the Coronavirus outbreak thread

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by Patton250

Sounds like we might have a compromise here. Here’s my idea.

I and millions of others will sign the waiver and then things can go back to normal right away. If this virus ends up being just a little worse than the flu then all you guys who were on board for all this have to pay the trillions of dollars that have been completely vaporized by this current action. If it’s worse by far than a normal flu and the death rate goes well above 100,000 then we waived our rights to treatment.

By the way I assure you that I care as much if not more about life than most people on the planet. I am highly passionate about life. You realize one can be passionate about life and preserving it and at the same time believe all this is being blown way out of proportion right? I’m tired of people I disagree with accusing me of being ignorant or not caring about other peoples lives. That’s not an argument. Besides it only seems like it works when that accusation is being displayed in a room where they are the majority. Kind of like this thread.

Just don’t understand why dissent is so disrespected and put down here.

Very well expressed Bret. I agree with some of what you say. I understand this is a very serious situation, and I am taking appropriate measures, (staying at home, washing my hands etc. ) but I am of the personal belief that the outcome will not be nearly as horrible as a lot of people on here seem to try and make us accept. Yes, it is bad, and yes, we all have to make adjustments, but call me an optimist, I believe we will not achieve the 250,000 deaths some forecast for this virus nor that the four horses of the apocalypse are on their way. I have no medical training to back this up, just a belief that while this is a bad illness, we will persevere. I have fought in a war. I have seen the terrible things and the good things humans can do. I just believe we can and will over-come this.

I think all of us, even those that express a terrible outcome, should be hoping (praying) I am right.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Very well expressed Bret. I agree with some of what you say. I understand this is a very serious situation, and I am taking appropriate measures, (staying at home, washing my hands etc. ) but I am of the personal belief that the outcome will not be nearly as horrible as a lot of people on here seem to try and make us accept. Yes, it is bad, and yes, we all have to make adjustments, but call me an optimist, I believe we will not achieve the 250,000 deaths some forecast for this virus nor that the four horses of the apocalypse are on their way. I have no medical training to back this up, just a belief that while this is a bad illness, we will persevere. I have fought in a war. I have seen the terrible things and the good things humans can do. I just believe we can and will over-come this.

I think all of us, even those that express a terrible outcome, should be hoping (praying) I am right.

Thank you. I don’t think they’ll get anywhere near 240,000 either. Also keep in mind that unfortunately they are counting any death in some of these hot zones as caused by coronavirus. That’s definitely going to mix these numbers up since we lose about 8000 people a day already.


https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...-not-required/

[Zakalwe]

Originally Posted by Patton250

Thank you. I don’t think they’ll get anywhere near 240,000 either. Also keep in mind that unfortunately they are counting any death in some of these hot zones as caused by coronavirus. That’s definitely going to mix these numbers up since we lose about 8000 people a day already.


https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...-not-required/

The flip side is I’m certain there are lots of CV deaths that are going unrecorded.

I went to a mortuary on Friday that I’ve been to many times in the past. Their fridges were full to the brim and the undertaker confirmed to me they had 2-3x more bodies than they usually would at this time of year. As these were deaths in the community it’s unlikely any would’ve been tested for Coronavirus meaning their cause of death wouldn’t be recorded as such.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by Zakalwe

The flip side is I’m certain there are lots of CV deaths that are going unrecorded.

I went to a mortuary on Friday that I’ve been to many times in the past. Their fridges were full to the brim and the undertaker confirmed to me they had 2-3x more bodies than they usually would at this time of year. As these were deaths in the community it’s unlikely any would’ve been tested for Coronavirus meaning their cause of death wouldn’t be recorded as such.

Another excellent point, some deaths are not recorded as Corona, when they could very well be a result of the virus. Really makes you wonder what “numbers” are accurate?

[ronricks]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Another excellent point, some deaths are not recorded as Corona, when they could very well be a result of the virus. Really makes you wonder what “numbers” are accurate?

We aren’t ever going to have accurate numbers because of China not being transparent and the mortality rate in the States isn’t ever going to be accurate because so many people have had the virus already and showed little to no symptoms and didn’t even know they had it or currently have it.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by Zakalwe

The flip side is I’m certain there are lots of CV deaths that are going unrecorded.

I went to a mortuary on Friday that I’ve been to many times in the past. Their fridges were full to the brim and the undertaker confirmed to me they had 2-3x more bodies than they usually would at this time of year. As these were deaths in the community it’s unlikely any would’ve been tested for Coronavirus meaning their cause of death wouldn’t be recorded as such.

I just don’t see how that’s possible. At least not to the extent or even close to what they are saying in this article I posted. Seems in this environment they are much more likely to count a natural death by cardiac arrest or finally succumbing to lung cancer etc. as being caused by coronavirus. It’s been reported all over the place that’s exactly what’s happening in Italy.

[Zakalwe]

Originally Posted by Patton250

I just don’t see how that’s possible. At least not to the extent or even close to what they are saying in this article I posted. Seems in this environment they are much more likely to count a natural death by cardiac arrest or finally succumbing to lung cancer etc. as being caused by coronavirus. It’s been reported all over the place that’s exactly what’s happening in Italy.

I certainly can’t speak for your neck of the woods, or anywhere else I suppose. Here, as long as the death is natural and the physician who knows the patient feels he/she is able to have a decent stab at the cause of death, they can issue a death certificate and the Coroner does not need to get involved. Just this past week I certified a nursing home resident as having died of a “lower respiratory tract infection” (with a confirmed case of CV19 in the same home). In the current climate it is pretty likely she died of COVID-19 but in the absence of laboratory evidence it went unrecorded as such. Everything reported in the news relating to mortality generally reflects what’s going on in hospitals, but hereabouts more people die in the community.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by Zakalwe

I certainly can’t speak for your neck of the woods. Here, as long as the death is natural and the physician who knows the patient feels he/she is able to have a decent stab at the cause of death, they can issue a death certificate and the Coroner does not need to get involved. Just this past week I certified a nursing home resident as having died of a “lower respiratory tract infection” (with a confirmed case of CV19 in the same home). In the current climate it is pretty likely she died of COVID-19 but in the absence of laboratory evidence it went unrecorded as such.

That sounds very reasonable.

I don’t think what I stated above is happening in places like Omaha Nebraska or Springfield Illinois. I think it’s happening where the hotspots are.

[Zakalwe]

Originally Posted by Patton250

That sounds very reasonable.

I don’t think what I stated above is happening in places like Omaha Nebraska or Springfield Illinois. I think it’s happening where the hotspots are.

I agree that what you said is also happening. Here many people in hospital are being reported as having died “with” COVID-19. Whether or not the numbers cancel each other out to produce roughly accurate statistics is anybody’s guess. I suspect we won’t really have a proper perspective until long after this is all over.

[Brenngun]

Originally Posted by Patton250

I and millions of others will sign the waiver and then things can go back to normal right away. If it’s worse by far than a normal flu and the death rate goes well above 100,000 then we waived our rights to treatment.

Brett, So how do we make sure that the people who signed this waiver also sign off the rights to healthcare for all their family members including their children who may come into close contact with them. Also how do we make sure they don't spread it to shelter in place people when they must go out to get essential items like groceries etc. Also lastly how does the hospital police this idea with 100% assurance no one games the system. When people are very sick they become very desperate for medical help.

Originally Posted by gliderpilot

Sweden chose not to "destroy the house to kill the fly", so we will know soon enough if we were overreacting or not.

So for those hanging out hope that Sweden is the smartest government in the world may be in for a surprise. Looks like their numbers are growing faster than not only Norway a country that shares its longest border but also Finland who both closed up shop. Here's a comparison of their numbers as of yesterday:

Sweden - Cases 6830 New Cases 387 Deaths 401 New Deaths 28 Death Rate 5.8%
Norway - Cases 5645 New Cases 95 Deaths 66 New Deaths 4 Death Rate 1.1%
Finland - Cases 1927 New Cases 45 Deaths 28 New Deaths 3 Death Rate 1.4%

[LandWatch]

Originally Posted by Zakalwe

I certainly can’t speak for your neck of the woods, or anywhere else I suppose. Here, as long as the death is natural and the physician who knows the patient feels he/she is able to have a decent stab at the cause of death, they can issue a death certificate and the Coroner does not need to get involved. Just this past week I certified a nursing home resident as having died of a “lower respiratory tract infection” (with a confirmed case of CV19 in the same home). In the current climate it is pretty likely she died of COVID-19 but in the absence of laboratory evidence it went unrecorded as such. Everything reported in the news relating to mortality generally reflects what’s going on in hospitals, but hereabouts more people die in the community.

Shouldn’t we be testing people dying in these circumstances so we have accurate stats? Would be helpful if we could rely on the numbers dying due to Covid.

If we can’t capture accurate numbers in the U.K., I dread to think of the under-reporting coming out of developing countries.

[Zakalwe]

Originally Posted by HighlandWatch

Shouldn’t we be testing people dying in these circumstances so we have accurate stats? Would be helpful if we could rely on the numbers dying due to Covid.

If we can’t capture accurate numbers in the U.K., I dread to think of the under-reporting coming out of developing countries.

Yes we should. But given there aren’t enough tests to go around, frail, multimorbid people in the community whose care never reaches hospital are not a priority for testing. That’s not a value judgement from me, just a comment on the unfortunate reality.

I’m convinced that the number of people who’ve been infected in this country already numbers in the 7-digits, but the confirmed case number languishes in the tens of thousands.

[pickettt]

Originally Posted by Patton250

I just don’t see how that’s possible. At least not to the extent or even close to what they are saying in this article I posted. Seems in this environment they are much more likely to count a natural death by cardiac arrest or finally succumbing to lung cancer etc. as being caused by coronavirus. It’s been reported all over the place that’s exactly what’s happening in Italy.

I have to agree wholeheartedly.

[mountainjogger]

Originally Posted by pickettt

I have to agree wholeheartedly.

But doesn't the same thing happen when they report flu deaths?

Stay safe.

[pickettt]

Originally Posted by mountainjogger

But doesn't the same thing happen when they report flu deaths?

Stay safe.

It's possible, and perhaps to the same end. Regardless, the virus, or the flu, COULD be taking credit where it's not due.


I lost my dad about 5 years ago. He had CHF, and was on various blood thinners. He fell, hit his head, and hemorrhaged before he could be saved. What killed him? Heart trouble? Exsanguination? A fall? Drugs? Just think if that event took place today, amidst all of this. Thats the thing about statistics...choose the outcome you are looking for, and it can be made to read that way.

[joeychitwood]

Originally Posted by mountainjogger

But doesn't the same thing happen when they report flu deaths?

Actually, in the US it’s just the opposite. I base my statement on my experience as a deputy county coroner for five years. A death was not officially attributed to influenza unless it was a KNOWN case of influenza. Many suspected influenza deaths are attributed to pneumonia, multi-system organ failure, congestive heart failure or other co-morbid entities. Likewise, we were not allowed to list “cardiac arrest” as a cause of death, as ultimately, every patient who dies suffers a cardiac arrest. I would guess that a much larger number of people are dying of Covid-19 than are being attributed to the virus on a death certificate due to the absence of testing, the presence of co-morbid disease, etc.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Very well expressed Bret. I agree with some of what you say. I understand this is a very serious situation, and I am taking appropriate measures, (staying at home, washing my hands etc. ) but I am of the personal belief that the outcome will not be nearly as horrible as a lot of people on here seem to try and make us accept. Yes, it is bad, and yes, we all have to make adjustments, but call me an optimist, I believe we will not achieve the 250,000 deaths some forecast for this virus nor that the four horses of the apocalypse are on their way. I have no medical training to back this up, just a belief that while this is a bad illness, we will persevere. I have fought in a war. I have seen the terrible things and the good things humans can do. I just believe we can and will over-come this.

I think all of us, even those that express a terrible outcome, should be hoping (praying) I am right.

But isn’t the current plan supposed to try to minimize the number of deaths? If we end up at far less than 250000 deaths shouldn’t that be viewed as the measures in place worked?

I think the government is in a damned if they do / damned if they don’t position.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by brandrea

But isn’t the current plan supposed to try to minimize the number of deaths? If we end up at far less than 250000 deaths shouldn’t that be viewed as the measures in place worked?

I think the government is in a damned if they do / damned if they don’t position.

That may be, that the number would be 250,000 if we DIDN’T do the current measures? I thought it was we would hit those numbers regardless Anyone know?

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by brandrea

But isn’t the current plan supposed to try to minimize the number of deaths? If we end up at far less than 250000 deaths shouldn’t that be viewed as the measures in place worked?

I think the government is in a damned if they do / damned if they don’t position.

It’s been my understanding that they’ve always assumed the same amount of people we’re going to die no matter what we do. They just wanted to do it over a longer period of time to not overwhelm the hospitals. It’s true they say that more lives would be saved by not overwhelming the hospitals but those are estimated by models of which are very own dr. Fauci said just the other day we shouldn’t count on models anymore.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

That may be, that the number would be 250,000 if we DIDN’T do the current measures? I thought it was we would hit those numbers regardless Anyone know?

Originally Posted by Patton250

It’s been my understanding that they’ve always assumed the same amount of people we’re going to die no matter what we do. They just wanted to do it over a longer period of time to not overwhelm the hospitals. It’s true they say that more lives would be saved by not overwhelming the hospitals but those are estimated by models of which are very own dr. Fauci said just the other day we shouldn’t count on models anymore.

There in lies the social experiment I guess ... no one knows with certainty.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by brandrea

There in lies the social experiment I guess ... no one knows with certainty.

Exactly right. But what we do know with 100% certainty is that Government(s) have grounded the economies of the west to a complete and total halt.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Patton250

Exactly right. But what we do know with 100% certainty is that Government(s) have grounded the economies of the west to a complete and total halt.

I agree partly Brett. I also think that there are plenty of smart people (much smarter than me at least) who use the science to back the position that the current course is needed to stop a much worse outcome.

Again, damned if they do, damned if they don’t I suppose, and now this thread has become the same topic going in circles. How many lives are worth “X” vs the healthy or destruction of the economy.

I appreciate you challenging me to try and think differently about this, but I’m pretty resolute in my thinking on this one.

[mountainjogger]

Originally Posted by brandrea

I appreciate you challenging me to try and think differently about this, but I’m pretty resolute in my thinking on this one.

As usual, you said it shorter and better than I.

Stay safe.

[gliderpilot]

Originally Posted by Patton250

It’s been my understanding that they’ve always assumed the same amount of people we’re going to die no matter what we do. They just wanted to do it over a longer period of time to not overwhelm the hospitals. It’s true they say that more lives would be saved by not overwhelming the hospitals but those are estimated by models of which are very own dr. Fauci said just the other day we shouldn’t count on models anymore.

That's right. The virus will be around until it either runs out of victims or we have an effective vaccine, no matter what we do.

Less people die if it happens over a longer time period with a coping health care system, but how much less is anybody's guess.

Sweden chose not to "destroy the house to kill the fly", so we will know soon enough if we were overreacting or not.

Mother Nature doesn't care either way. Hopefully we will be better prepared the next time...

[Phooi]

Originally Posted by gliderpilot

That's right. The virus will be around until it either runs out of victims or we have an effective vaccine, no matter what we do.

Less people die if it happens over a longer time period with a coping health care system, but how much less is anybody's guess.

Sweden chose not to "destroy the house to kill the fly", so we will know soon enough if we were overreacting or not.

Mother Nature doesn't care either way. Hopefully we will be better prepared the next time...

From the Washington Post in their live updates section,

“The Swedish government is considering implementing more restrictions in response to the coronavirus outbreak, potentially marking a tactical shift in the hands-off approach that had set it apart from much of Europe.

As of Sunday, 6,830 people in Sweden have been confirmed to be infected with the virus, while at least 401 people have died. News agency TT reported this weekend that a backlog in deaths announced by Sweden’s Public Health Agency may mean the real death toll is higher.”

[Blansky]

Originally Posted by Patton250

It’s been my understanding that they’ve always assumed the same amount of people we’re going to die no matter what we do. They just wanted to do it over a longer period of time to not overwhelm the hospitals. It’s true they say that more lives would be saved by not overwhelming the hospitals but those are estimated by models of which are very own dr. Fauci said just the other day we shouldn’t count on models anymore.

I think this is actually true.

Lockdown stops panic. Lockdown buys time. Lockdown spreads out the cases. Lockdown saves a few lives.

But until a vaccine, roughly the same number of people will die from it. Because you can't stay in lockdown for many more months.

As has been said, we are just spreading out the hospitalized rate to handle it more slowly.

[Star Ferry]

Originally Posted by Blansky

I think this is actually true.

Lockdown stops panic. Lockdown buys time. Lockdown spreads out the cases. Lockdown saves a few lives.

But until a vaccine, roughly the same number of people will die from it. Because you can't stay in lockdown for many more months.

As has been said, we are just spreading out the hospitalized rate to handle it more slowly.

Yes, let's imagine what things would be like without a forced shutdown. People start getting sick, then people start dying. Many businesses will act on their own, as the NBA and J.P. Morgan did. Some will stay open, including some bars/restaurants, which will be hotspots for transmission. Depending how many people refuse to show up to work at those places, the end result could be similar to a forced shutdown. And once people realize the hospitals are overrun, they'll be extra afraid of getting sick -- because at that point, being sick enough to truly need a hospital would be a death sentence.

maybe the above wouldn't happen everywhere, but it could happen in big cities

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by Star Ferry

Yes, let's imagine what things would be like without a forced shutdown. People start getting sick, then people start dying. Many businesses will act on their own, as the NBA and J.P. Morgan did. Some will stay open, including some bars/restaurants, which will be hotspots for transmission. Depending how many people refuse to show up to work at those places, the end result could be similar to a forced shutdown. And once people realize the hospitals are overrun, they'll be extra afraid of getting sick -- because at that point, being sick enough to truly need a hospital would be a death sentence.

maybe the above wouldn't happen everywhere, but it could happen in big cities

So then you believe all that’s going to happen starting May 1st?

[Star Ferry]

Originally Posted by Patton250

So then you believe all that’s going to happen starting May 1st?

I have no idea what will happen after April. I don't like the shutdown any more than you do, but there's a plausible argument that the virus was going to shut us down anyway, and in a less orderly fashion.

It's not as if the government did this with enthusiasm. They collect taxes on economic transactions. Less economic activity = less revenue.

[gliderpilot]

Originally Posted by Blansky

I think this is actually true.

Lockdown stops panic. Lockdown buys time. Lockdown spreads out the cases. Lockdown saves a few lives.

But until a vaccine, roughly the same number of people will die from it. Because you can't stay in lockdown for many more months.

As has been said, we are just spreading out the hospitalized rate to handle it more slowly.

Fully agree. In addition, there are MANY more COVID-19 positive people than we account for, so in some places (Italy, NYC) we are locking down an already infected population, thus greatly reducing the desired effect. Sadly, I personally know several families where the virus is spreading among family members regardless.

Until there is an effective vaccine, the virus will run its course one way or another :-(