Wuhan Coronavirus epidemic spreads from China to US

I didn't really need you to answer that , I knew exactly what was coming { Fr right wing playbook to a T} . Your collateral damage mostly applying to the Northeast is specious at best . You always have an out with idea . So the states saved lives by opening and more people being infected . You are the EC expert . That isn't a compliment here and your reluctance to admit being not just wrong but WAYYYYYY off initially is the reason you are furiously trying to be the expert far right winger with every talking point covered to deflect and minimize the National and federal response. The failure to execute of any real central plan to unite the country in this fight and the divisiveness that has led us to be the king of the world in Covid response , cases death an economic pain . You act as if you knew this was the way this was going to go all along and we are doing just fine overall and the Prez and VP have been real national leaders here and haven't spewed lies and misinformation from the get go and it continues now.

The bottom line for you.is minimizing the responsibility of the President and the VP and trying to make a case that it's not their responsibility at all and that we are doing very well in our fight compared to others { Wrong Wrong and as wrong as he was lying to quell panic and this isn't a serious virus folks}

And what do you base this on? Is the Northeast somehow immune to the economic ravages of the shut down? I wonder what song you'll be singing when NY City goes bankrupt?

You do know that the connection between poverty and adverse health events is as strong as that linking smoking to bad health outcomes. And you must realize that the shut down threatened to push us into a depression? And nothing increases poverty like a good old fashioned depression.

The collateral damage resulting from the Northeast States not reopening as soon as the Southern states is going to become very apparent over the coming months & years.
 
Now here's an amazing covid factoid that I bet you weren't aware of - the virus doesn't target gay people. That's right gay folks must be immune because I'm not hearing anyone complain about this little PRIDE gathering:



And isn't Chicago still in a shut down? Aren't they limiting the size of their gatherings?
 
If this turns out to be true it changes everything:



Then they ran tests on samples taken between January 2018 and December 2019 and found the presence of the virus genome in one of them, collected on March 12, 2019.

“The levels of SARS-CoV-2 were low but were positive,” research leader Albert Bosch was quoted as saying by the university.


Maybe we really are in the 2nd phase?
 
If this turns out to be true it changes everything:



Then they ran tests on samples taken between January 2018 and December 2019 and found the presence of the virus genome in one of them, collected on March 12, 2019.

“The levels of SARS-CoV-2 were low but were positive,” research leader Albert Bosch was quoted as saying by the university.



Maybe we really are in the 2nd phase?
Hopefully . I really have always rooted for this to be closer to the end and totally contained and fir Lotty to be right in his optimism and initial downplaying . Hasn’t worked out so far He hasn’t been right the President and VP have been very disappointing in their leadership ( show of hands how many EC luminary’s believed Pence in early May that this would be behind us by Memorial Day and the economy would be back roaring ?) This is a fluid situation and we can hope
 
This makes a solid argument that the lock down strategy was wrong:


First place the covid risk in proper perspective:

Young people, possibly from the recent protests and riots, are likely behind the recent spike in cases, and that tells us a lot about why the data looks the way it does right now. According to the CDC’s current best estimate, the fatality rate of the coronavirus for symptomatic cases only are as follows:
  • 0-49 years old: .05%
  • 50-64 years old: .2%
  • 65+ years old: 1.3%
  • Overall ages: .4%
When you take into account that approximately 30% of coronavirus infections are asymptomatic, that drives the fatality rate down even further. “The risk of death for the general population of school and working age is typically in the range of a daily car ride to work,” notes Josh Ketter on Medium.


And this strategy likely would have worked out much better:

What the data is clearly telling us is that the lockdowns were not implemented correctly. While there is a significant risk for the older, at-risk population, for those under 65 years of age, the economy could have been kept open. Schools didn’t have to close down, and “non-essential” businesses could have continued to serve the public, many of whom had as much a chance of dying from the coronavirus as they did dying on their daily commute, but the lockdowns kept everyone, including the young and healthy, at home.
 
I think that in the end, after all the collateral damage from the lock downs has been factored in the Swedish approach will be proven to have been the best:

 
More encouraging data on the low risk of catching covid from children:



Epidemiologist Arnaud Fontanet and colleagues said more studies on schools were needed because of the small number of cases they were able to study. They found that an estimated 41% of the children infected showed no symptoms, compared with about 10% of adults.
 
I was wrong about transmission but I was right about deaths plummeting.
Lotty you’ve been spot on since day one . No need to admit being wrong . You’ve just been a smidge less right at times . Keep us up to date on what’s going to happen next as you’ve been doing . You are doing us a great service .
 
I tried to get a look at testing over time but I could only find total testing numbers and NYS is near the top there. I do suspect that more recently the states with the big up ticks have been testing more then NY City.

Look there's no doubt that a more aggressive reopening would lead to more infections. How could it not. The real question was whether those extra infections meant more hospitalizations and deaths and so far they haven't. In fact deaths continue to drop and any hospitalization increases are due to hospitals lowering the bar for covid admittance.

And don't forget that states like NJ & NY which have seen horrific death totals compared to the states currently seeing case spikes are going to be dealing with much more serious shut down collateral damage. And they'll be dealing with these problems for a lot longer then the states seeing a spike in their infection numbers.
You can’t be serious. More cases does lead to more hospitalizations and deaths than there would be otherwise. The improvements in treatment and the infections of younger people will lower the death rate but make no mistake, more people will go to the hospital and die than otherwise would have if they had not been infected. To argue anything else if ridiculous.
 
Red State Governors struggling....and shutting things down. Since Trump quit the pandemic they are pretty much on their own and the virus does not really care about politics. I think all the experts predicted this...

" "
Could it be we are a big country and that it just takes time for this mildly dangerous virus to spread around the country? Makes sense that the coasts were hit first before middle America.
 
When covid-19 deaths are analysed by age, America is an outlier
American casualties tend to be younger than European ones, which has grim implications
coviddeaths.jpg


 
When covid-19 deaths are analysed by age, America is an outlier
American casualties tend to be younger than European ones, which has grim implications
View attachment 8073



Three points on this article:

1) Americans have a lot of underlining medical conditions particularly diabetes & obesity that make them more vulnerable.

2) Look closely at the first graph you posted. Where do they get the "to many to soon" headline from? The slope of US deaths appears to be less steep then that for the major European country's. This indicates that we did a better job of mitigation and flattening the curve.

3) Funny how they claim that a small difference in the number of younger Americans dying with covid will lead to "grim implications". I would suggest that a far greater # of deaths among young Americans will be caused by the shut down. This will have far worse implications for our future. One of the key arguments AGAINST shutting down is the terrible toll it will take on younger Americans.
 
You can’t be serious. More cases does lead to more hospitalizations and deaths than there would be otherwise. The improvements in treatment and the infections of younger people will lower the death rate but make no mistake, more people will go to the hospital and die than otherwise would have if they had not been infected. To argue anything else if ridiculous.

And do you think that continuing the shut down while providing exemptions to mass gatherings for certain political causes was actually going to PERMANENTLY reduce the # of infections? All it would have done is stretch out the time until we hit the same # of infections and deaths.

And since our hospitals and health care system is not in danger of being overwhelmed it's better to reopen, take the infection hit and get to herd immunity or a vaccine. At least in this way we avoid the massive collateral damage of the shut don. Collateral damage that you and others always forget to include.
 


Of all the lies you've posted on this topic Harry his might be the worst. Tens of thousands of MORE deaths. Really? In spite of the virus weakening and not being very dangerous among younger, healthier people? So had we continued the shut down, while still allowing mass gatherings for the right political causes, we would have prevented these extra infections from EVER happening? Is that what this moron is suggesting in his tweet?

And of course shut downs have zero cost. No collateral damage to see here folks just move along.
 
You can’t be serious. More cases does lead to more hospitalizations and deaths than there would be otherwise. The improvements in treatment and the infections of younger people will lower the death rate but make no mistake, more people will go to the hospital and die than otherwise would have if they had not been infected. To argue anything else if ridiculous.
Kind of like if people are exposed to the flu and die right?
 
For those that want to get a 2nd opinion on mask wearing here's an article written by a brain surgeon.



Seems to me that it's always a good idea to get a 2nd opinion on any medical procedure. And given how wrong the CDC and various State Health Departments have been about everything related to covid a 2nd opinion is mandated here.
 
Please keep comparing this to the flu. :ROFLMAO:

What else would you compare it to? The Black Plague or Ebola?

You are aware that most of the mitigation efforts undertaken against ciovid19 came directly from what we do to fight the flu. In the absence of solid data on the covid19 the flu makes for a good surrogate.

The flu is also a highly contagious virus that kills people every year. Comparing it's virulence & progression over the decades to covid19 is a great way to sharpen and attenuate our response to covid19. It provides all important perspective on how we handle this outbreak.
 
Top