The Coronavirus

[Independent1986]

28 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Not normally. When they mutate these respiratory viruses often fall apart. So while there is no way to be "certain" what it will do, there is no point in hiding while we wai for something to mutate. You might also get hit by a bus tomorrow, does that mean everyone should stay home now?

I think there is a higher chance of the virus mutating due to the rate that is spreading at (is not strength of the virus, i am talking about the rate of infection) than everyone coming out at the same time and getting hit by a bus. It only takes the virus to reach one "right person" and if the conditions are there for a mutation it can either be a lower strain of the virus or something like the black death.

At the same time keeping a society locked in can have devastating effects. I am looking at my case, I have all the basics needs including the ability to work from home remotely daily however after 10 weeks in and going out maybe once a day it does take its toll mentality. There are a lot of people that don't even have this and is probably even tougher, loss of work and financial uncertainty can lead society to revolutions.

There is an ancient curse, I believe is Chinese: "May you live in interesting times". We sure are.

The answer is that there is no answer, we will have to adapt each day when something new comes up.

Edited May 24, 2020 by Independent1986

[BubberMiley]

24 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Not normally. When they mutate these respiratory viruses often fall apart. So while there is no way to be "certain" what it will do, there is no point in hiding while we wai for something to mutate. You might also get hit by a bus tomorrow, does that mean everyone should stay home now?

That's foolish. Getting hit by a bus isn't extremely contagious. 

[OftenWrong]

1 minute ago, BubberMiley said:

That's foolish. Getting hit by a bus isn't extremely contagious. 

The fact you dont get it is no surprise. You are free to stay in your rabbit hole all summer, if you're afraid the virus "might mutate". Me, I'm gong outside like I have done every day since this started.

Me, and all the other people who kept working.

Say, did you notice how many grocery store clerks had to work also, none wear masks and people milling through the store each day? So where is the outbreak, supergenius?

[OftenWrong]

4 minutes ago, Independent1986 said:

I think there is a higher chance of the virus mutating due to the rate that is spreading at (is not strength of the virus, i am talking about the rate of infection) than everyone coming out at the same time and getting hit by a bus (no vaccine yet).

I understand that fear but it seems a little doubtful. We should still be vigilant, but no need to be afraid of this as it is right now. The infection rate is in decline in most countries.

This virus is just as bad as any bad flu in a given year. In this case we have counted the infections and deaths with great attention. Never before in history has there been such a coordinate worldwide effort to count a virus and use computers to tabulate and show results. We have statistics from the past but clearly, nothing like this before. We are learning many things statistically, more than we are even able to understand yet, there is so much data to be analyzed.

We rush to judgment based on scant information, an email or a web page headline triggers national policy, before what we are dealing with is actually understood. Before the information is even vetted.

But by now we know, the main threat is to the elderly and those who are unwell. So if you want to stop the infection rate and deaths, concentrate efforts there and get the biggest "bang for your buck". Do not keep young healthy people trapped indoors for months and months.

 

 

[Independent1986]

I honestly thought the coronavirus crisis is an opportunity to leave behind identity politics.

However the mayor of Toronto just said this: "Men see face masks as sign of weakness". When the mayor was asked by a journalist to reference his study, his response was “it’s been discussed” and he’s “heard people talk about” the issue.

Have all the issues been resolved in Toronto ? In the picture from the parks I have seen both men and women not wearing masks. I guess all other issues were resolved since the mayor has some time for to single out a group in society. 

Edited May 24, 2020 by Independent1986

[OftenWrong]

Just now, Independent1986 said:

I honestly thought the coronavirus crisis is an opportunity to leave behind identity politics.

However the mayor of Toronto just said this: "Men see face masks as sign of weakness". When the mayor was asked by a journalist to reference his study, his response was “it’s been discussed” and he’s “heard people talk about” the issue.

Have all the issues been resolved in Toronto ? In the picture from the parks I have seen both men and women not wearing masks. I guess all other issues were resolved since the mayor has some time for to single out a single group in society. 

Clearly the Mayor is just anther ignorant jackass who calls himself a leader. I've never been impressed with that guy's level of intelligence.

I see men wearing masks, they look scared.

I see women not wearing masks, they just look annoyed. And sexy, if you know what I mean..

[Independent1986]

9 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Do not keep young healthy people trapped indoors for months and months.

The value of a society is how they treat their most vulnerable individuals which is the elder individuals in this case. We will thrive and survive as a democracy only if we remember the value of the vulnerable individual. I don't agree to put at risk individuals for the greater good of the collective. We might suffer in the short term but in the longer term the system will thrive. Systems that disregard their vulnerable members of society don't seem to make it in the long run.

Edited May 24, 2020 by Independent1986

[OftenWrong]

1 minute ago, Independent1986 said:

The value of a society is how they treat their most vulnerable individuals which is the elder individuals in this case. We will thrive and survive as a democracy only if we remember the value of the individual. I don't agree to put at risk individuals for the greater good of the collective. We might suffer in the short term but in the longer term the system will thrive. Systems that disregard their vulnerable members of society don't seem to make it in the long run.

Yes, it is exactly what I mean. Who are the vulnerable individuals to the virus? Elderly and ill. Who are the vulnerable individuals to a prolonged shutdown? Families, children, husbands and wives, people who are trying to build their life, and most importantly to me, people who need health care, diagnostics and social health services.

They are being held to a position of suffering and some will die.

Now you please explain to me, which individuals do you think need help?

In fact they all do, because we are doing things absolutely wrong at this point:
- Elderly in homes were not moved to large spaces where they can be effectively quarantined. They're still crammed in nursing homes and that is where they are dying. No visitors before dying either, I might add. Say by to your Mom by phone, maybe.
- People needing diagnostic imaging or lab tests to determine if they have a terminal illness are not being seen.
- People needing their therapist for depression, drug abuse,  are not getting services. Suicide hot lines up x 100. Suicides, way up.

Please explain which individuals you want to protect, and how.

[Independent1986]

26 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Yes, it is exactly what I mean. Who are the vulnerable individuals to the virus? Elderly and ill. Who are the vulnerable individuals to a prolonged shutdown? Families, children, husbands and wives, people who are trying to build their life, and most importantly to me, people who need health care, diagnostics and social health services.

They are being held to a position of suffering and some will die.

Now you please explain to me, which individuals do you think need help?

In fact they all do, because we are doing things absolutely wrong at this point:
- Elderly in homes were not moved to large spaces where they can be effectively quarantined. They're still crammed in nursing homes and that is where they are dying. No visitors before dying either, I might add. Say by to your Mom by phone, maybe.
- People needing diagnostic imaging or lab tests to determine if they have a terminal illness are not being seen.
- People needing their therapist for depression, drug abuse,  are not getting services. Suicide hot lines up x 100. Suicides, way up.

Please explain which individuals you want to protect, and how.

Yes, good valid points however at the present time the most vulnerable individuals are the elderly. We are still in a short term shut down however if this gets prolonged the points that you raise can make the other members of society vulnerable and we might have dictators running society.

There is no such thing as an answer what to do in this case and how to proceed. Is like trying to play the piano and you need to find this perfect combination of decisions to reach your goal. 

Edited May 24, 2020 by Independent1986

[BubberMiley]

2 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

The fact you dont get it is no surprise. You are free to stay in your rabbit hole all summer, if you're afraid the virus "might mutate". Me, I'm gong outside like I have done every day since this started.

Me, and all the other people who kept working.

Say, did you notice how many grocery store clerks had to work also, none wear masks and people milling through the store each day? So where is the outbreak, supergenius?

I don't have to stay inside because we took it seriously in time and brought the numbers down to zero. We can't be complacent but now we can do what we want without jeopardizing the lives of thousands of people. The lack of an outbreak here proves to me that our shutdown efforts work, not that they were unnecessary. 

[OftenWrong]

1 hour ago, BubberMiley said:

I don't have to stay inside because we took it seriously in time and brought the numbers down to zero. We can't be complacent but now we can do what we want without jeopardizing the lives of thousands of people. The lack of an outbreak here proves to me that our shutdown efforts work, not that they were unnecessary. 

That's great news.

So, we can open the medical service now? Harvey's is open...

[WestCanMan]

16 hours ago, Pacifica77 said:

With that attitude   ,  losing over  5 million people  is just collateral damage??  A  natural  "cleaning" ?? Survival of the fittest (or luckiest)   and let's just move on?? Those of us that have worked in the medical field  simply don't take   this lightly. or with callous   indifference.

Wrong. The worldwide death toll is at 344,000 right now, we're only 6% of the way to 5M. This is not "biblical proportions".

And let's be honest, of the 344,000 that died of coronavirus, probably 300,000 of those people would have died this year anyways. 

I'm not calling it a cleansing, but I'm definitely saying in no uncertain terms that one "octogenarian with diabetes and heart disease" death is not equal to one "24 yrs old, just got out of college and recently engaged" death. One is normal, one is gut-wrenching and leaves whole families in mourning for decades.

Both my grandmas lived to be over 85 yrs old, one lived to 96. They both told me that they were "ready to go" once they were into their '80s. They both had a son that had already died, their husbands were dead for 20 years, their siblings were almost all dead, friends were dead, and they couldn't really relate to the young people in their families. My oldest grandma lived on the prairies without electricity or gas until 1955. She was almost 40 by that time. She had a lot of family and friends die in WWII. She was a great lady, but her life experience was so vastly different from everyone left around her that she had no one left that she could really relate with. I can promise you that at a certain point, people are just ready. 

This is bad, and it's sad that a lot of people died before they were ready, but this is definitely not of biblical proportions. 

As an example, 140,000 Japanese died in the great fires of 1923. That's whole families mostly wiped out, including cousins, aunts and uncles, grandparents, babies, teens, toddlers... Some of the people who survived could honestly be thought of as "unlucky". If you were a mom and you lost your sisters, husband, kids, nieces and nephews would you really want to live? If they saw some of them die, or succumb to their injuries after the fire was gone? That's "biblical proportions." This is puppyshit by comparison. Sorry but it just is.

I get that we have a responsibility to do the right things to protect the vulnerable now, and I'm happy to wear a mask when necessary to do that, but the current iteration of covid is not comparable with the major plagues any more than the common cold is comparable with stage 4 cancer. 

[dialamah]

37 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

And let's be honest, of the 344,000 that died of coronavirus, probably 300,000 of those people would have died this year anyways.

Not even remotely true.

From The Economist:

Quote

"Still, the available evidence suggests that many covid-19 victims were far from death’s door previously, and cut down at least a decade before their time. "

"The Economist" rating on Mediabiasfactcheck:  Overall, we rate The Economist Least Biased based on balanced reporting and High for factual reporting due to a clean fact check record

--------------------------------------------------

From the National Post:

Quote

 

According to their analysis, men are losing, on average, 13 years of their lives, and women, 11 years.

Even after accounting for high blood pressure, diabetes and other common chronic conditions found in people dying of the pandemic virus, death from COVID-19 resulted in more than a decade of life lost per person, the analysis shows, similar to the years of life lost from heart disease.

 

"National Post" rating on Mediabiasfactcheck:  Overall, we rate the National Post Right-Center Biased based on story selection that favors the right and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check record.

 

[BubberMiley]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

 

I get that we have a responsibility to do the right things to protect the vulnerable now, and I'm happy to wear a mask when necessary to do that, but the current iteration of covid is not comparable with the major plagues any more than the common cold is comparable with stage 4 cancer. 

It hasn't sunk in that this isn't a major plague because our efforts to prevent that are working?

[Shady]

We flattened the curve, and made sure hospitals weren’t overwhelmed.  That was the point.  It wasn’t shut down until there’s a vaccine.  The goalposts have been moved.  Btw, there might never be a vaccine.  If you expect people to live this way indefinitely you’re insane.  Especially for a virus that if you’re healthy and under 65, has a minuscule chance of killing you.  The whole world has lost it’s freaking mind.

[Shady]

Even experts are saying it.

We are infectious disease experts. It's time to lift the COVID-19 lockdowns

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/opinion-we-are-infectious-disease-experts-its-time-to-lift-the-covid-19-lockdowns

[OftenWrong]

1 hour ago, Shady said:

Even experts are saying it.

We are infectious disease experts. It's time to lift the COVID-19 lockdowns

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/opinion-we-are-infectious-disease-experts-its-time-to-lift-the-covid-19-lockdowns

From the article:

Quote

Ironically, the better our testing capacity and the more we look, the more we will find, making it appear that disease is worsening, when it isn't.

Reminds me of a famous quote:

On 5/22/2020 at 9:04 PM, OftenWrong said:

"The only way to really get rid of the virus is, stop looking."
- Albert OftenWrong

 

Edited May 24, 2020 by OftenWrong

[OftenWrong]

19 hours ago, Independent1986 said:

PS: Toronto, today full parks, here is a picture from CP24:

 

I say it is a form of protest, as much as any ordinary person such as these can do. They know it is not allowed. They purposely are there in very high density.

Mr. Premier, Mr. Prime Minister, the people have a message for you. Are you listening?

[dialamah]

4 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

From the article:

Reminds me of a famous quote:

"The only way to really get rid of the virus is, stop looking."

An approach that has many applications ...

"The only way to really get rid of the poverty is, stop looking"

"The only way to really get rid of murders and murderers is, stop looking"

"The only way to really get rid of pedophilia and pedophiliacs is, stop looking"

"The only way to really get rid of Islamic extremists is, stop looking"

11 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Ironically, the better our testing capacity and the more we look, the more we will find, making it appear that disease is worsening, when it isn't.

Rephrased: 

Ironically, the better we get at finding "X" the more we will find, making it appear that "X" is more prevalent than we thought, when it isn't.

In other words: 

The solution is to stick our heads in the sand (or up our asses) so we can tell ourselves that everything is the same as it ever was.

[BubberMiley]

1 hour ago, Shady said:

We flattened the curve, and made sure hospitals weren’t overwhelmed.  That was the point.  It wasn’t shut down until there’s a vaccine.  The goalposts have been moved.  Btw, there might never be a vaccine.  If you expect people to live this way indefinitely you’re insane.  Especially for a virus that if you’re healthy and under 65, has a minuscule chance of killing you.  The whole world has lost it’s freaking mind.

I got a haircut last week, so who expects things to be shut down until there's a vaccine? You shut it down until you can contain it and you have the resources to test and contact trace outbreaks, as we have in Manitoba. Once again, you're inventing an opponent to debate with where none exist.

Unless, of course, you're advocating that we just throw it all out the window and let a significant portion of the population die while still enjoying all the economic devastation. 

Edited May 24, 2020 by BubberMiley

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, dialamah said:

Not even remotely true.

From The Economist:

"The Economist" rating on Mediabiasfactcheck:  Overall, we rate The Economist Least Biased based on balanced reporting and High for factual reporting due to a clean fact check record

--------------------------------------------------

From the National Post:

"National Post" rating on Mediabiasfactcheck:  Overall, we rate the National Post Right-Center Biased based on story selection that favors the right and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check record.

 

The Economist isn't "unbiased", so your fact checker is wrong. I used to have a subscription to it, now it's garbage.

70-79, 12 yrs left? I don't think so. From the stats that I've read, 88% of the people who end up on ventilators have two or more co-morbidities. Even if you're looking at the 12% who don't have "two" co-morbidities, some have one, and the ones that don't, do not have 12 yrs left on avg.

https://www.google.ca/search?source=hp&ei=NdXKXpeRE4nh-gTp35fQAQ&q=avg+life+expectancy+italy&oq=avg+life+expectancy+italy&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQAzIECAAQCjIECAAQCjIECAAQCjIECAAQCjIGCAAQFhAeMggIABAWEAoQHjoCCAA6BQgAEIMBUIgHWP4yYJ41aABwAHgAgAHIAYgB2QySAQYyNC4wLjGYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwjX_7Lep83pAhWJsJ4KHenvBRoQ4dUDCAw&uact=5

Avg life expectancy in Italy is 83. The avg of 70-79 is 74.5. 74.5 + 12 is 86.5, and that's 3 yrs above the avg life expectancy. Don't forget that most people without a co-morbidity don't usually die from covid either. So a lot of the people who died with 74.5 and had underlying health issues, they weren't expected to make it to 83.

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, BubberMiley said:

It hasn't sunk in that this isn't a major plague because our efforts to prevent that are working?

Major plagues kill a lot of very healthy people.

Covid-19 kills almost 0% of very healthy people.

I haven't heard of a healthy 28 yr old dying from covid yet. 

The Spanish flu killed about 2-3% of the people on earth, and not everyone got it. That means that the infected death rate was much higher than 2-3%. Healthy 28 yr olds were one of the hardest hit groups. 

[WestCanMan]

@dialamah,

Here's the first economist article that came up on my google search:

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2019/03/28/lessons-of-the-mueller-report

Quote

The president thrives on grievance—against the media, the federal bureaucracy, or anyone he suspects of feeling superior. 

If this isn't utter bullshit I don't know what was.

The liberal MSM in the US called him guilty for over two years and he knew that he was innocent that whole time. He wasn't "thriving on grievance", he had a legitimate beef with the media and he still does. 

CNN was found guilty of defamation of character against a high school student, and their main beef against him was that he was wearing a MAGA hat. CNN is pure shit, and anyone who doesn't fully understand that in 2020 is a complete moron.  

[Shady]

26 minutes ago, BubberMiley said:

I got a haircut last week, so who expects things to be shut down until there's a vaccine? You shut it down until you can contain it and you have the resources to test and contact trace outbreaks, as we have in Manitoba. Once again, you're inventing an opponent to debate with where none exist.

Unless, of course, you're advocating that we just throw it all out the window and let a significant portion of the population die while still enjoying all the economic devastation. 

No, I’m advocating opening up everything, but adhering to mitigation and distancing measures, like masks, gloves if necessary, washing hands, using hand sanitizer before entering stores or restaurants or bars etc.  People that are high risk should probably avoid such places.  I will admit to being partially wrong.  It looks like there probably will be a vaccine.  Possibly as early as September/October.

[Shady]

43 minutes ago, dialamah said:

An approach that has many applications ...

"The only way to really get rid of the poverty is, stop looking"

"The only way to really get rid of murders and murderers is, stop looking"

"The only way to really get rid of pedophilia and pedophiliacs is, stop looking"

"The only way to really get rid of Islamic extremists is, stop looking"

Rephrased: 

Ironically, the better we get at finding "X" the more we will find, making it appear that "X" is more prevalent than we thought, when it isn't.

In other words: 

The solution is to stick our heads in the sand (or up our asses) so we can tell ourselves that everything is the same as it ever was.

So are you disagreeing with the experts in the article or just westcanman?