|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
cal1piggy
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 7:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | actually if you consider what fauci and birx said, it is pretty clear what would happen if there is no suppression. they said 1-2 million people would die. |
You keep quoting the same statistical projections. I've discussed them. The devil is in the fine print. |
you said the fineprint was for 100-200k people dying with suppression.
is there fineprint for 1-2 million dying with no suppression? |
No, I didn't say that. |
what did you not say?
is there fineprint for 1-2 million dying with no supression?
that just sounds like they expect everyone to be infected given 1% death rate if nothing was done to suppress. |
You're not making a lot of sense. At this point, I honestly don't know what you're talking about.
To summarize the points I've made elsewhere in greater detail:
1. You are obsessed with a set of projections being pushed by the Administration. But all of the projections out there are essentially junk. We have data issues and are forced to make a variety of guesses and assumptions. This is discussed in greater detail in the 538 articles. The 538 survey of infectious disease experts was updated yesterday. You can find it here. Some of the experts have "best estimates" within the Administration's range, and some do not. But even the experts whose best estimates fall within the Administration's range have much larger individual ranges. This is all just educated guesswork.
2. The part of the projections that you particularly obsess about is the difference between 1-2 million dying with "no suppression" and 100-200k dying with "suppression." As best I can tell, this doesn't have a lot of basis. We don't have sufficient data to make an accurate projection of the course of the virus, much less to project the course of the virus under different hypothetical policy-based scenarios. Furthermore, this is where the fine print starts to come into play. "Suppression" is a vague term. You're implicitly assuming that we are engaging in "suppression" right now, but in fact the stay-home orders are riddled with exceptions, and there are doubts about whether they are effective. As discussed in the new 538 article, this is one of the reasons why many of the individual projections are much higher than the Administration's projection.
3. The other part of the fine print is that we would need to stay in "suppression" mode for far longer than anyone in the Administration wants to talk about. It's there in the "fine print," though. The Imperial College report pretty much acknowledged that long term suppression is not feasible and that, as soon as we eased up, the infection rates would skyrocket again. The more recent projections try to gloss over this by focusing on shorter time frames, such as projections through July. They don't want to talk about what happens after July. Barring a miracle cure (or the Stanford guy turning out to be right all along), we're just kicking the can down the street. Unless you think that society can stay in shutdown mode for a year or more, the lower numbers (the "with suppression" numbers) become irrelevant, unless we get a miracle cure within a workable time frame. |
actually the way i look at it does not even depend on 100-200k number at all.
it primarily relies on the 1-2 million number. if you trust the 1% death rate or less that most experts are saying, 1-2 million deaths = all/most of usa infected.
so 1-2 million to me simply means that almost everyone has been infected but the infection was spread out over a much longer time so the hospital do not get overrun. it is when the hospitals get overrun when the death rate >>> 1%
-----------------------
after that, you look at europe. the curve for italy has been affected by their quarantine. their total infected is 115k. that is a lot less than than population of 60 million. in fact the total number infected is about 0.2% of the population. therefore, it is easy to say that they are achieving something far better than the entire population infected.
beyond italy, it appears spain's curve is starting to bend.
so the europeans have shown it can be done. and their quarantine is not like china and should be something our social distancing can achieve. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
cal1piggy
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 7:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TooMuchMajicBuss wrote: | | cal1piggy - very encouraging on Actemra. |
lets all pray/hope together that it works and there will be enough.
i actually worry about the latter more at this point though 2 other il6/il blockers are in trials.
now if simple steroids work, then it would be a real miracle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TooMuchMajicBuss
Franchise Player
Joined: 17 Sep 2008
Posts: 21075
Location: In a white room, with black curtains near the station
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cal1piggy wrote: | | TooMuchMajicBuss wrote: | | cal1piggy - very encouraging on Actemra. |
lets all pray/hope together that it works and there will be enough.
i actually worry about the latter more at this point though 2 other il6/il blockers are in trials.
now if simple steroids work, then it would be a real miracle. |
Looks to me like some of those trials conclude in June, but considering the situation it looks like it's getting used already, I agree lets hope they can produce enough.
Remsdesivir Gilead Phase 3 trial results should be April, based on that Milkin institute link. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cal1piggy
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 8:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TooMuchMajicBuss wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | TooMuchMajicBuss wrote: | | cal1piggy - very encouraging on Actemra. |
lets all pray/hope together that it works and there will be enough.
i actually worry about the latter more at this point though 2 other il6/il blockers are in trials.
now if simple steroids work, then it would be a real miracle. |
Looks to me like some of those trials conclude in June, but considering the situation it looks like it's getting used already, I agree lets hope they can produce enough.
Remsdesivir Gilead Phase 3 trial results should be April, based on that Milkin institute link. |
remdesivir is a nucleotide analog (rna duplication). if it works, hopefully production can be readily ramped up if data is good.
the final results for many drugs are due in june, but as you said, the drugs are already put into use now.
data from the trials would likely guide doctors far before the results come out.
do worry the antibody based drugs may take time to produce.
now if the novartis' jak-inhibitor anti-inflammation drug works, then there should be plenty of supply. it does not only go after il6 though like actemra, but instead after a whole bunch of cytokines, so that could be good or bad...
Last edited by cal1piggy on Fri Apr 03, 2020 9:30 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cal1piggy wrote: | actually the way i look at it does not even depend on 100-200k number at all.
it primarily relies on the 1-2 million number. if you trust the 1% death rate or less that most experts are saying, 1-2 million deaths = all/most of usa infected.
so 1-2 million to me simply means that almost everyone has been infected but the infection was spread out over a much longer time so the hospital do not get overrun. it is when the hospitals get overrun when the death rate >>> 1%
-----------------------
after that, you look at europe. the curve for italy has been affected by their quarantine. their total infected is 115k. that is a lot less than than population of 60 million. in fact the total number infected is about 0.2% of the population. therefore, it is easy to say that they are achieving something far better than the entire population infected.
beyond italy, it appears spain's curve is starting to bend.
so the europeans have shown it can be done. and their quarantine is not like china and should be something our social distancing can achieve. |
1. I'm not sure that any of the statistical projections are based on the underlying assumptions that you suggest. That is not what I have seen in the fine print, anyway.
2. Don't confuse correlation with causation. It is true that the curves in Spain and Italy finally appear to be bending a little. It does not follow that this is entirely due to the lockdowns as opposed to other factors such as general mitigation efforts and demographic considerations
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mamba81
Star Player
Joined: 19 Nov 2019
Posts: 2027
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 9:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Every day it's the same (bleep).
-Double the amount of people have died
-Double the amount of people infected
-This famous person has contracted it
-Maybe these drugs will work
-Medical field running low on supplies
Repeat for tomorrow. Very depressing.
_________________
Kobe Forever |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 9:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cal1piggy wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | actually if you consider what fauci and birx said, it is pretty clear what would happen if there is no suppression. they said 1-2 million people would die. |
You keep quoting the same statistical projections. I've discussed them. The devil is in the fine print. |
you said the fineprint was for 100-200k people dying with suppression.
is there fineprint for 1-2 million dying with no suppression? |
No, I didn't say that. |
what did you not say?
is there fineprint for 1-2 million dying with no supression?
that just sounds like they expect everyone to be infected given 1% death rate if nothing was done to suppress. |
You're not making a lot of sense. At this point, I honestly don't know what you're talking about.
To summarize the points I've made elsewhere in greater detail:
1. You are obsessed with a set of projections being pushed by the Administration. But all of the projections out there are essentially junk. We have data issues and are forced to make a variety of guesses and assumptions. This is discussed in greater detail in the 538 articles. The 538 survey of infectious disease experts was updated yesterday. You can find it here. Some of the experts have "best estimates" within the Administration's range, and some do not. But even the experts whose best estimates fall within the Administration's range have much larger individual ranges. This is all just educated guesswork.
2. The part of the projections that you particularly obsess about is the difference between 1-2 million dying with "no suppression" and 100-200k dying with "suppression." As best I can tell, this doesn't have a lot of basis. We don't have sufficient data to make an accurate projection of the course of the virus, much less to project the course of the virus under different hypothetical policy-based scenarios. Furthermore, this is where the fine print starts to come into play. "Suppression" is a vague term. You're implicitly assuming that we are engaging in "suppression" right now, but in fact the stay-home orders are riddled with exceptions, and there are doubts about whether they are effective. As discussed in the new 538 article, this is one of the reasons why many of the individual projections are much higher than the Administration's projection.
3. The other part of the fine print is that we would need to stay in "suppression" mode for far longer than anyone in the Administration wants to talk about. It's there in the "fine print," though. The Imperial College report pretty much acknowledged that long term suppression is not feasible and that, as soon as we eased up, the infection rates would skyrocket again. The more recent projections try to gloss over this by focusing on shorter time frames, such as projections through July. They don't want to talk about what happens after July. Barring a miracle cure (or the Stanford guy turning out to be right all along), we're just kicking the can down the street. Unless you think that society can stay in shutdown mode for a year or more, the lower numbers (the "with suppression" numbers) become irrelevant, unless we get a miracle cure within a workable time frame. |
actually the way i look at it does not even depend on 100-200k number at all.
it primarily relies on the 1-2 million number. if you trust the 1% death rate or less that most experts are saying, 1-2 million deaths = all/most of usa infected.
so 1-2 million to me simply means that almost everyone has been infected but the infection was spread out over a much longer time so the hospital do not get overrun. it is when the hospitals get overrun when the death rate >>> 1%
-----------------------
after that, you look at europe. the curve for italy has been affected by their quarantine. their total infected is 115k. that is a lot less than than population of 60 million. in fact the total number infected is about 0.2% of the population. therefore, it is easy to say that they are achieving something far better than the entire population infected.
beyond italy, it appears spain's curve is starting to bend.
so the europeans have shown it can be done. and their quarantine is not like china and should be something our social distancing can achieve. |
The 2.2 million figure comes from a worse-case model of the number of deaths that could happen over a couple of years if no suppression tactics were used.
It's worthless. It's important to realize that all the numbers the White House is throwing around are coming from a task force that latched onto different models for no purpose other than getting Trump to take the situation seriously. They looked for scary numbers to get his attention.
No one thinks the numbers are useful in terms of evaluating the situation or planning a response.
The Washington Post had a good article about this today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cal1piggy
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | actually the way i look at it does not even depend on 100-200k number at all.
it primarily relies on the 1-2 million number. if you trust the 1% death rate or less that most experts are saying, 1-2 million deaths = all/most of usa infected.
so 1-2 million to me simply means that almost everyone has been infected but the infection was spread out over a much longer time so the hospital do not get overrun. it is when the hospitals get overrun when the death rate >>> 1%
-----------------------
after that, you look at europe. the curve for italy has been affected by their quarantine. their total infected is 115k. that is a lot less than than population of 60 million. in fact the total number infected is about 0.2% of the population. therefore, it is easy to say that they are achieving something far better than the entire population infected.
beyond italy, it appears spain's curve is starting to bend.
so the europeans have shown it can be done. and their quarantine is not like china and should be something our social distancing can achieve. |
1. I'm not sure that any of the statistical projections are based on the underlying assumptions that you suggest. That is not what I have seen in the fine print, anyway.
2. Don't confuse correlation with causation. It is true that the curves in Spain and Italy finally appear to be bending a little. It does not follow that this is entirely due to the lockdowns as opposed to other factors such as general mitigation efforts and demographic considerations |
the 1% or lower death rate is something almost all experts agree on. if one use 1% death rate, basically one is assuming the entire population or the great majority of it will be infected. no fancy modeling needed.
only 120k of italians confirmed to be positive, but the population of italy is 60 million. so only a small percentage of italy population has been affected. so the demographics consideration does not hold water because at least 90% (actually >>90%) of the population remaining to be infected.
general mitigation efforts - what is that other than the social distancing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mamba81
Star Player
Joined: 19 Nov 2019
Posts: 2027
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | actually if you consider what fauci and birx said, it is pretty clear what would happen if there is no suppression. they said 1-2 million people would die. |
You keep quoting the same statistical projections. I've discussed them. The devil is in the fine print. |
you said the fineprint was for 100-200k people dying with suppression.
is there fineprint for 1-2 million dying with no suppression? |
No, I didn't say that. |
what did you not say?
is there fineprint for 1-2 million dying with no supression?
that just sounds like they expect everyone to be infected given 1% death rate if nothing was done to suppress. |
You're not making a lot of sense. At this point, I honestly don't know what you're talking about.
To summarize the points I've made elsewhere in greater detail:
1. You are obsessed with a set of projections being pushed by the Administration. But all of the projections out there are essentially junk. We have data issues and are forced to make a variety of guesses and assumptions. This is discussed in greater detail in the 538 articles. The 538 survey of infectious disease experts was updated yesterday. You can find it here. Some of the experts have "best estimates" within the Administration's range, and some do not. But even the experts whose best estimates fall within the Administration's range have much larger individual ranges. This is all just educated guesswork.
2. The part of the projections that you particularly obsess about is the difference between 1-2 million dying with "no suppression" and 100-200k dying with "suppression." As best I can tell, this doesn't have a lot of basis. We don't have sufficient data to make an accurate projection of the course of the virus, much less to project the course of the virus under different hypothetical policy-based scenarios. Furthermore, this is where the fine print starts to come into play. "Suppression" is a vague term. You're implicitly assuming that we are engaging in "suppression" right now, but in fact the stay-home orders are riddled with exceptions, and there are doubts about whether they are effective. As discussed in the new 538 article, this is one of the reasons why many of the individual projections are much higher than the Administration's projection.
3. The other part of the fine print is that we would need to stay in "suppression" mode for far longer than anyone in the Administration wants to talk about. It's there in the "fine print," though. The Imperial College report pretty much acknowledged that long term suppression is not feasible and that, as soon as we eased up, the infection rates would skyrocket again. The more recent projections try to gloss over this by focusing on shorter time frames, such as projections through July. They don't want to talk about what happens after July. Barring a miracle cure (or the Stanford guy turning out to be right all along), we're just kicking the can down the street. Unless you think that society can stay in shutdown mode for a year or more, the lower numbers (the "with suppression" numbers) become irrelevant, unless we get a miracle cure within a workable time frame. |
actually the way i look at it does not even depend on 100-200k number at all.
it primarily relies on the 1-2 million number. if you trust the 1% death rate or less that most experts are saying, 1-2 million deaths = all/most of usa infected.
so 1-2 million to me simply means that almost everyone has been infected but the infection was spread out over a much longer time so the hospital do not get overrun. it is when the hospitals get overrun when the death rate >>> 1%
-----------------------
after that, you look at europe. the curve for italy has been affected by their quarantine. their total infected is 115k. that is a lot less than than population of 60 million. in fact the total number infected is about 0.2% of the population. therefore, it is easy to say that they are achieving something far better than the entire population infected.
beyond italy, it appears spain's curve is starting to bend.
so the europeans have shown it can be done. and their quarantine is not like china and should be something our social distancing can achieve. |
The 2.2 million figure comes from a worse-case model of the number of deaths that could happen over a couple of years if no suppression tactics were used.
It's worthless. It's important to realize that all the numbers the White House is throwing around are coming from a task force that latched onto different models for no purpose other than getting Trump to take the situation seriously. They looked for scary numbers to get his attention.
No one thinks the numbers are useful in terms of evaluating the situation or planning a response.
The Washington Post had a good article about this today. |
This seems like the reasonable perspective. The problem for me is everyone has different answers for everything. Idk who to believe anymore. Idk what's really scary or what's really overreaction. This person says this, this person says that.
_________________
Kobe Forever |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 10:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mamba81 wrote: |
This seems like the reasonable perspective. The problem for me is everyone has different answers for everything. Idk who to believe anymore. Idk what's really scary or what's really overreaction. This person says this, this person says that. |
There are two problems:
1. There is a lot that we still don't know.
2. The messages coming out of the federal government continue to contradict themselves, as do the messages from Trump himself.
The vacuum of leadership just causes confusion. There isn't a calming voice of authority. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cal1piggy
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 10:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | actually if you consider what fauci and birx said, it is pretty clear what would happen if there is no suppression. they said 1-2 million people would die. |
You keep quoting the same statistical projections. I've discussed them. The devil is in the fine print. |
you said the fineprint was for 100-200k people dying with suppression.
is there fineprint for 1-2 million dying with no suppression? |
No, I didn't say that. |
what did you not say?
is there fineprint for 1-2 million dying with no supression?
that just sounds like they expect everyone to be infected given 1% death rate if nothing was done to suppress. |
You're not making a lot of sense. At this point, I honestly don't know what you're talking about.
To summarize the points I've made elsewhere in greater detail:
1. You are obsessed with a set of projections being pushed by the Administration. But all of the projections out there are essentially junk. We have data issues and are forced to make a variety of guesses and assumptions. This is discussed in greater detail in the 538 articles. The 538 survey of infectious disease experts was updated yesterday. You can find it here. Some of the experts have "best estimates" within the Administration's range, and some do not. But even the experts whose best estimates fall within the Administration's range have much larger individual ranges. This is all just educated guesswork.
2. The part of the projections that you particularly obsess about is the difference between 1-2 million dying with "no suppression" and 100-200k dying with "suppression." As best I can tell, this doesn't have a lot of basis. We don't have sufficient data to make an accurate projection of the course of the virus, much less to project the course of the virus under different hypothetical policy-based scenarios. Furthermore, this is where the fine print starts to come into play. "Suppression" is a vague term. You're implicitly assuming that we are engaging in "suppression" right now, but in fact the stay-home orders are riddled with exceptions, and there are doubts about whether they are effective. As discussed in the new 538 article, this is one of the reasons why many of the individual projections are much higher than the Administration's projection.
3. The other part of the fine print is that we would need to stay in "suppression" mode for far longer than anyone in the Administration wants to talk about. It's there in the "fine print," though. The Imperial College report pretty much acknowledged that long term suppression is not feasible and that, as soon as we eased up, the infection rates would skyrocket again. The more recent projections try to gloss over this by focusing on shorter time frames, such as projections through July. They don't want to talk about what happens after July. Barring a miracle cure (or the Stanford guy turning out to be right all along), we're just kicking the can down the street. Unless you think that society can stay in shutdown mode for a year or more, the lower numbers (the "with suppression" numbers) become irrelevant, unless we get a miracle cure within a workable time frame. |
actually the way i look at it does not even depend on 100-200k number at all.
it primarily relies on the 1-2 million number. if you trust the 1% death rate or less that most experts are saying, 1-2 million deaths = all/most of usa infected.
so 1-2 million to me simply means that almost everyone has been infected but the infection was spread out over a much longer time so the hospital do not get overrun. it is when the hospitals get overrun when the death rate >>> 1%
-----------------------
after that, you look at europe. the curve for italy has been affected by their quarantine. their total infected is 115k. that is a lot less than than population of 60 million. in fact the total number infected is about 0.2% of the population. therefore, it is easy to say that they are achieving something far better than the entire population infected.
beyond italy, it appears spain's curve is starting to bend.
so the europeans have shown it can be done. and their quarantine is not like china and should be something our social distancing can achieve. |
The 2.2 million figure comes from a worse-case model of the number of deaths that could happen over a couple of years if no suppression tactics were used.
It's worthless. It's important to realize that all the numbers the White House is throwing around are coming from a task force that latched onto different models for no purpose other than getting Trump to take the situation seriously. They looked for scary numbers to get his attention.
No one thinks the numbers are useful in terms of evaluating the situation or planning a response.
The Washington Post had a good article about this today. |
actually i dont think the 2 million deaths is anywhere near the worst case scenario.
death rate as discussed by many experts is 1% or lower. that is of course unless the hospitals are overrun and they run out of ventillators.
hospitalization rate is about 15%. not clear exactly how many % requires ventillators though i think about 5% requires ICU. if we use 5%, then that is a very big number that will require ventillators. i think many doctors have stated patients who need ventillators die without ventillators. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TooMuchMajicBuss
Franchise Player
Joined: 17 Sep 2008
Posts: 21075
Location: In a white room, with black curtains near the station
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 10:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mamba81 wrote: | Every day it's the same (bleep).
-Double the amount of people have died
-Double the amount of people infected
-This famous person has contracted it
-Maybe these drugs will work
-Medical field running low on supplies
Repeat for tomorrow. Very depressing. |
Gotta look at actions, what can be done vs what can't.
I get depressed when I see lives ended or otherwise impacted. I get encouraged by knowing I'm doing what I can to keep others around me healthy. I also get encouraged seeing what people, researchers, doctors and organizations are doing all over the world to bring this to an end.
I find the news on treatments very encouraging. It's a matter of when, not if, we get this under control IMO. But we gotta do our part to allow them time to do theirs.
I find the news on PPE shortages very frustrating, with fits of outrage at certain companies like the now defunct Covidian and what they did to our pandemic preparedness ventilator program 6 years ago, but I am encouraged that GM, Ford, 3M and other companies are initiating large production runs of ventilators and PPE. I hope supply chain coordination improves and hospitals get some relief sooner than later.
Terrible what happened in Italy and I feel for them. I also admire how Italians responded once the gravity of the situation became clear, and I am encouraged to see their daily new case counts turn southwards after the measures they took. I'm hopeful NY/NJ results start to follow a downward trajectory in new cases, we'll see.
It sucks being depressed. I've been there too. Find a constructive way to pass the time, think about what you can do, encourage others, maybe that'll help. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 10:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cal1piggy wrote: | | general mitigation efforts - what is that other than the social distancing? |
Everything from hand washing to bans on large public events to surgical masks to isolating the elderly. Basically, think of everything you can do without an actual shutdown, and you've got it.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mamba81
Star Player
Joined: 19 Nov 2019
Posts: 2027
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not sure what everyones ages are on this board, but I am relatively young. And I can tell you that many other people in my demographic- 20s, 30s, 40s are very concerned about their financial situation moving forward. People will not know what to do if this lockdown extends 2 more months (which I honestly believe it could) when they're still out of work and rent and bills still need to be paid.
_________________
Kobe Forever |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cal1piggy
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | general mitigation efforts - what is that other than the social distancing? |
Everything from hand washing to bans on large public events to surgical masks to isolating the elderly. Basically, think of everything you can do without an actual shutdown, and you've got it. |
so you think those efforts are achieving the benefits in italy vs the lockdown. and the italians locked down because they are stupid? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 10:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mamba81 wrote: | | I'm not sure what everyones ages are on this board, but I am relatively young. And I can tell you that many other people in my demographic- 20s, 30s, 40s are very concerned about their financial situation moving forward. People will not know what to do if this lockdown extends 2 more months (which I honestly believe it could) when they're still out of work and rent and bills still need to be paid. |
I was discussing the matter on an attorney board this morning. I commented that the Imperial College report envisioned a shutdown for 12-18 months. I was struck by this response from an attorney who works in the Houston office of a major New York law firm:
| Quote: | | David, all the more reason to take advantage of the Second Amendment now and stock up on guns and ammo. If the country’s shut down for 12 months—I guarantee you it’s not ever opening back up again. |
I don't think it will come to that, but only because I think the shutdowns would implode if they lasted that long.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cal1piggy wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | general mitigation efforts - what is that other than the social distancing? |
Everything from hand washing to bans on large public events to surgical masks to isolating the elderly. Basically, think of everything you can do without an actual shutdown, and you've got it. |
so you think those efforts are achieving the benefits in italy vs the lockdown. and the italians locked down because they are stupid? |
I've explained my point. Either you understand it, or you don't.
_________________
Internet Argument Resolved |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ziggy
Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 12712
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 10:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mamba81 wrote: | Every day it's the same (bleep).
-Double the amount of people have died
-Double the amount of people infected
-This famous person has contracted it
-Maybe these drugs will work
-Medical field running low on supplies
Repeat for tomorrow. Very depressing. |
Yup I stopped watching. I don't trust the media anyway. I am fortunate to have a lot of physicians/pharmacists in my family so I get the real world info directly from them. Media rarely give you the raw information without a hidden agenda. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cal1piggy wrote: |
actually i dont think the 2 million deaths is anywhere near the worst case scenario.
death rate as discussed by many experts is 1% or lower. that is of course unless the hospitals are overrun and they run out of ventillators.
hospitalization rate is about 15%. not clear exactly how many % requires ventillators though i think about 5% requires ICU. if we use 5%, then that is a very big number that will require ventillators. i think many doctors have stated patients who need ventillators die without ventillators. |
It was a worse-case scenario based on this particular model. I don't think there really is good data right now as far as making reasonable predictions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ziggy wrote: | | Mamba81 wrote: | Every day it's the same (bleep).
-Double the amount of people have died
-Double the amount of people infected
-This famous person has contracted it
-Maybe these drugs will work
-Medical field running low on supplies
Repeat for tomorrow. Very depressing. |
Yup I stopped watching. I don't trust the media anyway. I am fortunate to have a lot of physicians/pharmacists in my family so I get the real world info directly from them. Media rarely give you the raw information without a hidden agenda. |
Significant stuff doesn't change on a daily basis, so if you follow the news daily or hourly as some people do you are mostly just getting the politics of it all, which is depressing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cal1piggy
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 11:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TooMuchMajicBuss wrote: | | Mamba81 wrote: | Every day it's the same (bleep).
-Double the amount of people have died
-Double the amount of people infected
-This famous person has contracted it
-Maybe these drugs will work
-Medical field running low on supplies
Repeat for tomorrow. Very depressing. |
Gotta look at actions, what can be done vs what can't.
I get depressed when I see lives ended or otherwise impacted. I get encouraged by knowing I'm doing what I can to keep others around me healthy. I also get encouraged seeing what people, researchers, doctors and organizations are doing all over the world to bring this to an end.
I find the news on treatments very encouraging. It's a matter of when, not if, we get this under control IMO. But we gotta do our part to allow them time to do theirs.
I find the news on PPE shortages very frustrating, with fits of outrage at certain companies like the now defunct Covidian and what they did to our pandemic preparedness ventilator program 6 years ago, but I am encouraged that GM, Ford, 3M and other companies are initiating large production runs of ventilators and PPE. I hope supply chain coordination improves and hospitals get some relief sooner than later.
Terrible what happened in Italy and I feel for them. I also admire how Italians responded once the gravity of the situation became clear, and I am encouraged to see their daily new case counts turn southwards after the measures they took. I'm hopeful NY/NJ results start to follow a downward trajectory in new cases, we'll see.
It sucks being depressed. I've been there too. Find a constructive way to pass the time, think about what you can do, encourage others, maybe that'll help. |
yes i just watch for these items:
1. drug results
2. new tests becoming available, particularly the antibody one
3. when the backlog of LA tests get taken care of
4. la/sf stats
5. spain/italy stats
6. wuhan reinfection signs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ziggy
Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 12712
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 11:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | Ziggy wrote: | | Mamba81 wrote: | Every day it's the same (bleep).
-Double the amount of people have died
-Double the amount of people infected
-This famous person has contracted it
-Maybe these drugs will work
-Medical field running low on supplies
Repeat for tomorrow. Very depressing. |
Yup I stopped watching. I don't trust the media anyway. I am fortunate to have a lot of physicians/pharmacists in my family so I get the real world info directly from them. Media rarely give you the raw information without a hidden agenda. |
Significant stuff doesn't change on a daily basis, so if you follow the news daily or hourly as some people do you are mostly just getting the politics of it all, which is depressing. |
Agree. A lot of posturing and finger-pointing for the upcoming elections. But talking to actual doctors/pharmacists gives me more optimism than the media. Media are more zoomed in on worst case scenarios and fear-mongering. Hearing from the people directly on the front lines gives me a bigger picture of what is really going on. One thing they've told me is these next 2 weeks will get bad, so everyone just hunker down.
Unfortunately (or fortunately?) I run an essential business and have been going in to work everyday. Not that I HAVE to go in, but my employees are understandably worried and I want to give them a morale boost. Our health care workers are heroes but so are all the workers continuing to go into work to serve the community. Thank you to all of you and stay safe! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kikanga
Retired Number
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29279
Location: La La Land
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Jeremy C. Young
@jeremycyoung
We can now read the Imperial College report on COVID-19 that led to the extreme measures we've seen in the US this week. Read it; it's terrifying. I'll offer a summary in this thread; please correct me if I've gotten it wrong.
The Imperial College team plugged infection and death rates from China/Korea/Italy into epidemic modeling software and ran a simulation: what happens if the US does absolutely nothing -- if we treat COVID-19 like the flu, go about our business, and let the virus take its course?
Here's what would happen: 80% of Americans would get the disease. 0.9% of them would die. Between 4 and 8 percent of all Americans over the age of 70 would die. 2.2 million Americans would die from the virus itself.
It gets worse. People with severe COVID-19 need to be put on ventilators. 50% of those on ventilators still die, but the other 50% live. But in an unmitigated epidemic, the need for ventilators would be 30 times the number available in the US. Nearly 100% of these patients die.
So the actual death toll from the virus would be closer to 4 million Americans -- in a span of 3 months. 8-15% of all Americans over 70 would die.
How many is 4 million people? It's more Americans than have died all at once from anything, ever. It's the population of Los Angeles. It's 4 times the number of Americans who died in the Civil War...on both sides combined. It's two-thirds as many people as died in the Holocaust.
Now, of course countries won't stand by and do nothing. So the Imperial College team ran the numbers again, this time assuming a "mitigation" strategy: all symptomatic cases in the US in isolation. Families of those cases quarantined. All Americans over 70 social distancing.
This mitigation strategy is what you've seen a lot of people talking about when they say we should "flatten the curve": try to slow the spread of the disease to the people most likely to die from it, to avoid overwhelming hospitals.
And it does flatten the curve -- but not nearly enough. The death rate from the disease is cut in half, but it still kills 1.1 million Americans all by itself. The peak need for ventilators falls by two-thirds, but it still exceeds the number of ventilators in the US by 8 times.
That leaves the actual death toll in the US at right around 2 million deaths. The population of Houston. Two Civil Wars. One-third of the Holocaust. Globally, 45 million people die: 7.5 Holocausts, 3/4 of World War II. That's what happens if we rely on mitigation & common sense.
Finally, the Imperial College team ran the numbers again, assuming a "suppression" strategy: isolate symptomatic cases, quarantine their family members, social distancing for the whole population, all public gatherings/most workplaces shut down, schools and universities close.
Suppression works! The death rate in the US peaks 3 weeks from now at a few thousand deaths, then goes down. We hit but don't exceed the number of available ventilators. The nightmarish death tolls from the rest of the study disappear.
But here's the catch: if we EVER relax suppression before a vaccine is administered to the entire population, COVID-19 comes right back and kills millions of Americans in a few months, the same as before.
After the 1st suppression period ends in July, we could probably lift restrictions for a month, followed by 2 more months of suppression, in a repeating pattern without triggering an outbreak or overwhelming the ventilator supply. Staggering breaks by city could do a bit better.
But we simply cannot EVER allow the virus to spread throughout the entire population in the way other viruses do, because it is just too deadly. If lots of people we know end up getting COVID-19, it means millions of Americans are dying. It simply can't be allowed to happen. |
https://twitter.com/jeremycyoung/status/1239975682643357696[/quote]
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kikanga
Retired Number
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29279
Location: La La Land
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mamba81 wrote: | | The problem for me is everyone has different answers for everything. Idk who to believe anymore. Idk what's really scary or what's really overreaction. This person says this, this person says that. |
Trust the consensus within the medical community which stresses the importance of suppression.
For the life of me I can't understand why the same people questioning their consensus in terms of suppression still trust them to make tests, vaccines, and a cure.
Seems ... inconsistent.
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mamba81
Star Player
Joined: 19 Nov 2019
Posts: 2027
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 03, 2020 3:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think you already posted this
_________________
Kobe Forever |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
