ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 2729 of 3903
« First < 1729222926292679271927252726272727282729 273027312732273327392779282932293729 > Last »
Nzoner's Game Room>***NON-POLITICAL COVID-19 Discussion Thread***
JakeF 10:28 PM 02-26-2020
A couple of reminders...

Originally Posted by Bwana:
Once again, don't come in this thread with some kind of political agenda, or you will be shown the door. If you want to go that route, there is a thread about this in DC.
Originally Posted by Dartgod:
People, there is a lot of good information in this thread, let's try to keep the petty bickering to a minimum.

We all have varying opinions about the impact of this, the numbers, etc. We will all never agree with each other. But we can all keep it civil.

Thanks!

Click here for the original OP:

Spoiler!

[Reply]
Donger 09:35 AM 07-28-2020
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
The reality is there were going to be a shit ton of new cases regardless of what we do at this point. The FL & TX vs CA approach proves this. We aren't locking the country down again nor should we for a disease that kills mainly elderly and has low risk to everyone else.

Seems we have once again forgotten the goal of flattening the curve.

Its also worth noting the new case numbers keep popping up from areas that haven't been though it yet.
“If you look at the curves of outbreaks, they go big peaks, and then come down. What we need to do is flatten that down,” Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told reporters Tuesday. “That would have less people infected. That would ultimately have less deaths. You do that by trying to interfere with the natural flow of the outbreak.”
[Reply]
Pasta Little Brioni 09:45 AM 07-28-2020
All that's being done is buying time. This thing is going to tear through everyone eventually.
[Reply]
O.city 09:46 AM 07-28-2020
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
The reality is there were going to be a shit ton of new cases regardless of what we do at this point. The FL & TX vs CA approach proves this. We aren't locking the country down again nor should we for a disease that kills mainly elderly and has low risk to everyone else.

Seems we have once again forgotten the goal of flattening the curve.

Its also worth noting the new case numbers keep popping up from areas that haven't been though it yet.
Had we done what we should have during or after the first lockdown, we'd be better off with cases. But it is what it is at this point. Just gotta hope to keep deaths somewhat low and that hospitals don't overwhelm.
[Reply]
DaFace 09:47 AM 07-28-2020
Originally Posted by Pasta Giant Meatball:
All that's being done is buying time. This thing is going to tear through everyone eventually.
I 100% don't understand this mentality. Do you deny that IFRs are far lower today than they were 4 months ago? And do you see some reason that that trend won't continue? There's tons of positive news lately both on the vaccine and therapeutic fronts, so it seems pretty obvious that the longer you keep infection rates low, the better things will be.
[Reply]
Marcellus 09:55 AM 07-28-2020
Originally Posted by O.city:
Had we done what we should have during or after the first lockdown, we'd be better off with cases. But it is what it is at this point. Just gotta hope to keep deaths somewhat low and that hospitals don't overwhelm.
I wont argue that a 6 week hard lock down out the gate wouldn't have mitigated most of this, but that is 100% hindsight that almost no one thought was necessary back in early March.
[Reply]
Pasta Little Brioni 09:56 AM 07-28-2020
Originally Posted by O.city:
Had we done what we should have during or after the first lockdown, we'd be better off with cases. But it is what it is at this point. Just gotta hope to keep deaths somewhat low and that hospitals don't overwhelm.
Was never going to happen here.
[Reply]
KS Smitty 10:02 AM 07-28-2020
Anecdotal story of a 20 year old via Facebook:

Since July 1st I have been the sickest I have ever been. For those that do not know, I tested positive for Coronavirus at the beginning of the month. But, I failed to get better. After two ER trips, chest x-rays, and CT scans it was learned I needed more intensive care and I was transferred to KU Med in Kansas City. Imagine being 20 years old and getting told you’re not only part of a pandemic, but you’re going to a hospital two hours from home for who knows how long and you cannot have any visitors, not even parents. I spent three days in ICU, five days in isolation in a covid wing, and now I’m on day 3 of progressive care. It was learned I have developed an incredibly destructive secondary infection in my right lung due to my Covid infection. I’ve spent the last 9 days with a chest tube hanging out between my ribs draining liquid infection. Yes, it hurts. At all times. It was recently discovered that the secondary infection has done enough damage to require surgery to remove most of if not all of my lung, as it is now too infected to survive. Hopefully I will have surgery sometime this week so I can begin the long road to recovery.
Friends, especially those of my age, please use my experience as an example. I am 2 weeks away from turning 21 years old. We are not immune and we are not invincible to this disease because we are young and healthy. I never thought it a million years I would get sick. I went out, I hung out with friends, I never wore a mask. And now I regret it all. We are still at risk. Wear a mask. Wash your hands. Stay safe.

[Reply]
O.city 10:05 AM 07-28-2020
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
I wont argue that a 6 week hard lock down out the gate wouldn't have mitigated most of this, but that is 100% hindsight that almost no one thought was necessary back in early March.
It isn't hindsight when it was being said at the time that this is how to do it.

I think the lockdown we did was fine, we shoulda let cases get lower before we blasted out.

Now we are dealing with it. It is waht it is.
[Reply]
petegz28 10:18 AM 07-28-2020
Kansas Governor is threatening lockdown next week
[Reply]
petegz28 10:19 AM 07-28-2020
Originally Posted by O.city:
It isn't hindsight when it was being said at the time that this is how to do it.

I think the lockdown we did was fine, we shoulda let cases get lower before we blasted out.

Now we are dealing with it. It is waht it is.
Okay so say we let cases get lower. What would make you think they wouldn't rise again when we re-opened?
[Reply]
O.city 10:20 AM 07-28-2020
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Okay so say we let cases get lower. What would make you think they wouldn't rise again when we re-opened?
If they're low enough, you can track and trace them out and attempt to keep it from becoming community spread embedded.

Once that happens it's too late.

If you have them on a downward trend then slowly reopen you would hope you could keep them low.
[Reply]
petegz28 10:22 AM 07-28-2020
Originally Posted by O.city:
If they're low enough, you can track and trace them out and attempt to keep it from becoming community spread embedded.

Once that happens it's too late.

If you have them on a downward trend then slowly reopen you would hope you could keep them low.
I think that's a very myopic view to be honest. It assumes you can lock down harder and stay locked down longer without any ancillary effects or unintended consequences. Just saying.
[Reply]
Donger 10:22 AM 07-28-2020
Originally Posted by O.city:
If they're low enough, you can track and trace them out and attempt to keep it from becoming community spread embedded.

Once that happens it's too late.

If you have them on a downward trend then slowly reopen you would hope you could keep them low.
Are you saying that a planned, and followed, phased reopening plan works?
[Reply]
suzzer99 10:22 AM 07-28-2020
Originally Posted by DaFace:
I 100% don't understand this mentality. Do you deny that IFRs are far lower today than they were 4 months ago? And do you see some reason that that trend won't continue? There's tons of positive news lately both on the vaccine and therapeutic fronts, so it seems pretty obvious that the longer you keep infection rates low, the better things will be.
I can think of several possible reasons IFR is lower now than 4 months ago:
  1. younger population catching it
  2. at risk people isolating better
  3. nursing homes much better prepared
  4. better treatments
  5. masks and being careful may keep severity down
  6. warmer weather (for now) may keep severity down
  7. less super spreader events keeping initial dose and severity down

Those first three are the big one. There's no such thing as an IFR of a representative slice of the entire population anymore, since older and more at-risk people are behaving different. So this idea of a blanket IFR is mostly academic now imo. It's all about the demographics of your current case population.
[Reply]
DaFace 10:24 AM 07-28-2020
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Okay so say we let cases get lower. What would make you think they wouldn't rise again when we re-opened?
If you get them low enough, efforts like contact tracing can largely keep it under control. Most of the rest of the developed world has been able to do it that way.

But to your point, the U.S. populace has shown that we're unwilling to subject ourselves to the measures necessary to contract trace effectively, and we're unwilling to voluntarily abide by guidelines.

So I've pretty much given up on anything but a vaccine. We're the pity of the world at this point, and it just is what it is.
[Reply]
Page 2729 of 3903
« First < 1729222926292679271927252726272727282729 273027312732273327392779282932293729 > Last »
Up