that the risk was overinflated.

I am quite thankful for the improvement. David, IMO you are reacting based on knee jerk rather than facts.


Having read "surfski's" comments yesterday stating that he intubated 2 of his nurses and one of his colleagues ti\o me is the sobering reality of the severity of this virus


It's not something that the elderly are taking lightly

If you are 70-80 years old the risk of dying from the disease is 8.2% and if you are 80-90 and contract the disease the risk of dying is almost 14%

There is a move afoot to open the economy and the elderly be damned. To me you cannot put a price n the value of human life

 

[Folsom]

What does this crisis have to do with bullets? Not everyone agrees that the US Govt. response is tepid, and how would you know what everyone expected?

I find the disparity of opinions to be astonishing. While one side celebrates that perhaps the estimated 100K-240K death count seems to be going down, and they turn their attention to the damaged economy and figuring out ways to get people back to work, the other side keeps talking about how our government is in disarray and completely incompetent, that there are lots of shortages, the number of cases keeps climbing, that the worst is still ahead, and they advocate for extending the lock down, keeping the economy closed, and advocating for massive new spending to support an indefinite closure. And all the while, the bickering continues.

I am noticing that as the corona news starts to improve, the talk of blame and accountability is increasing. I had hoped this crisis would bring us closer together toward some kind of a common purpose and goal. Instead, I am disappointed and perplexed.

I find it impossible for me to conclude anything about appropriate response etc etc. We're a much larger country than many others dealing with this, our laws are not the same, and I'm not privy to a whole lot. Maybe things should have been different. But what I am sure of is we have more pressing issues than blame. I am saying I see your point. We are now being divided politically to the point where I suspect that's the game plan more than what's best. It feels like everyone is trying to "one up" whoever else however they think that should be done. Division is certainly increasing greatly. However when you go outside you notice that most people are trying to be respectful (and I do mean most, like almost everyone). The average person doesn't seem to be interested in division, so that's positive.

 

[ddk]

I haven't defended any of these numbers. I keep saying that they were based on assumptions which had no real basis. They were just guesses since there was no past experience to base them on. When data emerges the assumptions are refined.

The decision to shut things down was based on what governors saw as an effective way to reduce the spread in other countries. They did this in Wuhan, Italy and other places. It works.

How many deaths would it take for you think that this wasn't over-hyped and how many deaths do you think we would have seen if nothing shut down? Maybe i can get a sense for your view.

Look at previous epidemics and disasters compare the reaction to those and this one, you'll understand why I made that comment.

david

 

[steve williams]

Some of these "experts" have been out there since December in front of cameras changing their "expert" tunes by the minute.

I totally disagree. These experts are doing what they do best and that is giving us data based on what we know at the moment. This is NOT a static situation but one highly dynamic which changes daily. I laud them for their efforts

 

[rbbert]

You don't know when the models came out they were certainly out long before being publicized. Some of these "experts" have been out there since December in front of cameras changing their "expert" tunes by the minute.

david

Outside of China (who was not sharing), there was NO reliable information on COVID (either the virus or the disease caused by it) in December

 

[dminches]

Look at previous epidemics and disasters compare the reaction to those and this one, you'll understand why I made that comment.

david

Which ones in particular are you referring to?

Look at the tragedy in NYC WITH the city closed. Can you imagine what would have happened if they did nothing? I agree that closing the country, so to speak is drastic, but I am wondering what you think should have been done instead?

 

[steve williams]

Not sure if that's a bad thing, many still believe in herd immunization, always worked in the past!

david

For what little I know about this virus, IMO herd immunization is flirting with the devil as there will for sure be heaviest losses in the older age group. Have a look at Italy and talk about herd immunity or the UK where it was suggested.

Arm chair quarterbacking IMO is a dangerous thing because when you are sitting on the sidelines with no concept of the severity of the disease it is easy to talk herd immunity but I would proffer a guess that if it were you faced with the possibility of being placed in a medically induced coma and ventilated and might never wake up I would suggest you would be a bird of a different feather

 

[rbbert]

Look at previous epidemics and disasters compare the reaction to those and this one, you'll understand why I made that comment.

david

Early on (misled by the combination of false and incomplete data shared by China) I also thought this to be true. In fact, now that both virologic and clinical data is available from non-censored sources, it is clear that this is a far greater threat than ANY previous disaster or epidemic/pandemic, and if you don't realize this your head is in the sand ("your" in this case meaning the general population "you"). How badly the threat materializes will depend on the world's response.

 

[rbbert]

We need better data on the usefulness of artificial ventilation and how long to continue it in a given patient if/when resources become scarce. Right now it would appear that patients needing more than 24 hours on a ventilator have little chance of survival.

 

[ddk]

The modeling has to start somewhere....typically at the beginning with the data we have. The data is like hitting a moving target as it changes from moment to moment

For me I have no problem with what was done. It's a no win situation however as many people will say the measures are working based on the improved modeling results whereas others will use those improve statistics to say that the risk was overinflated.

I am quite thankful for the improvement. David, IMO you are reacting based on knee jerk rather than facts.


Having read "surfski's" comments yesterday stating that he intubated 2 of his nurses and one of his colleagues ti\o me is the sobering reality of the severity of this virus


It's not something that the elderly are taking lightly

If you are 70-80 years old the risk of dying from the disease is 8.2% and if you are 80-90 and contract the disease the risk of dying is almost 14%

There is a move afoot to open the economy and the elderly be damned. To me you cannot put a price n the value of human life

I know how modeling works, it does start somewhere and it can be programmed to come up with intended results one way or another. We shut down the lives of 300 million just in this country based on this and the say so of "experts" few had heard of before.

I appreciate surfki's efforts but doctors have put their lives on the line on many previous occasions, what's different this time? My mother was intubated in February after she had a heart attack and came down with pneumonia, so what?

I certainly love the elderly (we're closing ranks soon !) and would never want them to be sacrificed for anything but I don't want to sacrifice the future of the young based on faulty predictions. It's not a knee jerk reaction on my part, I've been thinking this way from the start.

david

 

[dminches]

We need better data on the usefulness of artificial ventilation and how long to continue it in a given patient if/when resources become scarce. Right now it would appear that patients needing more than 24 hours on a ventilator have little chance of survival.

Based on the drop in new ICU and ventilator cases in NY I have a feeling that the national supply may be enough assuming the patterns in NY and beyond continue.

 

[steve williams]

Early on (misled by the combination of false and incomplete data shared by China) I also thought this to be true. In fact, now that both virologic and clinical data is available from non-censored sources, it is clear that this is a far greater threat than ANY previous disaster or epidemic/pandemic, and if you don't realize this your head is in the sand ("your" in this case meaning the general population "you"). How badly the threat materializes will depend on the world's response.

Robert

It is good to see you here again and your last post to me is etched in stone

Those that deny the severity and have their head in the sand will be the ones to let their guard down and could easily become the next fatality

I agree that the economy is on hold worldwide and everyone is either unemployed or living off their savings. Having said that I do believe the economy will recover quickly. The Dow in the past 2 weeks has regained over 5000 points it had previously given up. You can't earn a living if you're dead. I suggest you listen to Robert's post because IMO it is dead on ( no pun intended)

 

[ddk]

Early on (misled by the combination of false and incomplete data shared by China) I also thought this to be true. In fact, now that both virologic and clinical data is available from non-censored sources, it is clear that this is a far greater threat than ANY previous disaster or epidemic/pandemic, and if you don't realize this your head is in the sand ("your" in this case meaning the general population "you"). How badly the threat materializes will depend on the world's response.

You misunderstand, I'm not in denial just wonder about the reaction to the pandemic.

david

 

[dminches]

I know how modeling works, it does start somewhere and it can be programmed to come up with intended results one way or another. We shut down the lives of 300 million just in this country based on this and the say so of "experts" few had heard of before.

I appreciate surfki's efforts but doctors have put their lives on the line on many previous occasions, what's different this time? My mother was intubated in February after she had a heart attack and came down with pneumonia, so what?

I certainly love the elderly (we're closing ranks soon !) and would never want them to be sacrificed for anything but I don't want to sacrifice the future of the young based on faulty predictions. It's not a knee jerk reaction on my part, I've been thinking this way from the start.

david

I disagree that states were shut down based on the model projections. I don’t work for NY, CA or IL where it first started so I can’t say for sure but I don’t recall them mentioning models in their statements.

There are hundreds of doctors and healthcare workers dying. When before has this happened?