Jump to content
LOTROCommunity
Sign in to follow this  
Papi

COVID-19 (Coronavirus)

Recommended Posts

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51984275
 

UK government is giving businesses a pay packet to cover 80% of employee earnings up to £2,500, for potentially 3 months (they're optimistic). So if you're earning more than that, self-employed, freelance, or even between jobs, you're fucked. And it's a double-fucking if a lock-down starts soon, because then you really have no source of income. Suddenly there's a lot of money in the coffers for businesses, or technically the future coffers are going to be pretty bare, all for the sake of unviable business practices biting their owners. Meanwhile, there are those of us who have had to make sure we have savings in place for these sorts of situations because we can't trust wider society to cope with what would otherwise be a minor crisis.

Maybe businesses shouldn't be running on such a thin line between profit and failure? Perhaps those at the top making millions a year should be forced to wait until they've got a financial buffer in place? Richard Branson of all people is asking for bailouts, the guy owns a damn island. But that aside, one of the (likely intended) side-effects of paying businesses is that it once again makes being salaried seem like the only attractive/viable option for income, as TPTB can't have too many people trying to make it in the world outside of that more easily controlled arrangement.

On a side note, I find it slightly amusing that the go-to response to a crisis in the western world is to institute socialism and totalitarianism. I wonder just how much of that is going to be left in place once the world returns to "normal". I'm already putting good odds on cash being phased out entirely under the excuse of hygiene. "All the better to control you with, my dear."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Doro said:

I wasn't talking about either of our opinions really

noted.

10 hours ago, Doro said:

I was only pointing out why there's controversy around the term when it comes to Trump and the media.

fair enough.  however...  back to my gas-lighting point...

up here in Canada there was a media surge on a report of a Muslim women getting harassed in a supermarket.  the story was ramping up and the typical media gas-lighting over treatment of Muslims was about to take off.  turns out both women in the said altercation were Muslim, just one was Shia and the other Sunni.  the story sank like a pallet of granite bricks.

so yeah i hear the media regurgitating China-Regime talking points, but...  how many actual incidents are even occurring?

are the incidents in fact actual Trump supporters attacking, (and not some other conflict altogether?  ((gang related?  inter-Asian conflict? family conflicts? etc.) )  how many actual confirmable incidents are happening, if any?  because the hoax claims aren't something new with regard to defaming, or framing the racial narrative.

if a White House staffer actually used the term, "Kung Flu"  you think producing the name of the said person would be easy...  not so:

10 hours ago, Doro said:

If we're getting into our own views on modern mainland Chinese culture, Trump calling the virus Chinese would likely pale in comparison.

indeed.


this one has some translation:

doesn't include troops response, but it is basically "praise" and "thanks" to "Great Leader." 

not a rare happening either:

for a purview into the Chinese propaganda machine at work, just use the search terms, "Xi Jinping inspects"  and then go look at any commentary that follows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EToAdexWkAEcne1?format=jpg&name=large

 

The UK is on track with Italy, yet there are people moaning about not being able to go for a pint.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, cossieuk said:

The UK is on track with Italy, yet there are people moaning about not being able to go for a pint.  

It seems to be because the people it's killing are a very clear minority: the old and the already sick. Shutting down services for people who are under 50ish (even 60ish) and with no medical conditions is the equivalent of shutting down services for everyone because of a cold that only kills amputees. It should be business as usual for the majority, and all the resources focused on isolation of the vulnerable to get them through the storm (providing this virus does have a standard immune situation, because if it doesn't then it's just going to be a yearly cycle of sick/old dying and that can't be stopped without the development of an annual vaccine).

Plus, the people it's killing are apparently also the same people who are most likely to die from everything else even without COVID-19.

"Would these people be dying anyway?

The figures for coronavirus are eye-watering. But what is not clear - because the modellers did not map this - is to what extent the deaths would have happened without coronavirus.

Of course, this will never truly be known until the pandemic is over, which is why modelling is very difficult and needs caveats.

But given that the old and frail are the most vulnerable, would these people be dying anyway?

Every year more than 500,000 people die in England and Wales: factor in Scotland and Northern Ireland, and the figure tops 600,000.

The coronavirus deaths will not be on top of this. Many would be within this "normal" number of expected deaths. In short, they would have died anyway.

It was a point conceded by Sir Patrick at a press conference on Thursday when he said there would be "some overlap" between coronavirus deaths and expected deaths - he just did not know how much of an overlap."

Media-spread hysteria has been the much greater threat and much more damaging to the UK than this virus justifies.

 

23 hours ago, Doro said:

Two Days Later..... | SpongeBob Time Card #98 - YouTube

Country,
Other
Total
Cases
New
Cases
Total
Deaths
New
Deaths
Total
Recovered
Active
Cases
Serious,
Critical
Tot Cases/
1M pop
China 80,967   3,248   71,150 6,569 2,136 56
Italy 47,021 +5,986 4,032 +627 5,129 37,860 2,655 778
Spain 21,510 +3,433 1,093 +262 1,588 18,829 939 460
Germany 19,848 +4,528 68 +24 180 19,600 2 237
Iran 19,644 +1,237 1,433 +149 6,745 11,466   234
USA 19,393 +5,604 256 +49 147 18,990 64 59
France 12,612 +1,617 450 +78 1,587 10,575 1,297 193
S. Korea 8,652 +87 94 +3 2,233 6,325 59 169
Switzerland 5,407 +1,185 56 +13 15 5,336   625
UK 3,983 +714 177 +33 65 3,741 20 59

 

Country,
Other
Total
Cases
New
Cases
Total
Deaths
New
Deaths
Total
Recovered
Active
Cases
Serious,
Critical
Tot Cases/
1M pop
China 81,008   3,255   71,740 6,013 1,927 56
Italy 53,578 +6,557 4,825 +793 6,072 42,681 2,857 886
Spain 25,496 +3,925 1,378 +285 2,125 21,993 1,612 545
USA 23,940 +4,557 301 +45 171 23,468 64 72
Germany 22,364 +2,516 84 +16 209 22,071 2 267
Iran 20,610 +966 1,556 +123 7,635 11,419   245
France 14,459 +1,847 562 +112 1,587 12,310 1,525 222
S. Korea 8,799 +147 102 +8 2,612 6,085 59 172
Switzerland 6,863 +1,248 80 +24 131 6,652 141 793
UK 5,018 +1,035 233 +56 93 4,692 20 74

 

Holy hell, the US almost hit the top 3 before this week was over, let alone my prediction that it would hit it next week. And look at China, still pretending it's all sorted out, bless their little cottons. The surprising thing about all this is just how quickly and suddenly things are changing on a day by day basis. I genuinely couldn't guess where things will be by the end of April.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be that some of them would have died this year anyway, but many would not have.  The youngest death in the UK is currently 41.  Younger people will die from this.

Well the number who die each year will end up balancing out over the next couple of years, the NHS is struggling and it is only a matter of time before the staff start having to make the horrible decision of who to treat and who to just let die as the dont have the resources to treat everyone 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Doro said:

The surprising thing about all this is just how quickly and suddenly things are changing on a day by day basis. I genuinely couldn't guess where things will be by the end of April.

Given that people are not practicing social distancing, the videos of Richmond Park are ridiculous, it will get a lot worse. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those that are throwing stones at the US for not acting soon enough.... here's a press release on January 29th announcing the formation of the Coronavirus Task Force https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-press-secretary-regarding-presidents-coronavirus-task-force/ , and here's the Wiki article on it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Coronavirus_Task_Force

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, cossieuk said:

Given that people are not practicing social distancing, the videos of Richmond Park are ridiculous, it will get a lot worse. 

I saw something about Snowdonia seeing record visitors recently, too. It's funny to see that the minute people get some freedom from work (except the poor bastards who have to work from home still... strange considering how most companies managed to get that going after years of saying working from home isn't possible), they immediately go exploring.

But talking of things getting worse, the whole spring-break culture in the US is ripe for bumping up the already insane numbers. It takes a hell of a lot of work to beat China's figures, but they managed it. Also, notice the slight increase for Hong Kong. Seems like 3 weeks is roughly the length of time it takes for people to start getting fed up with lock-downs and letting their guard down. If the UK goes full lock-down because people are still gathering in large numbers, the following month will be interesting to see.

A graphic with no description

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Doro said:

It takes a hell of a lot of work to beat China's figures, but they managed it.

Maybe because you're using numbers that are approved by the CCP (because they're several orders of magnitude less than what they actually are)?

A large part of the problem with the numbers in the US is that it's so big it makes getting enough tests out to places that need them is making identifying the actual infected population anybody's guess.... let alone getting said tests manufactured and distributed - which indicates that all the stats you've been showing are hypothetical bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Almagnus1 said:

A large part of the problem with the numbers in the US is that it's so big it makes getting enough tests out to places that need them is making identifying the actual infected population anybody's guess.... let alone getting said tests manufactured and distributed - which indicates that all the stats you've been showing are hypothetical bullshit.

"anybody who needs a test can get a test...the tests are beautiful...the tests are perfect"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Almagnus1 said:

A large part of the problem with the numbers in the US is that it's so big it makes getting enough tests out to places that need them is making identifying the actual infected population anybody's guess....

All that means is that the US figures are higher than recorded, then. Nothing hypothetical about recorded cases. Unless you have more concrete figures?

 

Back on stats:

Country,
Other
Total
Cases
New
Cases
Total
Deaths
New
Deaths
Total
Recovered
Active
Cases
Serious,
Critical
Tot Cases/
1M pop
China 81,093 +39 3,270 +9 72,703 5,120 1,749 56
Italy 59,138   5,476   7,024 46,638 3,000 978
USA 35,075 +1,529 458 +39 178 34,439 795 106
Spain 33,089 +4,321 2,182 +410 3,355 27,552 2,355 708
Germany 26,220 +1,347 111 +17 422 25,687 23 313
Iran 23,049 +1,411 1,812 +127 8,376 12,861   274
France 16,481 +463 674   2,200 13,607 1,746 252
S. Korea 8,961 +64 111 +7 3,166 5,684 59 175
Switzerland 8,547 +1,073 118 +20 131 8,298 141 988
UK 5,683   289 +8 135 5,259 20 84

 

Predictions on top 3 for Friday? I'm guessing China doesn't change much because of obvious covering up so it slips to 3rd place. Italy at 2nd place on 85,000. US best at coronavirus, they know more than anyone else about coronavirus, on 100,000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Papi said:

"anybody who needs a test can get a test...the tests are beautiful...the tests are perfect"

Operative word there is "need".  Most healthy people under the age of 40 don't need to be tested as they're (most likely) going to survive the Kung Flu.

6 hours ago, Doro said:

All that means is that the US figures are higher than recorded, then. Nothing hypothetical about recorded cases. Unless you have more concrete figures?

As are China's.  I've heard their actual death count is in the millions, and the CCP is suppressing that information, kinda like how they suppressed the doctor that first found this thing and basically created this entire epidemic.  Winnie the Pooh has certainly outdone himself this time.

6 hours ago, Doro said:
Country,
Other
Total
Cases
New
Cases
Total
Deaths
New
Deaths
Total
Recovered
Active
Cases
Serious,
Critical
Tot Cases/
1M pop
China 81,093 +39 3,270 +9 72,703 5,120 1,749 56
Italy 59,138   5,476   7,024 46,638 3,000 978
USA 35,075 +1,529 458 +39 178 34,439 795 106
Spain 33,089 +4,321 2,182 +410 3,355 27,552 2,355 708
Germany 26,220 +1,347 111 +17 422 25,687 23 313
Iran 23,049 +1,411 1,812 +127 8,376 12,861   274
France 16,481 +463 674   2,200 13,607 1,746 252
S. Korea 8,961 +64 111 +7 3,166 5,684 59 175
Switzerland 8,547 +1,073 118 +20 131 8,298 141 988
UK 5,683   289 +8 135 5,259 20 84

Take a look at the cases per million, as that's the number that better normalizes how the countries are doing.  The US currently has several major population centers infected, so of our estimated total population of 327.2M, the major cities in California (39.5M), Florida (21.5M) and New York (19.5M) are likely to drive infection numbers up.  As far as Texas goes (29.0M), distance is helping here, as are the shelter at home order currently ongoing in one of the metro areas (Dallas County, 2.6M - DFW Metro area has around 7.4M).

Let's put this into perspective, Europe has a land area of roughly 10.180M km^2, while the lower 48 US land area is 7.65M km^2 (Alaska is a freaking huge state at 1.48 M km^2 which is why I'm only counting lower 48).  So while Europe has a population of 742.6M people, the US has roughly half of that... meaning that Europe is going to get wrecked by Coronavirus while the US will likely weather it just fine, mostly due to population density.

China doing what they have been doing to aggravate this pandemic coupled with their complete bungling of the initial stages when they figured out what was going on as we suspect by December 12, 2020 (see https://thethaiger.com/hot-news/tourism/chinese-scientists-identify-the-wuhan-virus-screening-continues-on-thai-bound-flights ) is likely going to get them economically slaughtered by sanctions as the US thinking towards China is "embargo them back into the stone age" as China denied the US critical supplies which has made things over here worse than they really should be.

And the amusing thing about all of this... it's going to influence the US 2020 election as Coronavirus has proven Trump right about the need to secure our borders, manage immigration, and have critical industries ONLY in the US - so while Trump is doing almost daily news conferences, Joe Biden is no where to be seen.  Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, is actually staying somewhat relevant but the Democrat super delegates don't want him so.... let's just say it's going to be interesting later this year =D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Almagnus1 said:

Take a look at the cases per million, as that's the number that better normalizes how the countries are doing.

It doesn't really, for two reasons.

1. The virus isn't aware of the total population available. It won't spread any faster in a larger population than a smaller one, as it's density that factors in there (which, as you've said, the US should be doing better for with a lower density, but currently isn't due to a more accurately representative population density in urban areas). I'd be interested in seeing individual population centres across all nations, but the figures are hard to come by.

2. It doesn't factor in time. The US is still a few days behind the heavy hitters. In just 5 days, their infected per 1m quadrupled. They're 11 days behind Italy, so there's lots of room for that number to match or even exceed the fallen Romans' figures.

It's all about how high and how steep that curve gets, really. The lower the better and unfortunately the US seems to becoming the global leader in the virus (excluding China, because right now they're going full commie and hiding the truth).

3 hours ago, Almagnus1 said:

... as China denied the US critical supplies which has made things over here worse than they really should be.

China's certainly responsible for the virus, but I don't think you can blame how the US is(n't) handling the outbreak on them. Is this something Trump's said, by any chance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Doro said:

It doesn't really, for two reasons.

1. The virus isn't aware of the total population available. It won't spread any faster in a larger population than a smaller one, as it's density that factors in there (which, as you've said, the US should be doing better for with a lower density, but currently isn't due to a more accurately representative population density in urban areas). I'd be interested in seeing individual population centres across all nations, but the figures are hard to come by.

2. It doesn't factor in time. The US is still a few days behind the heavy hitters. In just 5 days, their infected per 1m quadrupled. They're 11 days behind Italy, so there's lots of room for that number to match or even exceed the fallen Romans' figures.

It's all about how high and how steep that curve gets, really. The lower the better and unfortunately the US seems to becoming the global leader in the virus (excluding China, because right now they're going full commie and hiding the truth).

China's certainly responsible for the virus, but I don't think you can blame how the US is(n't) handling the outbreak on them. Is this something Trump's said, by any chance?

I try to convice people too that population size doesn't matter yet, but it's so f*cking difficult for people to understand...

 

And I'm really curious about infection numbers in China and the true infection rate, mortality rate; I think infection rate is much higher, thus mortality much lower, especially for those with no other medical issues. And I think we are overreacting, the economic damage done by the current measures is so high, that I fear it will cause many more deaths in the coming years than the direct deaths because of Corona. Especially because I think most of those who pass away would have passed away within in the next 2-5 years anyway. 

Though I understand that policy makers can't ignore public pressure and that emotion wins from ratio in these situations.

 

Edit: And I think the largest problem is the desinformation campaigns going on; Western governments blaming the east, Russia destabilizing the West, China blaming the West. And yeah, it makes sense to do it, because it is better for those in charge to blame others than yourself, but truth is hard to find

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thrabath said:

I try to convice people too that population size doesn't matter yet, but it's so f*cking difficult for people to understand...

I kind of get why that's the case as well. It seems logical, right? 100 million people compared to 1 million people, it should make sense to spread faster with more people, or having infected numbers be less important for a larger population. A lot of these simulations out there are a bit flawed, but a few make it more obvious as to why population size doesn't really matter when it comes to infection rates.

1 hour ago, Thrabath said:

And I'm really curious about infection numbers in China and the true infection rate, mortality rate; I think infection rate is much higher, thus mortality much lower, especially for those with no other medical issues. And I think we are overreacting, the economic damage done by the current measures is so high, that I fear it will cause many more deaths in the coming years than the direct deaths because of Corona. Especially because I think most of those who pass away would have passed away within in the next 2-5 years anyway. 

Though I understand that policy makers can't ignore public pressure and that emotion wins from ratio in these situations.

I'm with you on all of this.

1 hour ago, Thrabath said:

Edit: And I think the largest problem is the desinformation campaigns going on; Western governments blaming the east, Russia destabilizing the West, China blaming the West. And yeah, it makes sense to do it, because it is better for those in charge to blame others than yourself, but truth is hard to find

I've seen a lot of discussion as well about how these sorts of events can make or break a dynasty, hence all the world powers scrabbling for the best position after the crisis dies down. It's all going to be a massive propaganda-fest for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Doro said:

I kind of get why that's the case as well. It seems logical, right? 100 million people compared to 1 million people, it should make sense to spread faster with more people, or having infected numbers be less important for a larger population

I don't recall anyone suggesting anything about it spreading faster with a higher population. That smells like a giant moronic straw man to me.

The latter is true however. I'm surprised people can't understand that. Take two countries with the same number of deaths and infected. One country has far more population than the other. That country is almost certainly going to be less impacted overall. 

Just look at China's normal annual mortality rate in 2018: 7.13 per 1000 .

https://www.statista.com/statistics/270165/death-rate-in-china/

https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/china-population/

Out of 1.427 billion people that works out more than 10 million deaths in a normal year.

You're insane if you don't think the same 10 million deaths in the UK or Australia wouldn't have a very different (i.e. catastrophic) impact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Bohemond said:

I don't recall anyone suggesting anything about it spreading faster with a higher population. That smells like a giant moronic straw man to me.

That's the implication behind trying to suggest the US per 1 million rate is more appropriate, i.e. because that number is low because of a higher population, it's therefore not as bad of a situation. What you're smelling is your own stupidity.

38 minutes ago, Bohemond said:

The latter is true however. I'm surprised people can't understand that. Take two countries with the same number of deaths and infected. One country has far more population than the other. That country is almost certainly going to be less impacted overall.

You're completely missing that the virus continues to spread. Those deaths and infected aren't stopping at a snapshot from the first few weeks of the outbreak. The fatality rate works as a percentage, and percentages don't care about one population being larger than another.

38 minutes ago, Bohemond said:

You're insane if you don't think the same 10 million deaths in the UK or Australia wouldn't have a very different (i.e. catastrophic) impact.

You're insane if you think the spread will magically stop in a larger population at the threshold of a smaller population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Addressing points made as you requested:

3 hours ago, Doro said:

because that number is low because of a higher population

Straw man. I never said nor implied any causal relationship between cases and population.

 

3 hours ago, Doro said:

You're completely missing that the virus continues to spread

Another straw man. I've never even remotely implied that I thought the virus had stopped spreading. 

 

3 hours ago, Doro said:

Those deaths and infected aren't stopping at a snapshot

Yet another man of straw. Never said they were. 

 

3 hours ago, Doro said:

if you think the spread will magically stop in a larger population at the threshold of a smaller population.

Man of straw number four. Never said nor implied this at all.

I reiterate - you are welcome to reply to something I have actually said if you'd like. Otherwise, you might as well just type out my posts for me and counter those. Saves us both a lot of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Bohemond said:

Straw man. I never said nor implied any causal relationship between cases and population.

Except you did when you said cases per 1m is what should be looked at.

Quote

Another straw man. I've never even remotely implied that I thought the virus had stopped spreading. 

Again, it's required if you're trying to compare equal case numbers for a smaller and larger population. Clearly, the larger will continue to increase in case numbers.

Quote

Yet another man of straw. Never said they were. 

Same as above.

Quote

Man of straw number four. Never said nor implied this at all.

Again, you did by trying to suggest some how China will only have 10 million if UK or Australia had that amount. Clearly, they would be proportional, so a catastrophic death count for one nation would be the same proportionally for another.

Quote

I reiterate - you are welcome to reply to something I have actually said if you'd like.

Already did, twice now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Doro said:

Except you did when you said cases per 1m is what should be looked at.

I simply said it was important. Everything else you have argued against is your projection and imagination.

3 hours ago, Doro said:

trying to suggest some how China will only have 10 million if UK or Australia had that amount

I have no idea how you can possibly come up with this interpretation from what I said. I never suggested there was any magical causal link between the cases in Australia and UK, and those in China. I wasn't even discussing coronavirus deaths in that example. Your argument is that cases per million doesn't matter. I was simply making the bleedingly obvious point that if the normal proportional deaths per year in China of about 10 million was replicated in the absolute in a much smaller country, the effect would be vastly different. This neatly illustrates that cases per million does matter. 10 million is a rounding error for China. It's more than 1/3 of my country.

3 hours ago, Doro said:

Clearly, they would be proportional, so a catastrophic death count for one nation would be the same proportionally for another.

That's right. Which has been my point all along. If the proportion is different between one country and another, then the country is overall in better shape at that moment in time. I haven't even brought up the reasons why this might be the case.

Edited by Doro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Bohemond said:

I simply said it was important. Everything else you have argued against is your projection and imagination.

Then how is it important? In what way does infected per 1m matter if not by trying to minimise the total infected by the total population size?

19 minutes ago, Bohemond said:

I have no idea how you can possibly come up with this interpretation from what I said. I never suggested there was any magical causal link between the cases in Australia and UK, and those in China. I wasn't even discussing coronavirus deaths in that example. Your argument is that cases per million doesn't matter. I was simply making the bleedingly obvious point that if the normal proportional deaths per year in China of about 10 million was replicated in the absolute in a much smaller country, the effect would be vastly different. This neatly illustrates that cases per million does matter. 10 million is a rounding error for China. It's more than 1/3 of my country.

Okay, let me walk you through it: you said for China, 10m is relatively normal, but that would be a lot in UK or Australia. Yep, that's fine. However, you're trying to use it to suggest equal infected numbers between a larger and a smaller country then means the larger country is less impacted. Again, I have to point out that those infected numbers in the larger population are still temporary. You're using a snapshot, when the point is this is a ever-spreading virus and those two populations are not going to remain with equal infected numbers.

To flip it around, if we say 10m in the UK/Australia is a lot, proportionally that would be a much higher number for China, obviously. In the context of this virus, it's not going to be an absolute figure across all countries, it's going to be proportional.

19 minutes ago, Bohemond said:

That's right. Which has been my point all along. If the proportion is different between one country and another, then the country is overall in better shape at that moment in time. I haven't even brought up the reasons why this might be the case.

Which is pointless, because it's not ending at that moment in time. The virus hasn't stopped, so trying to use population sizes to minimise infection rates is redundant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A reply to Las from the election thread.

8 minutes ago, LasraelLarson said:

what if the virus is spreading via asymptomatic viral shedding?

As far as I know, this is the case and has been strongly suspected for a couple of months now. I've been reading claims based on Icelandic tests that at least half of those who carry the virus are asymptomatic, so it's likely most don't even know they have it. Add in that it was shown that even those who showed symptoms were able to spread the virus before said symptoms manifested, you're looking at a virus being passed around unaware carriers.

8 minutes ago, LasraelLarson said:

why is it assumed the Wuhan Virus has only one stage?  Herpes (2 stage) is also a virus, once caught, it never goes away.

It's based on what's known of previous coronavirus strains. I don't know much about herpes, but I don't think it's in the same sort of "family" as Chinese Originated Virally Infectious Disease-19.

8 minutes ago, LasraelLarson said:

what if the long term effects, don't actually provide immunity? or there are byproducts of infection?

how much is actually known regarding this virus?

A lot more now in terms of short-term impacts. Long-term impacts are still being based on similar infections and their outcomes, which are fairly reliable but not certain.

Right now, there's four possible outcomes:

1. People develop an immunity to it and don't catch it again, the world breathes a sigh of relief, everything continues on like before until the next crisis.

2. People don't develop an immunity but there's a vaccine, people take it, the world breathes a sigh of relief, everything continues on like before until the next crisis.

3. People don't develop an immunity but there's a vaccine for this strain, the virus however mutates often enough to require yearly vaccination to avoid it, the world breathes a sigh of relief, everything continues on like before until the next crisis.

4. People don't develop an immunity and no vaccine is possible, it's like a cold on steroids, the world learns to deal with the fact that every year the old and the vulnerable will die, and the world quickly learns annual lock-downs aren't viable.

Any of the first 3 would be alright. The 4th one could mean the erosion of personal freedoms if governments use emotional responses to the virus as an excuse for greater control. They'll likely try that shit regardless, but they'll be able to push much harder under the assumption of no "cure".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Doro said:

As far as I know, this is the case and has been strongly suspected for a couple of months now.

assuming what is being transmitted via air is even the same thing...  what the face masks are for.

does this new brand of "sickness" have multiple vectors of transmission? or is there more than one strain in circulation?

has anyone considered 2 strains of "Wuhan" virus in circulation?

here we are almost 4 months later & what is known still seems rather fuzzy.

1 hour ago, Doro said:

It's based on what's known of previous coronavirus strains. I don't know much about herpes, but I don't think it's in the same sort of "family" as Chinese Originated Virally Infectious Disease-19.

Chinese doctors to first encounter it, said it was "SARS" like. which again plays to face masks being important.  but again, this assumes only some characteristics.  its the parts that aren't SARS "like" that has me asking questions.

1 hour ago, Doro said:

Long-term impacts are still being based on similar infections and their outcomes, which are fairly reliable but not certain.

1 hour ago, Doro said:

but not certain...

...

1 hour ago, Doro said:

Right now, there's four possible outcomes:

you seem certain.

 

1 hour ago, Doro said:

could mean the erosion of personal freedoms if governments use emotional responses to the virus as an excuse for greater control. They'll likely try that shit regardless, but they'll be able to push much harder under the assumption of no "cure".

cure, no cure...  it would be my guess this happens regardless.  some people are addicted to order:

giphy-2.gif

giphy.gif

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, LasraelLarson said:

assuming what is being transmitted via air is even the same thing...  what the face masks are for.

does this new brand of "sickness" have multiple vectors of transmission? or is there more than one strain in circulation?

The face masks are mostly to stop the spread from infected, not really the spread to uninfected. It catches water droplets from sneezing and coughing which is mostly how the virus is spreading. The issue with the asymptomatic seems to be poor hygiene practices, e.g. not washing their hands enough and touching everything with their contaminated digits.

6 minutes ago, LasraelLarson said:

has anyone considered 2 strains of "Wuhan" virus in circulation?

Yup, that's been speculated since the start. Some have even said one was already out there a few months before but misdiagnosed due to mild symptoms, while the "worse" strain popped up in Wuhan later. Neither currently has any evidence behind it.

6 minutes ago, LasraelLarson said:

here we are almost 4 months later & what is known still seems rather fuzzy.

Chinese doctors to first encounter it, said it was "SARS" like. which again plays to face masks being important.  but again, this assumes only some characteristics.  its the parts that aren't SARS "like" that has me asking questions.

It's also SARS-like in its viral type, not just symptoms. Both are coronaviruses, as is the common cold, and MERS. They tend to share the same sorts of symptoms and mostly respiratory based, so it's not like suddenly this one will be like the Ebola virus or mutate into HIV. To put it another way, we know what various canine species are like and they share a lot of features despite their few differences, but one isn't secretly a shark that's been overlooked.

6 minutes ago, LasraelLarson said:

you seem certain.

Certain of societal outcomes, yes. Not certain of (but still reasonably comfortable) with the long-term biological effects of the virus. Two different things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...