General COVID-19 talk, NHL remains suspended MOD Warning post #1

[Legionnaire]

I hear that. I've considered going short van dyke again, but my goat and stache have been growing since I had a full beard.

Getting close to a thicker version of Dali w/goat.

Ha!

This is how it's looked since I shaved the full beard.

 

[King'sPawn]

This is how it's looked since I shaved the full beard.

Damn dude. You've had Pierce Brosnan stuck to your face? (J/k)

My hair very much looks like a light brown version of Ted's mop from Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure.

 

[Legionnaire]

Damn dude. You've had Pierce Brosnan stuck to your face? (J/k)

My hair very much looks like a light brown version of Ted's mop from Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure.

You need to borrow a black vest?

 

[jfont]

From the article:C
Conclusions

• Deaths increased in Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas

• Test positivity increased in South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Utah, Nebraska

• Hospitalizations increased in Mississippi, South Dakota, Arkansas, Tennessee

• Cases increased in South Carolina, Mississippi, South Dakota, Missouri, Nebraska, Georgia

Upward trends

• South Carolina: Cases, percent positive cases and deaths trending up

• Mississippi: Cases, hospitalizations, deaths trending up

• South Dakota: Cases, hospitalizations trending up

• Arkansas: Hospitalizations trending up

• Tennessee: Hospitalizations trending up

• Texas: Deaths trending up

• Florida: Percent positive cases trending up

• Missouri: Cases trending up

• Nebraska: Cases, percent positive cases trending up

• Georgia: Percent positive cases trending up

 

[Lt Dan]

1 death in OC today and it was from a SNF

Looks like more are on the way

Faulty OC Virus Reporting Exposes 10 Elderly Residents to Coronavirus, One Tests Positive

 

[jfont]

OK, so you don't believe any actual numbers presented by the CDC and pretty much every other country, but are just going to make some up that suit your argument? People definitely should be cautious, but for most people under the age of 50 years old this is not a very dangerous disease.

I trust the CDC but I don't believe they have it all correct. As I said before, we won't know the real numbers until this pandemic is over and some academic starts a study. You can't discount the evidence here. It would be foolish specially with some states manipulating data.

Coronavirus death toll: CDC data says it's much greater than indicated
As I said before, let's all not add this gamble into our lives.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

That's why I keep going back to the 'excessive death' counts, showing how many more have died of any cause this year than an 'average' year. I feel that's a pretty strong approximation of what we're dealing with, +/- all those delayed concerns we keep hearing about of people not going to the hospital for other things.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Whoops.

Positive COVID-19 patient was at crowded Lake of the Ozarks bars over Memorial Day weekend

Guess we'll get a real-time understanding of how the virus spreads!

 

[Bandit]

That's why I keep going back to the 'excessive death' counts, showing how many more have died of any cause this year than an 'average' year. I feel that's a pretty strong approximation of what we're dealing with, +/- all those delayed concerns we keep hearing about of people not going to the hospital for other things.

Do you know of any sites with more up to date data? Those graphs haven't been updated in over a month, and the CDC's data is lagging by 2-3 weeks as well. Trying to make an informed decision in near real time is damn near impossible with this disgraceful absence of timely and accurate data.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Do you know of any sites with more up to date data? Those graphs haven't been updated in over a month, and the CDC's data is lagging by 2-3 weeks as well. Trying to make an informed decision in near real time is damn near impossible with this disgraceful absence of timely and accurate data.

Their full coverage site has more up to date data but they've had the same struggle in the last week or so: Coronavirus tracked: the latest figures as countries fight to contain the pandemic | Free to read

Personally I use Global COVID-19 Tracker & Interactive Charts | Real Time Updates & Digestable Information for Everyone | 1Point3Acres, though I know some prefer https://covidtracking.com/data. But of course those are only as up to date or accurate as local health departments will allow, which of course is the issue.

 

[HeadInjury]

From the article:C
Conclusions

• Deaths increased in Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas

• Test positivity increased in South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Utah, Nebraska

• Hospitalizations increased in Mississippi, South Dakota, Arkansas, Tennessee

• Cases increased in South Carolina, Mississippi, South Dakota, Missouri, Nebraska, Georgia

Upward trends

• South Carolina: Cases, percent positive cases and deaths trending up

• Mississippi: Cases, hospitalizations, deaths trending up

• South Dakota: Cases, hospitalizations trending up

• Arkansas: Hospitalizations trending up

• Tennessee: Hospitalizations trending up

• Texas: Deaths trending up

• Florida: Percent positive cases trending up

• Missouri: Cases trending up

• Nebraska: Cases, percent positive cases trending up

• Georgia: Percent positive cases trending up

Has anyone suggested that opening things up more would not lead to any increases in infections, hospitalizations or deaths? The point is that there have not yet been dire consequences anywhere that restrictions were eased.

This situation is no different than any other cost benefit analysis we have to do as a society. The same analysis that tells us that 30,000 to 40,000 annual car accident fatalities are acceptable, that increasing the maximum speed limit from 55 to 65 or 75 miles per hour is okay even though we know it leads to more deaths. The same analysis that has led us as a society to conclude that we won't shut things down in order to save 20,000 to 50,000 people from dying from Influenza each year.

The shut down was implemented in an attempt to avoid our healthcare system from being overwhelmed. Turns out we never got close to that happening. Thank God for that. But to suggest that everyone has to remain in lockdown so there are no increases in infections, hospitalizations or deaths would be completely nuts.

How many jobs should we be willing to sacrifice going forward in order to minimize COVID-19 deaths? I don't hear anyone opposing opening things up answering that question. But that's the cost benefit analysis that has to be done.

At this point, start opening things up everywhere (with reasonable restrictions on numbers of people permitted), tell people to wash their hands, wear masks and continue social distancing. People who are at high risk should stay isolated. Everyone else gets to decide whether or not to enter a restaurant, bar, etc. Just large gatherings such as theatres, concerts, sporting events and the like should be completely prohibited for the time being.

Monitor what happens and make adjustments according to the actual data. We know all the models have been garbage without actual data.

Putting 40 million people out of work to limit deaths is not a sustainable strategy.

 

[Herby]

Has anyone suggested that opening things up more would not lead to any increases in infections, hospitalizations or deaths? The point is that there have not yet been dire consequences anywhere that restrictions were eased.

This situation is no different than any other cost benefit analysis we have to do as a society. The same analysis that tells us that 30,000 to 40,000 annual car accident fatalities are acceptable, that increasing the maximum speed limit from 55 to 65 or 75 miles per hour is okay even though we know it leads to more deaths. The same analysis that has led us as a society to conclude that we won't shut things down in order to save 20,000 to 50,000 people from dying from Influenza each year.

The shut down was implemented in an attempt to avoid our healthcare system from being overwhelmed. Turns out we never got close to that happening. Thank God for that. But to suggest that everyone has to remain in lockdown so there are no increases in infections, hospitalizations or deaths would be completely nuts.

How many jobs should we be willing to sacrifice going forward in order to minimize COVID-19 deaths? I don't hear anyone opposing opening things up answering that question. But that's the cost benefit analysis that has to be done.

At this point, start opening things up everywhere (with reasonable restrictions on numbers of people permitted), tell people to wash their hands, wear masks and continue social distancing. People who are at high risk should stay isolated. Everyone else gets to decide whether or not to enter a restaurant, bar, etc. Just large gatherings such as theatres, concerts, sporting events and the like should be completely prohibited for the time being.

Monitor what happens and make adjustments according to the actual data. We know all the models have been garbage without actual data.

Putting 40 million people out of work to limit deaths is not a sustainable strategy.

Spot on,

Somehow along the way the pro-lockdown people went from flattening the curve and not overflowing hospitals to not opening up until there are basically zero cases. I'm sure there tune will change sometime around November 3rd though.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Has anyone suggested that opening things up more would not lead to any increases in infections, hospitalizations or deaths? The point is that there have not yet been dire consequences anywhere that restrictions were eased.

This situation is no different than any other cost benefit analysis we have to do as a society. The same analysis that tells us that 30,000 to 40,000 annual car accident fatalities are acceptable, that increasing the maximum speed limit from 55 to 65 or 75 miles per hour is okay even though we know it leads to more deaths. The same analysis that has led us as a society to conclude that we won't shut things down in order to save 20,000 to 50,000 people from dying from Influenza each year.

The shut down was implemented in an attempt to avoid our healthcare system from being overwhelmed. Turns out we never got close to that happening. Thank God for that. But to suggest that everyone has to remain in lockdown so there are no increases in infections, hospitalizations or deaths would be completely nuts.

How many jobs should we be willing to sacrifice going forward in order to minimize COVID-19 deaths? I don't hear anyone opposing opening things up answering that question. But that's the cost benefit analysis that has to be done.

At this point, start opening things up everywhere (with reasonable restrictions on numbers of people permitted), tell people to wash their hands, wear masks and continue social distancing. People who are at high risk should stay isolated. Everyone else gets to decide whether or not to enter a restaurant, bar, etc. Just large gatherings such as theatres, concerts, sporting events and the like should be completely prohibited for the time being.

Monitor what happens and make adjustments according to the actual data. We know all the models have been garbage without actual data.

Putting 40 million people out of work to limit deaths is not a sustainable strategy.

Actually yes, the problem is that's exactly the implication of the tweet that @jfont is responding to.

But re: the boldfaced what's funny is that's what the vast, vast majority of at least this forum is saying, no matter what precedes that statement. some of us--MOST of us?--can make sense of what we see and reach that conclusion in some manner. But unfortunately it seems quite a few can't, and unfortunately many that can't hold an unfortunate amount of power.

 

[King'sPawn]

I'm okay with opening with appropriate plans in places, phases, and following the instructions of agencies who have the resources and education to make recommendations.

If the CDC said, in March, "let's reopen, but use partitions and masks" I'd have more faith.

But the recommendations weren't forwarded from the administration, to my understanding. Leadership isn't even following guidelines. And consequently people are irresponsibly following his example.

My stance this whole time is listen to the experts, and don't put finances over health and safety.

 

[KINGS17]

Whoops.

Positive COVID-19 patient was at crowded Lake of the Ozarks bars over Memorial Day weekend

Guess we'll get a real-time understanding of how the virus spreads!

If I was a person who was possibly exposed, I wouldn't go near a person who is at high risk. All it takes is a little common sense.

In some ways it wouldn't be so bad if it did spread to 30 or 40 healthy individuals. They will get the antibodies and will not be carriers of the disease, thereby preventing spread, in the near future. This is why you protect the vulnerable and not quarantine the healthy. Isolation of healthy individuals leads to an unhealthy society in many ways.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

If I was a person who was possibly exposed, I wouldn't go near a person who is at high risk. All it takes is a little common sense.

In some ways it wouldn't be so bad if it did spread to 30 or 40 healthy individuals. They will get the antibodies and will not be carriers of the disease, thereby preventing spread, in the near future. This is why you protect the vulnerable and not quarantine the healthy. Isolation of healthy individuals leads to an unhealthy society in many ways.

They were able to trace this dude's steps very well it seems. I'm not being snarky, I genuinely think it will be interesting to see what the spread is like given the outdoor venues, pool, bars, etc. Like did some places get more infections than others? How bad are they? etc.

 

[KINGS17]

They were able to trace this dude's steps very well it seems. I'm not being snarky, I genuinely think it will be interesting to see what the spread is like given the outdoor venues, pool, bars, etc. Like did some places get more infections than others? How bad are they? etc.

I know you are genuinely interested in what occurs. I believe if we are protecting the most at risk correctly the impact can be greatly reduced.

 

[LAKings88]

I’m waiting three weeks to a month to see where things stand after the reopening.

Won’t take unnecessary risk at the moment.

Widowed mom is in her 70s and my wife has autoimmune issues.

 

[KINGS17]

I wonder what kind of virus spread will be seen from the civil unrest this weekend and how it will be covered by the media.

 

[KINGS17]

I’m waiting three weeks to a month to see where things stand after the reopening.

Won’t take unnecessary risk at the moment.

Widowed mom is in her 70s and my wife has autoimmune issues.

Sounds like a wise decision on your part. You should be cautious.

 

[LAKings88]

I wonder what kind of virus spread will be seen from the civil unrest this weekend and how it will be covered by the media.

Coronavirus Live Updates: U.S. Protests Set Off Fears of New Outbreaks

 

[LAKings88]

The mystery of 'silent spreaders'

 

[Herby]

Coronavirus Live Updates: U.S. Protests Set Off Fears of New Outbreaks

I think it's pretty funny how people with "Stay Home: It Saves Lives" FB Frames who last week were angry with people at the beach are now suddenly supporting of protesting in the streets.

I personally have no issues with anyone protesting or anyone going to the beach. I think its a good sign that things are getting back to normal and people aren't terrified to leave their homes anymore.

 

[tny760]

I think it's pretty funny how people with "Stay Home: It Saves Lives" FB Frames who last week were angry with people at the beach are now suddenly supporting of protesting in the streets.

this is very amusing to me too

but no bro, this is different

 

[Bandit]

I think it's pretty funny how people with "Stay Home: It Saves Lives" FB Frames who last week were angry with people at the beach are now suddenly supporting of protesting in the streets.

I personally have no issues with anyone protesting or anyone going to the beach. I think its a good sign that things are getting back to normal and people aren't terrified to leave their homes anymore.

I don't condone the violence or the mass gatherings right now, but you might not find it so funny when you realize that some of these people wonder what the point of staying home is when the cops can just break your door down and shoot your ass dead for no reason at all. There are plenty of asshats that are taking advantage of the situation, there always are, but for a lot of people this is a life and death struggle of it's own.