Corona Virus Thread Part 4 of Unknown (MOD NOTE IN OP)

[Jets 31]

So I guess coronavirus pandemic is over ... no mention of it in the media for 4 days now.
On to the next agenda.

Come on, there is protests all over America right now. Is the media supposed to ignore all of that and just talk about the Corona virus? Don't worry once the protests calm down they will go back to talking about a virus that has killed so many people.

 

[raideralex99]

Come on, there is protests all over America right now. Is the media supposed to ignore all of that and just talk about the Corona virus? Don't worry once the protests calm down they will go back to talking about a virus that has killed so many people.

"How media and government reports of coronavirus cases make the pandemic look worse than it is"

Most people recover from coronavirus, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The CDC's most recent estimates peg the overall rate of recovery at as high as 99.74%. That number decreases as patients get older and/or if they are afflicted by co-morbidities that hinder their immune systems. Yet overall, "most people have mild illness and are able to recover at home," the CDC states.

How media and government reports of coronavirus cases make the pandemic look worse than it is

 

[Jets 31]

"How media and government reports of coronavirus cases make the pandemic look worse than it is"

Most people recover from coronavirus, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The CDC's most recent estimates peg the overall rate of recovery at as high as 99.74%. That number decreases as patients get older and/or if they are afflicted by co-morbidities that hinder their immune systems. Yet overall, "most people have mild illness and are able to recover at home," the CDC states.

How media and government reports of coronavirus cases make the pandemic look worse than it is

Hey i hope you are right and 99.74% do recover but the virus has killed over 100,000 people in the U.S alone. It's still a very serious virus that has no vaccine.

 

[10Ducky10]

LIVE PRESS CONFERENCE
at 5:00 pm by COVID-19 on how it is going to protect the American citizens from the government.


NYC deaths about 16,410.
Canada deaths about 7,294.

 

[SensibleGuy]

more than 200 deaths in Canada today? What's up with that? Only 750 new cases...there must have been some recount or something. We've been hovering around 100 deaths per day for ages...

 

[10Ducky10]

more than 200 deaths in Canada today? What's up with that? Only 750 new cases...there must have been some recount or something. We've been hovering around 100 deaths per day for ages...

You shouldn't take the deaths today with new cases today.
There was 221 deaths today and about 1500-1600 new cases reported every day about 3 or so weeks ago. It is those people that caught the virus back then that are dyingnow.
This guy is pretty good and he talks about Canada at the very beginning and not in a good fashion. It is from Saturday...

 

[SensibleGuy]

Yeah I'm familiar with John Campbell. Been following him for months. But he seems to me to be a little off on Canada. I understand the delay in deaths, but that doesn't account for why daily deaths would be going gradually down and then suddenly double in a day. I don't think there was a big spike in cases 2 weeks ago (there was a big one day spike a while back but it was a book keeping thing). As far as I can see just from following our numbers daily, Quebec is the only part of Canada that isn't trending reasonably well in the right direction. Even Ontario is improving...

I didn't mean to suggest that today's death number relates to today's new cases number. I was just noting that our new cases have been gradually dropping for some weeks now...

I like this site for comparing the provinces...
Manitoba, Canada, COVID-19 Patient Status, Over Time, Annotated

A-HA! I just noticed a note on Quebec's graph that 202 deaths were added today due to a clerical error. So that explains it.

 

[buggs]

more than 200 deaths in Canada today? What's up with that? Only 750 new cases...there must have been some recount or something. We've been hovering around 100 deaths per day for ages...

I think you can attribute the difference to random variance more than anything else. Trends aren't always strictly linear, averages don't always create straight lines. You'll see hiccups because data sets aren't always pretty.

Not trying to be condescending here - apologies if it seems as such; just an anomaly for a day. Hopefully.

 

[SensibleGuy]

I think you can attribute the difference to random variance more than anything else. Trends aren't always strictly linear, averages don't always create straight lines. You'll see hiccups because data sets aren't always pretty.

Not trying to be condescending here - apologies if it seems as such; just an anomaly for a day. Hopefully.

um, no...I can attribute the difference to 200 deaths being added today due to a clerical issue, which is what actually happened. I'm not a simpleton. I know none of this is perfectly linear. I'm also pretty good at spotting oddities and strange variances.

 

[Larabee]

The fact they can't jack up the price of a drug that millions rely on will be good news for diabetics in the US. Humalog is now over $300 btw (this chart is from 1996). In Canada a vial costs about $35.

The U.S. government will be capping the cost at $35 starting next year.

 

[kcin94]

I think you can attribute the difference to random variance more than anything else. Trends aren't always strictly linear, averages don't always create straight lines. You'll see hiccups because data sets aren't always pretty.

Not trying to be condescending here - apologies if it seems as such; just an anomaly for a day. Hopefully.

56 deaths today. The rest is because once again, Quebec had a data transmission error

 

[JetsFan815]

Big pharma companies are against HCQ because the drug is too cheap. Currently the cost is about $37 for 100 2mg pills. Other promising meds like remdesiver have open ended pricing at this point..... anywhere from 1k to 4.5k per treatment. I’ll admit that I’m not sure how that breaks down per mg, but I’m sure it’s much higher than HCQ.

I can assure you that "big pharma" wants this pandemic to be over or atleast brought under control as much as anyone. They would rather things go back to normal and not make a profit on Corona then be stuck in the Corona limbo while the rest of the economy and their sources of funding grind to a halt.

 

[ERYX]

56 deaths today. The rest is because once again, Quebec had a data transmission error

Wonder what's going to happen with all of these mass protests without any semblance of social distancing. I guess we will see in the next two weeks whether all of the lockdowns were necessary or not. If there isn't a major outbreak it would seem to suggest that being allowed to earn an income, shop, or go to church wasn't so dangerous after all.

 

[ERYX]

Hey i hope you are right and 99.74% do recover but the virus has killed over 100,000 people in the U.S alone. It's still a very serious virus that has no vaccine.

Regular flu killed 80,000 in the US just a few years ago, and there IS a vaccine for that. So, arguably the flu is a lot worse than COVID if that's how bad flu numbers can get with a vaccine in circulation.

 

[SensibleGuy]

Regular flu killed 80,000 in the US just a few years ago, and there IS a vaccine for that. So, arguably the flu is a lot worse than COVID if that's how bad flu numbers can get with a vaccine in circulation.

80,000 in a year is considerably different than 110,000 in three months. There's a vaccine for the flu, but lots of people don't get it. I haven't in years. I should, but dumb laziness takes hold.

Interesting to see a lot more activity on various world live cams now than a couple months back...these Venice cams were complete ghost towns for a while.

 

[Jets 31]

Regular flu killed 80,000 in the US just a few years ago, and there IS a vaccine for that. So, arguably the flu is a lot worse than COVID if that's how bad flu numbers can get with a vaccine in circulation.

True but the Corona virus has killed even more in only 4 months . We will see what the numbers are after 1 year. I hope you are also right though and we get through this with very little deaths from here on in.

 

[KCjetsfan]

Regular flu killed 80,000 in the US just a few years ago, and there IS a vaccine for that. So, arguably the flu is a lot worse than COVID if that's how bad flu numbers can get with a vaccine in circulation.

you are leaving out the part where the flu lives in a world that operates 'normally' whereas the last 3 months with covid19 has been anything but. So no, arguably the flu isn't a lot worse than covid19. If/when there's an effective vaccine for covid19 and it's used as widely as the flu shot, you may be able to try to make an accurate comparison between the two.

to your other point about whether the protests will serve as a catalyst to more infection, time will tell. a decent amount of people wearing masks may help mitigate it a bit, and t's a little different than being in an enclosed space with others, or even packed into an outdoor stadium, but I guess we'll see in a few weeks.

 

[ERYX]

you are leaving out the part where the flu lives in a world that operates 'normally' whereas the last 3 months with covid19 has been anything but. So no, arguably the flu isn't a lot worse than covid19. If/when there's an effective vaccine for covid19 and it's used as widely as the flu shot, you may be able to try to make an accurate comparison between the two.

So you're saying that a vaccine is much less effective than lockdown?

to your other point about whether the protests will serve as a catalyst to more infection, time will tell. a decent amount of people wearing masks may help mitigate it a bit, and t's a little different than being in an enclosed space with others, or even packed into an outdoor stadium, but I guess we'll see in a few weeks.

Those rioters are VERY closely packed together, even closer than in a stadium where there's at least some distance created by the seats and stairwells, etc.

Surely rioting isn't safer than shopping at a small business with social distancing or attending church with a reduced congregation and 6 feet between families?

 

[KCjetsfan]

So you're saying that a vaccine is much less effective than lockdown?


Those rioters are VERY closely packed together, even closer than in a stadium where there's at least some distance created by the seats and stairwells, etc.

Surely rioting isn't safer than shopping at a small business with social distancing or attending church with a reduced congregation and 6 feet between families?

I'm no scientist so I don't know what is more effective (they do different things), but if you want to make a comparison, you'd have to compare flu with a vaccine and no social distancing, and covid with a vaccine and no social distancing in order to back up your claim.

To the 2nd point, well that's clearly not what I said, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt even though it's pretty clear the narrative you want to foster. I'm saying that protesting in the streets may (key word may) not have the same issues with transmission as sitting for an hour in an enclosed building. I'll grant I haven't really watched the national news, but in KC I would not categorize the protests as being very closely packed together like a 60,000 person stadium would be.

 

[ERYX]

True but the Corona virus has killed even more in only 4 months . We will see what the numbers are after 1 year. I hope you are also right though and we get through this with very little deaths from here on in.

Perhaps looking at Canada's numbers might be useful too ... between 2,000 and 8,000 people die of the flu in Canada each year. We're at about 7,000 so far in Canada and things seem to be really slowing down. So it may turn out to actually be similar deaths to the common flu albeit with a lockdown instead of a vaccine.

 

[ERYX]

I'm no scientist so I don't know what is more effective (they do different things), but if you want to make a comparison, you'd have to compare flu with a vaccine and no social distancing, and covid with a vaccine and no social distancing in order to back up your claim.

I guess I'd defer to a scientist as well, but surely vaccines and lockdowns both have the same intention -- to stop people from getting the disease. And the way vaccines are talked about, one gets the impression that they are VERY effective to the point that surely SOME comparison can be made?

Agreed though that for a true/accurate/scientific comparison you'd need the scenario you described.

To the 2nd point, well that's clearly not what I said, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt even though it's pretty clear the narrative you want to foster. I'm saying that protesting in the streets may (key word may) not have the same issues with transmission as sitting for an hour in an enclosed building. I'll grant I haven't really watched the national news, but in KC I would not categorize the protests as being very closely packed together like a 60,000 person stadium would be.

The only "narrative" I'm trying to foster is that we'll see what happens in weeks whether all these protests lead to an outbreak. And if they don't, I think that really hurts the argument that small businesses and churches needed to be shut down. Because even if a stadium of 6,000 people is more dangerous, surely a small business or a church using some social distancing and cleaning protocols is not more dangerous and therefore should have been allowed open.

Maybe in Kansas City the protestors have been practicing social distancing, but watching the live helicopter cameras of protests/riots in Chicago, New York, and Minneapolis over the weekend, there were tens of thousands of people very closely packed together. Just for some visual examples:

Minneapolis:

Oakland:

Minneapolis:

 

[HannuJ]

Regular flu killed 80,000 in the US just a few years ago, and there IS a vaccine for that. So, arguably the flu is a lot worse than COVID if that's how bad flu numbers can get with a vaccine in circulation.

this is so factually incorrect that i've had to log in an post here for the first time in ages.
regular flu killed 80 000 in a year. this has killed 100 000 americans (likely more) in 3 months. with people told to stay at home. so yeah, your comparison is as wrong as one can get.
the flu is usually passed on from 1 person to only 1 other person. COVID transmits on average from 1 carrier to 3 other people.
the flu has a vaccine. it also has low vaccination rates and it's a predicative vaccine based on computer-generated models that try to guess the strains that will be most virulent each flu season. sometimes it's right, other times (a few years ago) it is wrong.
the only things correct are 1. the original mortality rate of 3% is likely incorrect 2. it initially was thought that people in their 30s and 40s were disproportionately affected by COVID. it's been shown that seniors are still the highest risk category. So perhaps focusing on keeping everyone at home versus protecting seniors was done in error.

 

[ERYX]

this is so factually incorrect that i've had to log in an post here for the first time in ages.

What part of what I said was factually incorrect?

Let's break down what I said that was asserted as fact ...

1. "Regular flu killed 80,000 in the US just a few years ago" You say "regular flu killed 80 000 in a year" so we are in agreement. So I take it this is not factually incorrect.

2. "and there IS a vaccine for that" You qualify the flu vaccine as a "predicative vaccine" with "low vaccination rates" but I think you still admit that there is a vaccine and I've not made a false factual assertion in this regard either.

I believe you are suggesting that the flu vaccine actually isn't that good because it is "predicative" and lots of people don't take it. Given that they, in your own words "guess" at how to make the vaccine each year, it is not that useful. What you say actually accords with what I understand of the flu vaccine, but I have used the flu having a vaccine as a bit of a rhetorical device since vaccines are held up as some sort of panacea by the medical community.

this has killed 100 000 americans (likely more) in 3 months.

Well, you say likely more, but that is not factual that is opinion/conjecture. I could just as easily say, on the other hand, that there are likely fewer deaths given all of the anecdotes about cause of death being noted as "COVID-19" when someone is brought in from a car accident, or heart attack -- or just noting the drastic drop in heart disease and cancer deaths since. I think at this point it's not clear and claims of falsifying numbers abound so for now let's just assume the official numbers are somewhat correct.

I think the real bottom line is that we are in agreement on the points you made in your last sentence, although I am more vehemently a proponent of the bolded than I suspect you are:

1. the original mortality rate of 3% is likely incorrect 2. it initially was thought that people in their 30s and 40s were disproportionately affected by COVID. it's been shown that seniors are still the highest risk category. So perhaps focusing on keeping everyone at home versus protecting seniors was done in error.

 

[SensibleGuy]

What part of what I said was factually incorrect?

Let's break down what I said that was asserted as fact ...

1. "Regular flu killed 80,000 in the US just a few years ago" You say "regular flu killed 80 000 in a year" so we are in agreement. So I take it this is not factually incorrect.

2. "and there IS a vaccine for that" You qualify the flu vaccine as a "predicative vaccine" with "low vaccination rates" but I think you still admit that there is a vaccine and I've not made a false factual assertion in this regard either.

I believe you are suggesting that the flu vaccine actually isn't that good because it is "predicative" and lots of people don't take it. Given that they, in your own words "guess" at how to make the vaccine each year, it is not that useful. What you say actually accords with what I understand of the flu vaccine, but I have used the flu having a vaccine as a bit of a rhetorical device since vaccines are held up as some sort of panacea by the medical community.

Oh, more anti vax BS. I get it.

 

[ERYX]

Oh, more anti vax BS. I get it.

We're just talking about the flu vaccine.

But you can't have it both ways, either the flu vaccine is effective or it isn't. You can't say that the flu having a vaccine doesn't count because the flu vaccine isn't that good, and then turn around and say it's "anti vax BS" to question the usefulness of the flu vaccine!