Coronavirus Thread

  • Thread starter Deleted member 2897
  • Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
jwsavhGT

jwsavhGT

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
4,531
Location
Savannah,GA
90526541_2198253320329485_1919563511856365568_o.png
 
GT_EE78

GT_EE78

Banned
Messages
3,605
bwelbo said:
This didn’t age well. 6,400 now. 4,600 to 6,400 in a single day
Click to expand...
that might be misleading as the 3/15 numbers(daily increase in new cases) appeared abnormally low( re - day over day increase). If you ignore 3/15 data and tabulate a two day average,then the rate of increase in " day to day" new cases is about 150 per day over the past 5 days. . I'm still trying to assess what "constant acceleration" means.
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,095
bwelbo said:
Part of the reason the CDC and NIH are short changed is because of how they **** away all our money - it’s their deliberate choices. The amount of garbage they spend money on is obscene. Then when they “have 1 job”, they fail, because they’ve been focused on so many other irrelevant things.
Click to expand...
I have to disagree here. What you are describing is the way basic science often looks to those who have no idea about what it does; i.e. the politicians who have been in charge of CDC/NIH funding. Most scientific research has no immediate payoff at all and most of it turns out to be a dead end. The default of every empirical explanation is that it is wrong. There isn't any reason to believe any new finding unless it is clear that most of the sources of error have already been tested. Even then the findings are always tentative. And don't get me started on engineering. The amount of money thrown away on engineering screwups makes the scientists look like pikers.

This makes it hard to justify basic research on health - which isn't easy and is seldom subject to true experimental testing - to those who believe that all of our tax money should show some kind of concrete result. But ignoring that is - again - a species of the Fifth Risk. If you get used to taking on long range problems with short range solutions, you pretty much put the entire society at jeopardy. We simply have to get away from thinking like this.
 
Supersizethatorder-mutt

Supersizethatorder-mutt

Banned
Messages
13,443
Location
Augusta, GA
takethepoints said:
I have to disagree here. What you are describing is the way basic science often looks to those who have no idea about what it does; i.e. the politicians who have been in charge of CDC/NIH funding. Most scientific research has no immediate payoff at all and most of it turns out to be a dead end. The default of every empirical explanation is that it is wrong. There isn't any reason to believe any new finding unless it is clear that most of the sources of error have already been tested. Even then the findings are always tentative. And don't get me started on engineering. The amount of money thrown away on engineering screwups makes the scientists look like pikers.

This makes it hard to justify basic research on health - which isn't easy and is seldom subject to true experimental testing - to those who believe that all of our tax money should show some kind of concrete result. But ignoring that is - again - a species of the Fifth Risk. If you get used to taking on long range problems with short range solutions, you pretty much put the entire society at jeopardy. We simply have to get away from thinking like this.
Click to expand...
Producing and distributing test kits is not a matter of research. It is the result of a bureaucratic boondoggle.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
GTRX7 said:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/two-charts-show-coronavirus-outbreaks-005500009.html
Click to expand...

That’s a horrible article. First, notice the scales on the two charts are drastically different (a factor of 2). They should be corrected for population, which is about 5.5x. Second, we are 2 weeks behind them at least, so we should never be superimposed on top of their chart - were not fighting the same things at the same time. South Korea has about 50,000 population corrected cases. Have they don’t a better job than most countries? Yes. In 10-14 days if our curve doesn’t flatten then we can officially say they did better than us, which is what the article is arguing. Btw, each country has their own freedoms of movement, laws, travel - it’s hard to compare reactions but only so far.
 
Techster

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,235
Milwaukee said:
This is all bull****. The only people that need to be quarantined are old people and vulnerable people. Stop messing with the American way of life. “But you may have it with no symptoms and pass it to the vulnerable!” No, not if THEY are quarantined. This is a global sham, we’ve all been had. “But death totals are spiraling!” “The body count is PILING UP!” I don’t see any of these athletes or actors dying or feeling any more ill than a cold. Are there not famous people in Italy?

Get a grip. Once I get it I’ll quarantine myself but until then it’s business as usual. I’ll punch corona in the face.

Triggered crowd incoming in 3, 2, and 1...
Click to expand...

I'm not saying Milwaukee is 100% correct with his approach, but there is some validity to the approach of continuing life as normal. There's a "herd immunity" theory that has validity, but it would have to be controlled. Few things here:

1. No matter what happens, and even if we are able to "flatten the curve" and have infection rates plummets, the virus will still always be around and numbers will continue to flare up in different areas. This is not going away until a vaccine is found.

2. The vast majority of people (around 80%) who contract the virus will symptoms that range from mild fever to severe flu. Once it runs its course in the 14-21 weeks with someone, there's strong evidence that that person will have built an immunity for re-infection.

3. In theory, given points 1 & 2 above, if all the "healthy" people get infected, and the virus runs its course in 14-21 days, around 80% of the population will have a built in immunity thus the numbers of infected after that duration will plummet.

Obviously, there are a LOT of issues with "herd immunity" since this is a novel virus that we still don't have the final answers for. Are we 100% sure that there's no chance of re-infection? How do we have "controlled" infections for it to run its course given some people don't like to follow rules? How do we fully quarantine the other 20% (elderly, people with underlying health issues, etc) so they don't get infected?

LOTS of issues with the "herd immunity" theory, but there is some validity to it.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
Techster said:
I'm not saying Milwaukee is 100% correct with his approach, but there is some validity to the approach of continuing life as normal. There's a "herd immunity" theory that has validity, but it would have to be controlled. Few things here:

1. No matter what happens, and even if we are able to "flatten the curve" and have infection rates plummets, the virus will still always be around and numbers will continue to flare up in different areas. This is not going away until a vaccine is found.

2. The vast majority of people (around 80%) who contract the virus will symptoms that range from mild fever to severe flu. Once it runs its course in the 14-21 weeks with someone, there's strong evidence that that person will have built an immunity for re-infection.

3. In theory, given points 1 & 2 above, if all the "healthy" people get infected, and the virus runs its course in 14-21 days, around 80% of the population will have a built in immunity thus the numbers of infected after that duration will plummet.

Obviously, there are a LOT of issues with "herd immunity" since this is a novel virus that we still don't have the final answers for. Are we 100% sure that there's no chance of re-infection? How do we have "controlled" infections for it to run its course given some people don't like to follow rules? How do we fully quarantine the other 20% (elderly, people with underlying health issues, etc) so they don't get infected?

LOTS of issues with the "herd immunity" theory, but there is some validity to it.
Click to expand...

Yea, but the problem with being mostly correct is you’re still wrong. What I mean by that is a few key things.

First, you can’t have zero interaction with people at risk. And the more everyone is out and about, the more people that will get infected.

Second, and most important, he’s saying that since he won’t die, who cares? Well the data shows that even in younger people, many see significant lung damage and require hospitalization. We don’t have the hospital space, manpower, or equipment to handle hundreds of thousands of people - even if none of them would have normally died.

His recommendation is basically worse than an anti-van approach.
 

Deleted member 2897

Guest
The Today Show had video today of all kinds of spring break people violating the crowd limitations, with thousands of people together in parties on beaches and what-not. I hope they’re enjoying their Tide Pod shots.
 
armeck

armeck

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
357
bwelbo said:
I hope we do what we did a little of during the last business bailouts - if anybody wants money (like Delta, Southwest, Casinos, etc.), then we take an equity stake in the business so we can recoup our money down the road when everything stabilizes again.
Click to expand...
Sounds socialisty! :)
 
slugboy

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,490
MountainBuzzMan said:
In the long run, I dont have a problem with it, but it sure seems like it is too soon. Today is what day 2 of seriously starting to shut down the country. How often do we plan on doing this?
Click to expand...

They’ll bring it back up, if we don’t get a domestic travel ban. You just don’t want sick air traffic controllers or technicians


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
armeck

armeck

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
357
bwelbo said:
I just read that if you give blood (it was on the news), they screen it for all kinds of things including the virus. That doesn’t seem right to me given what we’ve been reading about testing limitations, but that’s what they said. So if you’re worried and you can’t get a test, go donate blood!
Click to expand...
I heard that last week, I can't recall the source but it was soundly debunked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top