by Heraclitusstudent ➕follow (8) 💰tip ignore
« First « Previous Comments 763 - 802 of 3,372 Next » Last » Search these comments
This is how social distancing works. The important point is: it isn't meant to protect you, but the herd.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/corona-simulator/
Facts about the H1N1 virus in 2009. Similar if not more intense, Media did not hype to the moon.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/2009-h1n1-pandemic.html
From April 12, 2009 to April 10, 2010, CDC estimated there were 60.8 million cases (range: 43.3-89.3 million), 274,304 hospitalizations (range: 195,086-402,719), and 12,469 deaths (range: 8868-18,306) in the United States due to the (H1N1)pdm09 virus.
In June 2009, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the new strain of swine-origin H1N1 as a pandemic. This novel virus spread worldwide and had caused 18,500 laboratory-confirmed deaths with an estimated 151,700 to 575,400 deaths total[3][4] by August of 2010. On 10 August 2010, the World Health Organization declared the H1N1 influenza pandemic over, saying worldwide flu activity had returned to typical seasonal patterns.[5]
Nov. 3, 2009 - H1N1 swine flu isn't always severe, but when it's bad, it's really bad. Patients hospitalized with pandemic flu have an 11% fatality rate, data from California suggest.
The pandemic flu bug is far more likely to strike younger people. But when people aged 50 and older get hospitalized with H1N1 swine flu, their case-fatality rate is the highest of any group: 18% to 20%.
Starting to think that shutting down planet earth is in fact quite a hysterical overreaction.
Vice President Joe Biden is arguing that there would be no practical benefit in shutting down the country's border with Mexico.
Huh, looks like H1N1 was actually deadlier than coronavirus:
Starting to think that shutting down planet earth is in fact quite a hysterical overreaction.
It is estimated that 11–21% of the then global population (of about 6.8 billion), or around 700 million–1.4 billion people, contracted the illness — more in absolute terms than the Spanish flu pandemic,[3][6] with about 150,000–575,000 fatalities.[7] A follow-up study done in September 2010 showed that the 2009 H1N1 flu was no more severe than the yearly seasonal flu.[8]
Unlike most strains of influenza, H1N1 does not disproportionately infect adults older than 60 years; this was an unusual and characteristic feature of the H1N1 pandemic.[9] Even in the case of previously very healthy people, a small percentage develop pneumonia or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). This manifests itself as increased breathing difficulty and typically occurs three to six days after initial onset of flu symptoms.[10][11]
Huh, looks like H1N1 was actually deadlier than coronavirus:
Every Briton over the age of 70 will be told "within the coming weeks" to stay at home for an extended period to protect themselves from coronavirus.
When it happens, they will be asked to stay home for "a very long time", Health Secretary Matt Hancock said.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51895873Every Briton over the age of 70 will be told "within the coming weeks" to stay at home for an extended period to protect themselves from coronavirus.
When it happens, they will be asked to stay home for "a very long time", Health Secretary Matt Hancock said.
@WookieMan looks like the British are going to implement your idea.
am not a prepper or gun owner.
I like you Wookie, but you are completely wrong on this and more than a tad hysterical.
Shitloads of businesses are going to go under if this response isn't recalibrated. And it likely won't be.
“They are throwing money in the wrong place,” Bair said of an unprecedented move by the Fed on Sunday to slash benchmark rates to zero and start a $700 billion Treasury- and mortgage-bond buying program.
“This isn’t a financial crisis — at least not yet,” she told MarketWatch on Sunday evening following the Fed’s announcement, which drops the target U.S. benchmark rate to zero and aims to shore up liquidity for banks and investors in the $15.6 trillion Treasury and $8.5 trillion agency mortgage bonds markets.
“Lowering interest rates to zero doesn’t help if businesses can’t pay their loans back and they don’t have cash flow,” she said. “We need to get help out there, especially to small businesses and people already losing their jobs.”
WookieMan saysam not a prepper or gun owner.
There is no excuse for the latter. What's wrong with you?
WookieMan saysShitloads of businesses are going to go under if this response isn't recalibrated. And it likely won't be.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/guid/ca4c0226-6713-11ea-9596-8a889527719f“They are throwing money in the wrong place,” Bair said of an unprecedented move by the Fed on Sunday to slash benchmark rates to zero and start a $700 billion Treasury- and mortgage-bond buying program.
“This isn’t a financial crisis — at least not yet,” she told MarketWatch on Sunday evening following the Fed’s announcement, which drops the target U.S. benchmark rate to zero and aims to shore up liquidity for banks and investors in the $15.6 trillion Treasury and $8.5 trillion agency mortgage bonds markets.
“Lowering interest rates to zero doesn’t help if businesses can’...
It's a cashflow crisis that turns into a financial crisis. Just not right away.
I think I've said it here, my cruise cancelled. I can get a future cruise credit worth 125% of the purchase price or a 100% cash refund. Guess what, can't request the refund until March 23. I don't think they have the cash on hand to manage this along with all the people cancelling 60-120 days out where they already have their cash. It's a ponzi scheme in essence and now that the future cruisers are bailing, they don't have the cash to reimburse. I hope I'm wrong.
Remember, this is spring break time people. Summer is a long period, but besides X-mas, spring break is probably #2 or 3 for jacking up prices and making huge $$$$. Airlines and travel industry is getting fucking smashed. Then domino it down to the local economies of rental cars, Ubers, restaurants, hotels, etc. and shit ain't good.
Also, it’s possible that the United States and other governments are well aware of this, they eventually figured it out, and that’s why there is such an extreme reaction by the governments of the world to try to contain it, and they are trying to prevent panic by covering up the actual death toll in China.
Slightly off the current topic. But, china had massive outbreak in a country of 1 billion with a delayed containment effort. They claim only somewhere around 70,000 cases, 3000 deaths in their country. Italy is already up to around 1000 in a few weeks, Iran is close, the death rates in other countries seem to be advancing pretty fast. Doesn’t it seem hard to believe China only had 3000 deaths in their country. The level of reaction in their country, the extent of the clamp down, all suggest that it was a much more serious situation than 3000 deaths. Seems to me this is much more deadly than China has admitted and the uninformed populations of the world are starting to find out right now. I don’t want this to be true at all. But the numbers in China don’t make sense based on what’s happened since it left China. Also, it’s possible that the United States and other governments are well aware of this, they eventually figured it out, and that’s why there is such an extreme reaction by the g...
PaisleyPattern saysSlightly off the current topic. But, china had massive outbreak in a country of 1 billion with a delayed containment effort. They claim only somewhere around 70,000 cases, 3000 deaths in their country. Italy is already up to around 1000 in a few weeks, Iran is close, the death rates in other countries seem to be advancing pretty fast. Doesn’t it seem hard to believe China only had 3000 deaths in their country. The level of reaction in their country, the extent of the clamp down, all suggest that it was a much more serious situation than 3000 deaths. Seems to me this is much more deadly than China has admitted and the uninformed populations of the world are starting to find out right now. I don’t want this to be true at all. But the numbers in China don’t make sense based on what’s happened since it left China. Also, it’s possible that the United States and other governments are well aware of this...
Well, I hope you’re right , I’m not immune to tinfoil type thoughts. I still don’t really understand why China would’ve reacted so extremely and threatened their whole economic stability over a disease that eventually only killed 3000 people. It’s possible that they realized it could’ve had a much greater impact I suppose and they stopped it in time.
mell saysPaisleyPattern saysSlightly off the current topic. But, china had massive outbreak in a country of 1 billion with a delayed containment effort. They claim only somewhere around 70,000 cases, 3000 deaths in their country. Italy is already up to around 1000 in a few weeks, Iran is close, the death rates in other countries seem to be advancing pretty fast. Doesn’t it seem hard to believe China only had 3000 deaths in their country. The level of reaction in their country, the extent of the clamp down, all suggest that it was a much more serious situation than 3000 deaths. Seems to me this is much more deadly than China has admitted and the uninformed populations of the world are starting to find out right now. I don’t want this to be true at all. But the numbers in China don’t make sense based on what’s happened since it left China. Also, ...
For them with so much pollution and so many smokers the fallout would have been unbearable, losing factory workers en masse. So a hard curfew / lockdown for a few weeks was a good decision on their part. It will work in Italy and Spain as well now that people can't go out at all and can only be in numbers of two at the grocery store at the same time and are only allowed to leave house for emergencies and groceries. This is a serious illness mainly due to its high R0 so of you want to save your elderly and prevent spread these measures are necessary. Wookie is right though if you would toss morals aside it would prob be better for the youth to keep running the country and quarantine the old instead. We're sort of doing the opposite. Either way the measures enacted by many states will slow the spread.
PaisleyPattern saysmell saysPaisleyPattern saysSlightly off the current topic. But, china had massive outbreak in a country of 1 billion with a delayed containment effort. They claim only somewhere around 70,000 cases, 3000 deaths in their country. Italy is already up to around 1000 in a few weeks, Iran is close, the death rates in other countries seem to be advancing pretty fast. Doesn’t it seem hard to believe China only had 3000 deaths in their country. The level of reaction in their country, the extent of the clamp down, all suggest that it was a much more serious situation than 3000 deaths. Seems to me this is much more deadly than China has admitted and the uninformed populations of the world are starting to find out right now. I don’t want this to be true at all. But...
As I understand it, the current approach by the CDC in the US is to slow the spread of the virus so that the number of cases won’t overwhelm our healthcare capacity. The CDC is assuming that there is no way no way prevent the eventual exposure of the entire population to the virus, with the eventual infection of 40 to 70% of the population.
Their goal is just to slow it down so that there will be smaller numbers of sick people in the healthcare system at any given time, and also this will give the pharmaceutical companies time to develop treatments , and possibly a vaccine, and to build up medical supplies and devices which will be necessary to handle the number of sick and dying people. Even if only 50% of the country eventually gets infected, that would mean more than two million deaths.That sounds pretty substantial to me. No one in the CDC is claiming that we will be able to prevent widespread infection.
Do you still think that the fatalities are going to be minor, but that that the economic consequences of the over reaction will be the real problem?
3/ the extreme reactions by governments, especially the United States, now, to try to control it.
china had massive outbreak in a country of 1 billion
PaisleyPattern sayschina had massive outbreak in a country of 1 billion
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China
Population 1,427,647,786 (2018 data)
Italy is now close to 2000 in only a few weeks.
PaisleyPattern saysDo you still think that the fatalities are going to be minor, but that that the economic consequences of the over reaction will be the real problem?
I haven't really cared about the fatalities in all honesty. In the grand scheme of world population, it's not going to be a big deal at all.
The economic consequences will most certainly kill more people. I still think we're overreacting 100%. But, at this point if we're going to overreact let's go full retard I guess is my point of view in the timeline of events, hence my change of tone in the last 24 hours.
I also don't have much choice as the reaction is government mandated. Starting tomorrow I cannot go have lunch at a bar here in IL. Have a flight scheduled for Saturday, but realistically know that it's going to be cancelled and have decent info that domestic air is going to be grounded.
Paisley responds:
My concern is that China’s reaction, which was extreme, is an indication of the true nature of the risks and fatalities of this virus. Similarly, our countries reaction, which really is unprecedented and immense is also indicative of our governments knowledge of the actual infectiousness and likely fatalities and impact on our healthcare system and our society in general. I think the government isn’t telling us the truth.
If you assume this is much worse than our government is telling us, then China’s reaction, and our country’s reaction makes sense, and it isn’t an overreaction, it’s an appropriate reaction to a scenario that they are keeping from the public to prevent widespread panic.
I’ve already been accused of tinfoil thinking, and that is fair enough, I am suggesting
the US government is perpetrating a massive cover-up on our population, it wouldn’t be the first time, and I’m sure it would be justified by the goal of preventing panic.
PaisleyPattern saysItaly is now close to 2000 in only a few weeks.
Italy is different from the US or China.
Italy has open borders.
Italy has an unusually large elderly population.
Italy seems to have flu issues in other years as well:
https://www.thelocal.it/20180119/italy-worst-flu-season-in-14-years
2018 was an unusually bad year everywhere, even in the US, but nobody made a big deal about it:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/10/02/flu-season-arrives-after-highest-death-rate-in-four-decades-80000-estimated/
« First « Previous Comments 763 - 802 of 3,372 Next » Last » Search these comments
patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,259,800 comments by 15,046 users - Ceffer online now