Mega-Thread: Coronavirus Pandemic

[Gaidax]

Long time no see.

Current statistic in Israel:

Cases: 3460 (+425), Dead: 12 (+0)



Severe: 50 total, ventilation machines total 2864




Some bit of worrying news is that during audit there was found a discrepancy between test results and notifications tested people received - as in cases where test returned positive, but notification was negative and vice versa.

They are trying to find out whether it was a systematic failure or just some specific momentary one.

[Dormie]

One measure would have to be permanent in order to have any effect, the other is a TEMPORARY action.

You do the math.

But in this situation, even a temporary change can ruin lives. How many people will be affected long-term by not being able to work now compared to those that would be affected by corona? Dealing with and controlling the consequences of confronting the virus is much more predictable and straight-forward than the domino affect of unpredictable consequences due to temporarily shutting down the world.
I'm still waiting a month or so to see how things go before having any strong position.

[XDurionX]

But we could reduce all traffic deaths by not using cars, just like we can drastically reduce deaths by quarantining the world. Both have negatives that are arguably worse than choosing a middle ground.
And nowhere did I say this should be ignored or that we shouldn't take measures. That's specifically why I said "I'm not really saying anything about how this all should be handled". We should be careful when we're still in the early stages. But once we have a better idea of how things are going to look, "not using cars" becomes less preferable.
And it's called an analogy, not "whataboutism".

By "not using cars" society would break down immediately. People would starve, people would not have water, electricity, or any other goods, people wouldn't have any medical support at all.

[Easo]

Well, an unexpected bonus of living in a blockaded unrecognized puppet state is that we've been sort of semi-quarantined since 2014, so it's easy to implement fully closed borders. Quick googling tells me that Donetsk People's Republic is almost exactly the size of Delaware + Rhode Island combined, and has population about 1.15x of those two combined, 2.3 million people. As of yesterday, we had zero confirmed cases and 70 returning tourists (yeah lol) being quarantined and tested for the virus.

And, we're not comparable to refugee camps, we're just impoverished eastern European cities. I can't talk about Luhansk, but Donetsk city was largely spared during the war, so we have some (outdated?) medical equipment and even some medical personnel, so when we'll get actual cases, then we'll see what happens.

Huh, I did not expect anyone from there to actually be in this thread. No, I did not mean that you are like refugee camps, I meant that you probably have other... priorities than some "plague from the West". And being half blockaded impacts what you can do in response.
Pretty sure you already have it. Every single country in Europe (well, almost every single country in the world) has it and border with Russia was not closed, so... It is just a matter of time. Sorry.

[Granyala]

But in this situation, even a temporary change can ruin lives. How many people will be affected long-term by not being able to work now compared to those that would be affected by corona?

You can see a 10% mortality rate in Italy (Data from WHO situation report), whose health system can't keep up.
And that is WITH measures being taken now. If they did nothing (as you suggest), that percentage would be higher.

Projections say, that 60-70% of the population will be infected over the course of the outbreak.
A 10% mortality rate would mean 6-7% dead (that would be around 20*10^6 Americans) instead of the currently predicted 0.06% (roughly 20*10^4) with the measures in place.

Yeah I think we don't need to worry about who is able to work and who is not able to work just yet.

[Forogil]

You can see a 10% mortality rate in Italy (Data from WHO situation report),

But WHO says that those numbers are incorrect, specifically that there are likely a lot of people who are infected but aren't confirmed (some don't care to get tested - especially if they don't show symptoms; some want to get tested but aren't a priority at the moment) - and some that are infected and will die in the coming weeks.

That's why I don't understand why people are so focused on the number of cases - and even comparing them between different countries and dates; when the testing differs.

- - - Updated - - -

By "not using cars" society would break down immediately. People would starve, people would not have water, electricity, or any other goods, people wouldn't have any medical support at all.

But we could also reduce traffic deaths by e.g. reducing the speed of cars further.
People wouldn't starve, people would still get goods - but it would be a bit more inconvenient.

Obviously there are also attempts of reducing traffic death that seem good - but don't actually work; and just reducing the speed limit or requiring seat-belts will not help if people don't see a reason to follow the rules.

Similarly the question about the pandemic responses is whether they actually work - or just attempts at doing something. The bad part is that we will first know in a few months, and the really bad part is that people will ignore the conclusions.

[XDurionX]

But WHO says that those numbers are incorrect, specifically that there are likely a lot of people who are infected but aren't confirmed (some don't care to get tested - especially if they don't show symptoms; some want to get tested but aren't a priority at the moment) - and some that are infected and will die in the coming weeks.

That's why I don't understand why people are so focused on the number of cases - and even comparing them between different countries and dates; when the testing differs.

- - - Updated - - -


But we could also reduce traffic deaths by e.g. reducing the speed of cars further.
People wouldn't starve, people would still get goods - but it would be a bit more inconvenient.

Obviously there are also attempts of reducing traffic death that seem good - but don't actually work; and just reducing the speed limit or requiring seat-belts will not help if people don't see a reason to follow the rules.

Similarly the question about the pandemic responses is whether they actually work - or just attempts at doing something. The bad part is that we will first know in a few months, and the really bad part is that people will ignore the conclusions.

There's absolutely no doubt about lockdowns being effective in mitigating the impact. Look at the countries who failed to employ these measures at the right time, they're blowing up right now. The US will have millions of infected in no time.

[Kiri]

But in this situation, even a temporary change can ruin lives. How many people will be affected long-term by not being able to work now compared to those that would be affected by corona? Dealing with and controlling the consequences of confronting the virus is much more predictable and straight-forward than the domino affect of unpredictable consequences due to temporarily shutting down the world.
I'm still waiting a month or so to see how things go before having any strong position.

The thing is, we can remedy the ruined lives. Communities, countries, families can help one another to buffer the consequences of those measures. Many will have to make at least minor sacrifices for that, but we can keep lives from being truly ruined.
But there is nothing we can do to remedy death. Or severe, lasting lung damage.

[Forogil]

There's absolutely no doubt about lockdowns being effective in mitigating the impact. Look at the countries who failed to employ these measures at the right time, they're blowing up right now. The US will have millions of infected in no time.

The US failed in multiple ways, and for some reason WHO stresses testing, testing, testing, contact tracing, washing your hands, and physical distancing - not lockdowns.

[XDurionX]

The US failed in multiple ways, and for some reason WHO stresses testing, testing, testing, contact tracing, washing your hands, and physical distancing - not lockdowns.

It's almost as if lockdowns ensure physical distancing.

[Acidbaron]

The US failed in multiple ways, and for some reason WHO stresses testing, testing, testing, contact tracing, washing your hands, and physical distancing - not lockdowns.

Are you arguing that lockdowns are not effective?

[tromage2]

Are you arguing that lockdowns are not effective?

They are effective to win time, but when you open restrictions again the virus will return.
I wonder if the world will stay in lockdown for more then a year till a vaccine is made, ppl alrdy get crazy inside of my country let alone see their hole lifes getting destroyed.

If ppl understand that you need to stay apart 2 meters then you don’t need a lock down. It just sucks that a lot cant handle this rule.

[Ghostpanther]

Interesting news...https://www.foxnews.com/world/101-ye...-official-says

A 101-year-old Italian man born during the Spanish flu pandemic has reportedly survived a coronavirus infection as the outbreak continues to ravage his country and spread globally.

Gloria Lisi, the vice mayor of Rimini, a city on the coast of the Adriatic Sea in the Italian north, said the man had been released from a hospital earlier this week and returned to his family. She identified him only as Mr. P.

"He made it. Mr. P. made it," said Lisi, according to the ANSA news agency.

[Dormie]

The thing is, we can remedy the ruined lives. Communities, countries, families can help one another to buffer the consequences of those measures. Many will have to make at least minor sacrifices for that, but we can keep lives from being truly ruined.
But there is nothing we can do to remedy death. Or severe, lasting lung damage.

Death from other causes is one of the indirect consequences of a prolonged world quarantine. You're asking the world to go on hold, that's going to have hundreds of consequences.

[Granyala]

They are effective to win time,

That's all they are supposed to do.
Win time, so # of infected get spread out over a larger time frame, thus enabling our health care systems to keep up.

- - - Updated - - -

Death from other causes is one of the indirect consequences of a prolonged world quarantine. You're asking the world to go on hold, that's going to have hundreds of consequences.

If your country is inept at helping the poor, then yes: people will die because of a diminished economy.

[Inuyaki]

They are effective to win time, but when you open restrictions again the virus will return.
I wonder if the world will stay in lockdown for more then a year till a vaccine is made, ppl alrdy get crazy inside of my country let alone see their hole lifes getting destroyed.

If ppl understand that you need to stay apart 2 meters then you don’t need a lock down. It just sucks that a lot cant handle this rule.

Yeah and at that point you have already people with immunity (may just be a low number, but who knows), build more equipment, have maybe found a drug that works, etc etc

For example that test in Britain that tests for antibodies. If that is available in huge numbers in May or June, you could test hospital stuff and helpers for immunity and that alone would help ALOT.

[tromage2]

Death from other causes is one of the indirect consequences of a prolonged world quarantine. You're asking the world to go on hold, that's going to have hundreds of consequences.

Idd, i saw a few days ago that other healthcare has been put on hold like ppl that got cancer don’t get care because their system will get an impact and if they then get corona they might have a big problem. But if you keep this lock down going for a year you basicly kill these ppl aswell.

[Dormie]

If your country is inept at helping the poor, then yes: people will die because of a diminished economy.

You're making the mistake of thinking you can predict how people will be affected, you can't. By putting the world on hold you're affecting every system of humanity.

[Acidbaron]

They are effective to win time, but when you open restrictions again the virus will return.
I wonder if the world will stay in lockdown for more then a year till a vaccine is made, ppl alrdy get crazy inside of my country let alone see their hole lifes getting destroyed.

The intend is to control the upcoming peak, a person who needs to be hospitalized generally stays there for two weeks. There is concern that even with the lockdown this can be come unmanageable, Spain and Italy are prime examples of this and the US will follow in that trend with perhaps the UK.

It is the governments job to ensure people lives won't be ruined if your nation is wealthy and developed and this is the case than the problem is not the lockdown but the government structure and its policies, people also present this as if the alternative of just going your way won't ruin your life. It will, you need to accept the fact that this disease can take up to three weeks to kick in so that's why a monthly lockdown as being utilized now serves it purpose. Also hospitals have other cases to deal with than the corona virus, so that's why it is crucial the virus is not given the chance to run its course.

People need to stop believing that a lockdown will keep going on till there is a cure, this is not the case. So to say it once more this is to catch the initial peak, things will be re-opened slowly but surely.

In addition to this people seem to misunderstand what a lockdown actually is, work keeps happening if it can be done safely and if it is essential, in the US once again this term of what is essential is being misused, than again there's no real federal government there as the election fever has hit in.

I do fully get people not grasping the entire situation as you have governments such as the american and brazillian one spreading large amounts of misinformation.

[Kiri]

Death from other causes is one of the indirect consequences of a prolonged world quarantine. You're asking the world to go on hold, that's going to have hundreds of consequences.

Lives not being lost to other diseases or incidents is, as well. That's just how it works. From traffic accidents that don't happen because of reduced traffic over other kinds of accidents to people with other treatment getting treatment who would have found overwhelmed hospitals otherwise - that's just as possible. No one can truly predict what is going to happen. If you can, you should contact people in power immediately and tell them. Other than that, I'd leave it to people with much more information and insight to make that call and not armchair this.