Mega-Thread: Coronavirus Pandemic

[Deja Thoris]

next level bullshit

Run out of shit to post in the brexit thread? Useless poster.

[Crissi]

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation...aCTHVaQgaslWss

This is a worrying story from the US.

60 choir members were in a rehearsal, all asymptomatic, 45 are now positive and 2 dead. They sanitized their hands, didn't hug or shake hands. Just sang in the same room for a couple of hours....

And it wasn't some small room, it was a church.

Having been in choir myself, that doesnt suprise me. The amount of force you need to sing properly in a large area could easily have had droplets scatter. Not to mention you tend to stand very close together.

Going ahead with that was a dumb thing to do.

[PhaelixWW]

All very well you adding in supposed Coronavirus deaths after March 20th, was that deaths with or from Corona?

These numbers come directly from the UK government.

however even at the peak in your yellow area of one day at 250ish deaths the normal background death rate in an average year every day in the UK is about 1600. Shame you didn't add that in for some balance.

Lol. The UK is at +381 so far today. You think a 25% increase is going to get hidden as some kind of blip against the "normal background death rate"? Do you also honestly want to look at the chart I posted and then suggest that it's going to stay at only +381 in future days?

- - - Updated - - -

Not to argue against you, his graph simply starts with week #1 of the year.

Sure, but there's zero reason to start the chart there. That's why it's 100% disingenuous, especially when coupled with the fact that the data just... stops 11 days ago.

[Cynep]

Yo, Americans, hit me up! Is the scene in the 1st episode of Breaking Bad realistic or not? Would a school teacher refuse to go to the hospital because of not being able to afford it with his bad insurance? Or it's just the movies?

[PhaelixWW]

US is seeing a fairly major increase today, it looks like. We're already past +20k new cases and +600 deaths, and we still have a broad chunk of data reporting still yet to see.

[Puupi]

Having been in choir myself, that doesnt suprise me. The amount of force you need to sing properly in a large area could easily have had droplets scatter. Not to mention you tend to stand very close together.

Going ahead with that was a dumb thing to do.

But still...

The odds are that there was only one infected person in the church who then spread the virus to 75% of the people in the church. You can't have 60 people right next to each other anyway, so it definitely spreads much further than just a few meters.

It was also said in the article that as a precaution they were standing further from each other than normal.

[PACOX]

The number of new cases has halved in Finland in a couple of days. Quarantine measures are starting to show their effect.

I hope the slow down doesn't get people to break protocols.

Rates are beginning to slow down because people have listened.

[Cynep]

Sure, but there's zero reason to start the chart there. That's why it's 100% disingenuous, especially when coupled with the fact that the data just... stops 11 days ago.

Yes, your more important points are valid. Just pointing out that a graph starting at the start of the year is not suspicious. Not being updated for the relevant week is suspicious, yes.

[PhaelixWW]

Yes, your more important points are valid. Just pointing out that a graph starting at the start of the year is not suspicious. Not being updated for the relevant week is suspicious, yes.

No, see, there's not a single graphic-maker in the world who would intentionally make a graphic where only 20% of the graph was meaningful (2 out of 11 weeks), while also missing a full half of the meaningful data (the 2 weeks after the end of the graph), especially with such a declarative tagline ("So far, average weekly deaths has not changed due to Coronavirus"), unless they were pushing an agenda.

[Wezmon]

In the UK the national background normal death rate is unchanged by Coronavirus, and yet the economy is being destroyed for generations to come.

You cant make this shit up. So Brexit, which even the most ardent supporter admitted would hamper the UK economy was fine, but if we lose money trying to save lives that's bad? Have you thought this through?

Anyway pointless looking at anything at the moment. If things go well we hopefully see a low death count. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have done what we did! It just means the steps we took worked. The real test will be in a few months when brazil's numbers come in. At that point we can tell whether the price was worth it.

[PACOX]

Yo, Americans, hit me up! Is the scene in the 1st episode of Breaking Bad realistic or not? Would a school teacher refuse to go to the hospital because of not being able to afford it with his bad insurance? Or it's just the movies?

Yes it's very realistic. People in the US avoid hospitals because they/we can't afford them. They weren't lying. Seemingly good people turning to drugs to get by, also not unrealistic.

Heres something. If you are in a car accident and bump your head you should probably go to ER and get checked out right? Even if EMTs come to look at you, common practice is to wait until you can file a claim to go to the ER because A) ambulances are expense even if the hospital is within a mile. B) car insurance might cover you better than health insurance in the case of an accident.

[Cynep]

No, see, there's not a single graphic-maker in the world who would intentionally make a graphic where only 20% of the graph was meaningful (2 out of 11 weeks), while also missing a full half of the meaningful data (the 2 weeks after the end of the graph), especially with such a declarative tagline ("So far, average weekly deaths has not changed due to Coronavirus"), unless they were pushing an agenda.

OK, when you look at it from that angle, I agree. They take a graph for the whole year but talk about last 2 weeks while omitting one of those 2.

[Draco-Onis]

Ah that...I had completely written it off and forgotten that was even a thing because of how absolutely fucking ridiculous it was.

Never underestimate stupid also pretty sure anti vaxxers will not want to take the vaccine when it's out.

[Puupi]

I think the number of deaths is dictated solely by the capacity of health care. There will be enough people with coverage to overwhelm the capacity, what is affected who dies. In the US there will be proportionally more poor people dead that in other countries.

When the poor and the old die, the survivors triumph.

- - - Updated - - -

Trump is saying the US internet infrastructure is holding better than in Europe.

lol

[Belize]

Trump is saying the US internet infrastructure is holding better than in Europe.

lol

The infrastructure can't break if it's not there in the first place *taps head*

[Puupi]

I think this is the first time Trump looks like he isn't even himself believing the shit he is reading out loud from the written statement.

[Svifnymr]

Donetsk got our first confirmed case today... blockade didn't help after all, damn tourists

So, judging by responses to my last post, it is possible that USA will get increased death rate due to absence of universal healthcare, people without "coverage" won't get treated? I mean, Germany is doing miracles so far, I thought USA may or may not join the club of countries with low deaths?

A hospital cannot refuse service in the USA if it's a serious case, so no, insurance levels won't affect the treatment. For non-serious cases, it may result in some not getting treatment, but that doesn't really affect deaths. If you have insurance or not, a serious case will get treated and then at some point you'll get a bill, which if you don't pay, it will hurt your credit.

[Poopymonster]

Yo, Americans, hit me up! Is the scene in the 1st episode of Breaking Bad realistic or not? Would a school teacher refuse to go to the hospital because of not being able to afford it with his bad insurance? Or it's just the movies?

Real sadly. Long term treatment would bankrupt him on a teacher's salary even with insurance. Hospital would just get you to the point where they can say "Yup, you'll live, follow up with your regular doctor."

[Zan15]

A hospital cannot refuse service in the USA if it's a serious case, so no, insurance levels won't affect the treatment. For non-serious cases, it may result in some not getting treatment, but that doesn't really affect deaths. If you have insurance or not, a serious case will get treated and then at some point you'll get a bill, which if you don't pay, it will hurt your credit.

No you are confused.

A hospital cannot refuse stabilization of the patient.

They can refuse a lot of "service". They can stabilize you and refuse cancer treatment. They can stabilize you and refuse a transplant.
They can also refuse you under "layperson" language if you show up at the ER with what a normal citizen would consider non emergent care (i.e hangnail).


Do not confuse Treatment/service with medical stabilization as forced under the law.

Its also amazing under CMS rules what even constitutes stabilization of a patient under EMTALA. Its not as powerful of a law as one would guess

- - - Updated - - -

Real sadly. Long term treatment would bankrupt him on a teacher's salary even with insurance. Hospital would just get you to the point where they can say "Yup, you'll live, follow up with your regular doctor."

in the US He would be better off quitting then filing for Medicaid under hardship exemption for instant approval instead of waiting for the enrollment period.


There are so many ways to "game" the system LEGALLY to get access to zero patient liability Medicaid coverage

[-aiko-]

Yo, Americans, hit me up! Is the scene in the 1st episode of Breaking Bad realistic or not? Would a school teacher refuse to go to the hospital because of not being able to afford it with his bad insurance? Or it's just the movies?

Not only is it real, it's not uncommon.

When I was between jobs, I refused an ambulance ride and treatment during an HPP episode because I didn't have insurance.