the Coronavirus outbreak thread

[mannyv11]

Originally Posted by Knappo 1307

Forever, as in these Olympics or all Olympics in general? If it's all Olympics in general from here on out, cmon man....

I just think the way the Olympics are currently run is a huge waste of money and resources and also puts a HUGE strain on the people of the host city. In the US a lot of cities voted against lobbying for the Olympics.

Like i said further down in my post, I think we should build a few permanent homes for the winter and summer Olympics and rotate that. That way the facilities will continue to be used and kept up and the Olympic tradition can still continue.

My opinion has nothing to do with the current virus outbreak and cancelling this years Olympics, I just think as a whole the IOC has shown in the past how corrupt they are and it would be a good way to remove the greed from that organization while continuing the Olympics the way they were meant, for the worlds best athletes to compete against each other in hopes that they come out on top.

[superdog]

Originally Posted by mgsooner

It is worth reading this paper from the Imperial College COVID-19 response team. This paper came out early yesterday and drove some of the policy decisions we saw rolled out in the US and UK yesterday.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imp...16-03-2020.pdf

I read this last night, and it is a lot to take in. My takeaway was that unless we literally want to see the next Great Depression at some point we are going to have to accept that there will be some heightened risk of getting sick/dying over the next 12-18 months and go back to our lives. It is simply not sustainable to do what it would require to keep this completely 100% at bay. It would require 18 months of what the US is currently attempting to do for 15 days.

The solution may be to apply these extreme measures on a rolling basis, and regionally on an as-needed basis. We will also need to continue to come up with new and innovative ways to live our lives that reduces the rate of transmission.

Of course there is always the hope that we are able to innovate and come up with better ways to treat the disease. A vaccine is likely impossible until 2021.

a sobering read. not wrong, imo.

how much worse will we make this, than it has to be.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by mannyv11

I just think the way the Olympics are currently run is a huge waste of money and resources and also puts a HUGE strain on the people of the host city. In the US a lot of cities voted against lobbying for the Olympics.

Like i said further down in my post, I think we should build a few permanent homes for the winter and summer Olympics and rotate that. That way the facilities will continue to be used and kept up and the Olympic tradition can still continue.

My opinion has nothing to do with the current virus outbreak and cancelling this years Olympics, I just think as a whole the IOC has shown in the past how corrupt they are and it would be a good way to remove the greed from that organization while continuing the Olympics the way they were meant, for the worlds best athletes to compete against each other in hopes that they come out on top.

That is an interesting take Manny, I don’t want to get off topic, well, actually it might do us all a little good! So if I understand you, we will have say, three cities for the summer and three cities for the winter games and rotate between those? And the facilities would be maintained by the host countries?

[daveathall]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

X 100 Dave, you are a crusty old salt, you are definitely doing the right thing but you are going to be annoying us on here for years to come.

Hahahaha, thank you Paul. Many people have expressed that in their opinion, I am fabulous at annoying people, in fact, my wife seems to be the most vocal and avid supporter of that point of view.

[fmc000]

Hope this is readable, it's from an Italian newspaper and translated by google: https://translate.google.com/transla...i-251524546%2F

[nilel]

Originally Posted by mgsooner

It is worth reading this paper from the Imperial College COVID-19 response team. This paper came out early yesterday and drove some of the policy decisions we saw rolled out in the US and UK yesterday.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imp...16-03-2020.pdf

I read this last night, and it is a lot to take in. My takeaway was that unless we literally want to see the next Great Depression at some point we are going to have to accept that there will be some heightened risk of getting sick/dying over the next 12-18 months and go back to our lives. It is simply not sustainable to do what it would require to keep this completely 100% at bay. It would require 18 months of what the US is currently attempting to do for 15 days.

The solution may be to apply these extreme measures on a rolling basis, and regionally on an as-needed basis. We will also need to continue to come up with new and innovative ways to live our lives that reduces the rate of transmission.

Of course there is always the hope that we are able to innovate and come up with better ways to treat the disease. A vaccine is likely impossible until 2021.

i think that extreme measures are needed because 10-20 % of the population wont listen to them anyways and it just becomes a rolling basis anyway.

i agree we likely will get it, mostly a mild form but we must get it slowly as to not overwhelm the medical infrastructure.

maybe the chiros and naturopaths homeopaths can also work front line

[Mr. Miami]

My college just suspended in person classes for rest of semester. I’m a senior and they cancelled commencement as well. This is crazy.

[nilel]

Originally Posted by Mr. Miami

My college just suspended in person classes for rest of semester. I’m a senior and they cancelled commencement as well. This is crazy.

crazy in what way?

[mgsooner]

Originally Posted by superdog

a sobering read. not wrong, imo.

how much worse will we make this, than it has to be.

I think we are at the point where we need to weigh the potential effects of this virus on human life vs the effects on human life of an absolutely catastrophic economic depression. I'm not saying we should do nothing. I'm saying we will likely need to mitigate and innovate. We are going to have to come up with entirely new ways of doing things. We can't simply look at the tools in the toolbox. We are going to have to make new tools.

[MSchu]

All I know is... Trump is a F*CKING gangster!

[LandWatch]

Originally Posted by mgsooner

It is worth reading this paper from the Imperial College COVID-19 response team. This paper came out early yesterday and drove some of the policy decisions we saw rolled out in the US and UK yesterday.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imp...16-03-2020.pdf

I read this last night, and it is a lot to take in. My takeaway was that unless we literally want to see the next Great Depression at some point we are going to have to accept that there will be some heightened risk of getting sick/dying over the next 12-18 months and go back to our lives. It is simply not sustainable to do what it would require to keep this completely 100% at bay. It would require 18 months of what the US is currently attempting to do for 15 days.

The solution may be to apply these extreme measures on a rolling basis, and regionally on an as-needed basis. We will also need to continue to come up with new and innovative ways to live our lives that reduces the rate of transmission.

Of course there is always the hope that we are able to innovate and come up with better ways to treat the disease. A vaccine is likely impossible until 2021.

Interesting paper from Imperial College, if rather terrifying. I heard the lead author, Professor Ferguson, interviewed this morning. Very credible, very sobering and extremely alarming.

More than a few months of lock down would see a monumental change in our society.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by MSchu

All I know is... Trump is a F*CKING gangster!

This forum will not tolerate posts like this your membership is terminated.

[mgsooner]

Amazon says they plan to hire 100,000 people. That's what I'm talking about. People whose industries will be absolutely crushed during this can potentially pivot into other things. It's going to be hard. Very hard. But come on, we can pull together and solve this (to a degree).

[RWH]

numerous states in the northeast has closed all gyms, casinos, bars, theaters, schools, and dine in restaurants. I won't be surprised if many other states start following suit this week.

[Carry The Interest]

Originally Posted by mgsooner

It is worth reading this paper from the Imperial College COVID-19 response team. This paper came out early yesterday and drove some of the policy decisions we saw rolled out in the US and UK yesterday.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imp...16-03-2020.pdf

I read this last night, and it is a lot to take in. My takeaway was that unless we literally want to see the next Great Depression at some point we are going to have to accept that there will be some heightened risk of getting sick/dying over the next 12-18 months and go back to our lives. It is simply not sustainable to do what it would require to keep this completely 100% at bay. It would require 18 months of what the US is currently attempting to do for 15 days.

The solution may be to apply these extreme measures on a rolling basis, and regionally on an as-needed basis. We will also need to continue to come up with new and innovative ways to live our lives that reduces the rate of transmission.

Of course there is always the hope that we are able to innovate and come up with better ways to treat the disease. A vaccine is likely impossible until 2021.

Thank you for sharing this. Very thorough and sobering read. I shared this with some colleagues at work this morning.

I myself am in my late 20's but me and my fiance are taking this very serious. We have not gone outside since Saturday aside from a ~45 minute walk around our neighborhood (nice, quiet residential area) each day and my fiance trying to make a run to the grocery store yesterday morning. I am not expecting anything to change for at least another two weeks minimum. I am fortunate enough where I can work from home and be just as efficient.

[mountainjogger]

Originally Posted by mgsooner

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imp...16-03-2020.pdf

I read this last night, and it is a lot to take in. My takeaway was that unless we literally want to see the next Great Depression at some point we are going to have to accept that there will be some heightened risk of getting sick/dying over the next 12-18 months and go back to our lives. It is simply not sustainable to do what it would require to keep this completely 100% at bay. It would require 18 months of what the US is currently attempting to do for 15 days.

Interesting paper. But as always, there are a lot of unknowns. So, let me play devils advocate.

This sentence was important to me.

"Last, while experience in China and now South Korea show that suppression is possible in the short term, it remains to be seen whether it is possible long-term, and whether the social and economic costs of the interventions adopted thus far can be reduced."

Have to agree that China and SK future experience may be one indicator of whether suppression can buy enough time in a sustainable fashion.

But for me, even if you wanted to pause and let it come back and then pause again, no one knows quite how to do this for a certainty. We know what worked in China and SK to suppress (for now). We know about the delay that did not work in Italy where the result was an out of control spin. What none of the experts know for sure is how to strike a middle balance (assuming that you and the people you are charged with protecting want you to do that).

That is to say, even if you are willing to pause suppression efforts and let it "roll" and spread and sacrifice a certain percentage of the population (and your citizens would let you do that) how far do you go? And the bigger question (for those who survive), are you sure you can can you put the genie back in the bottle? Or did you fail to account for certain factors? Or did the virus mutate and make your analysis irrelevant?

But regardless of whether suppression is viable strategy to buy enough time until more treatment options become available, none of this changes the short term agreement of experts that an unmitigated surge at this point in the UK or US would overwhelm the healthcare systems and possibly lead to serious mortality numbers.

That unpalatable scenario happened worldwide with the Spanish Flu. Which, after a short pause, pretty much ran its course.

And the effects of a pandemic running its course were not kind to the economy. Ala the the "forgotten depression" of 1920-21.

However, I would note that the world economy still came back, despite the effects of WWI and the Spanish Flu. And we got the Roaring 20's.

I remain confused on a lot of this, but hopeful that we can slow it enough not to overwhelm the healthcare system. And hopefully find some treatments. And hopefully not loose too many people.

Stay safe.

[superdog]

Originally Posted by mgsooner

Amazon says they plan to hire 100,000 people. That's what I'm talking about. People whose industries will be absolutely crushed during this can potentially pivot into other things. It's going to be hard. Very hard. But come on, we can pull together and solve this (to a degree).

Agree.

I am actually planning on hiring as well.

If I am going into the storm, and taking risks, I am going to take the bull by the horns and either gore myself of come out the other end a champ.

[superdog]

Originally Posted by mountainjogger

Interesting paper. But as always, there are a lot of unknowns. So, let me play devils advocate.

This sentence was important to me.

"Last, while experience in China and now South Korea show that suppression is possible in the short term, it remains to be seen whether it is possible long-term, and whether the social and economic costs of the interventions adopted thus far can be reduced."

Have to agree that China and SK future experience may be one indicator of whether suppression can buy enough time in a sustainable fashion.

But for me, even if you wanted to pause and let it come back and then pause again, no one knows quite how to do this for a certainty. We know what worked in China and SK to suppress (for now). We know about the delay that did not work in Italy where the result was an out of control spin. What none of the experts know for sure is how to strike a middle balance (assuming that you and the people you are charged with protecting want you to do that).

That is to say, even if you are willing to pause suppression efforts and let it "roll" and spread and sacrifice a certain percentage of the population (and your citizens would let you do that) how far do you go? And the bigger question (or those who survive), are you sure you can can you put the genie back in the bottle? Or did you fail to account for certain factors? Or did the virus mutate and make your analysis irrelevant?

But regardless of whether suppression is viable strategy to buy enough time until more treatment options become available, none of this changes the short term agreement of experts that an unmitigated surge at this point in the UK or US would overwhelm the healthcare systems and possibly lead to serious mortality numbers.

That unpalatable scenario happened worldwide with the Spanish Flu. Which, after a short pause, pretty much ran its course.

And the effects of a pandemic running its course were not kind to the economy. Ala the the "forgotten depression" of 1920-21.

However, I would note that the world economy still came back, despite the effects of WWI and the Spanish Flu. And we got the Roaring 20's.

I remain confused on a lot of this, but hopeful that we can slow it enough not to overwhelm the healthcare system. And hopefully find some treatments. And hopefully not loose too many people.

Stay safe.

I don't want to seem cold, because I agree.

But sometimes there is no good answer. Sometimes it is the lesser evil.

And what will the impact of a global depression be? How many will starve or freeze? How may riots will there be? Will martial law be implemented?

Please don't misunderstand. I don't want to lose anyone either. Not a single person. But sadly that is not an option in the current scenario.

[mountainjogger]

Originally Posted by mgsooner

Amazon says they plan to hire 100,000 people. That's what I'm talking about. People whose industries will be absolutely crushed during this can potentially pivot into other things. It's going to be hard. Very hard. But come on, we can pull together and solve this (to a degree).

Amazon has also just announced that that because of demand they will be focusing on restocking essential items and are closing their warhorses for new shipments of all items that are not food or essential supplies.

[Moggo]

I may be talking out of my backside but we need to keep in mind that almost all with a healthy immune system and no underlying issues recover fine as far as the cases we know appear.

We should be really looking out for those with compromised immune systems and underlying health issues and making sure they are cared for.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mountainjogger]

Originally Posted by superdog

I don't want to seem cold, because I agree.

But sometimes there is no good answer. Sometimes it is the lesser evil.

And what will the impact of a global depression be? How many will starve or freeze? How may riots will there be? Will martial law be implemented?

Please don't misunderstand. I don't want to lose anyone either. Not a single person. But sadly that is not an option in the current scenario.

Understood Seth. I am just making the counter argument.

And I would also ask, where would China be if they had let it run its course. Or SK? What damage would have been done to their economy? Would that have resuted in civil breakdown and marshals law?

I don't think anyone really knows.

[77T]

Originally Posted by mgsooner

It is worth reading this paper from the Imperial College COVID-19 response team. This paper came out early yesterday and drove some of the policy decisions we saw rolled out in the US and UK yesterday.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imp...16-03-2020.pdf

I read this last night, and it is a lot to take in. My takeaway was that unless we literally want to see the next Great Depression at some point we are going to have to accept that there will be some heightened risk of getting sick/dying over the next 12-18 months and go back to our lives. It is simply not sustainable to do what it would require to keep this completely 100% at bay. It would require 18 months of what the US is currently attempting to do for 15 days.

The solution may be to apply these extreme measures on a rolling basis, and regionally on an as-needed basis. We will also need to continue to come up with new and innovative ways to live our lives that reduces the rate of transmission.

Of course there is always the hope that we are able to innovate and come up with better ways to treat the disease. A vaccine is likely impossible until 2021.

The paper explains in detail what I had supplied earlier in this modified chart.



During that long blue tail, people are still becoming ill and possibly dying. But it gives time to find better courses of treatment (or combinations) for the deadly pneumonia that is killing the vast majority of patients.

HK has done very well with isolation. The question is how long that can go. Eventually supporting systems could break down and people stop the good practices that led to the original containment.

The WH just advised we won’t go to the lockdown at this time. We are giving it 2 weeks to see if our plan bends the curve.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[77T]

Originally Posted by padi56

This forum will not tolerate posts like this your membership is terminated.

I certainly agree with you that the forum must keep our tone civilized.

That member may have been trying to express support of Trump policies as if they’d crush Covid like a soda can.

But the metaphor was definitely over the line. Very poor choice on his part.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[mannyv11]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

That is an interesting take Manny, I don’t want to get off topic, well, actually it might do us all a little good! So if I understand you, we will have say, three cities for the summer and three cities for the winter games and rotate between those? And the facilities would be maintained by the host countries?

yes something like that, and all countries who wish to compete would contribute to a fund to help support / maintain the facilities. That way the responsibility isn't just on the host country.

[Fleetlord]

Originally Posted by mountainjogger

Understood Seth. I am just making the counter argument.

And I would also ask, where would China be if they had let it run its course. Or SK? What damage would have been done to their economy? Would that have resuted in civil breakdown and marshals law?

I don't think anyone really knows.

I would suspect letting the virus run wild would result in a broken healthcare system AND a global depression.

Sick people can't work. Sick People can't shop, dine and spend money, so when you have more sick people from an uncontrolled infection, you will have less business organically just from the mechanism of the disease.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by mannyv11

yes something like that, and all countries who wish to compete would contribute to a fund to help support / maintain the facilities. That way the responsibility isn't just on the host country.

That’s an interesting proposal. Who Knows? It might be an adjustment the world adopts after this virus is subdued.

[superdog]

Originally Posted by Fleetlord

I would suspect letting the virus run wild would result in a broken healthcare system AND a global depression.

Sick people can't work. Sick People can't shop, dine and spend money, so when you have more sick people from an uncontrolled infection, you will have less business organically just from the mechanism of the disease.

I could be wrong, but doesn't the data so far show that very few people, relatively speaking, are actually showing symptoms or experiencing sickness?

And don't get me wrong. I am not saying we should let anything run wild. But I do think a measured, balanced approach is potentially the best path forward.

Clearly, that is not possible at the moment. Clearly people are just trying to figure out any viable path forward. And that makes sense. But a long term solution will need to be found. Or we will slip into a dynastopian future.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by padi56

This forum will not tolerate posts like this your membership is terminated.

Thank you Peter.

[Alan111]

Originally Posted by superdog

Or we will slip into a dynastopian future.

I think you meant dystopian... and we're already here.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by brandrea

Thank you Peter.

Yeah, that was quite a ways over the top!