The Coronavirus

Boges · June 10, 2020

13 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Those things are not the issue that is causing the social harm. It's the closure of all non-emergency medical services, including many things that I would consider vital. I have brought them up many times here. We sought to protect our hospitals from being overwhelmed but the plan was too rigid. Shuttering x-ray diagnostic services and others made absolutely no sense, as it didn't contribute to maintaining a "Covid Ward". These are run in other departments, even in separate buildings.

It made sense if you were preparing for an overwhelming of the Healthcare system. Even if X Healthcare service wasn't near any place where COVID was being treated, having people congregate in waiting rooms and in close contact may contribute to the spread of the disease.

Quote

Mental health services being shuttered is another issue I have raised. No serious effort to provide alternatives, just leave the problem. Ignore it. Media blackout on all things, whether it was intentional or not. Then we did the most predictable and worst move, politicize it.

Do you know that for certain? Out of all healthcare services I can imagine, Mental health is one thing that can certainly be done virtually. Family doctors have moved that way.

Quote

Do I think data is manipulated? I wouldn't doubt it. Do I think data is misinterpreted? Oh yes.

How do you think it's being misinterpreted? I think focusing on actual positive cases isn't what should be focused on, but it's always the top line item. Articles bury the Hospitalization figures but that's what is most important when gauging the severity of the outbreak.

Quote

Finally the dum dums we elected cannot think clearly and are lost in a dark cave, or rather, in their cottage resort where it's quiet peaceful and stress-free. They are unable to think a way out of this box. Their lack of concern is from a point of view that financially, we are screwed anyway so it won't matter if it's July, or August or September. They are not sensitive to the issues for common everyday people ordered to stay home.

What would you have political leaders do? It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario. If you don't trust the numbers, then how can you accurately evaluate how governments have reacted?

OftenWrong · June 10, 2020

11 minutes ago, Boges said:

It made sense if you were preparing for an overwhelming of the Healthcare system. Even if X Healthcare service wasn't near any place where COVID was being treated, having people congregate in waiting rooms and in close contact may contribute to the spread of the disease.

That doesn't require it to be shut down. There are degrees of things.

Quote

What would you have political leaders do?

Lead. The whole thing was shock to me, when I heard the extent of the shutdown they were calling for. It goes against my training for over 30 years in a medical facility. My wife is working on the front line right now. Her mother was a head nurse all her career. We understand their are important actions that have a major effect, and others that are less effective, and beyond that you go into the regions where the cure is worse than the disease.

None of us can figure out the governments actions here, not even themselves.

Boges · June 10, 2020

3 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

That doesn't require it to be shut down. There are degrees of things.

You'd have to give certain examples, where it really made no sense and caused public harm. Elective surgeries were shut down, for a time. But I was able to get doctor's appointments. But they were certainly slowed down due to Social Distancing.

100% some collateral deaths happened because the Healthcare system focused on COVID-19 to the detriment of other services. But had those services proceeded without care taken for the pandemic, more could have died.

Quote

Lead. The whole thing was shock to me, when I heard the extent of the shutdown they were calling for. It goes against my training for over 30 years in a medical facility. My wife is working on the front line right now. Her mother was a head nurse all her career. We understand their are important actions that have a major effect, and others that are less effective, and beyond that you go into the regions where the cure is worse than the disease.

None of us can figure out the governments actions here, not even themselves.

Lead? That's abstract. I see the Premiere of Ontario and public health officials talking every day.

#45 was too for a time until he started telling people they should chug bleach.

Shady · June 10, 2020

The most important metric is hospitalizations, not cases.

Boges · June 10, 2020

1 minute ago, Shady said:

The most important metric is hospitalizations, not cases.

Agreed.

I'm not sure why that's the last thing mentioned.

https://www.cp24.com/news/ontario-reports-fewer-than-300-new-cases-of-covid-19-for-third-day-in-a-row-1.4977794

OftenWrong · June 10, 2020

3 minutes ago, Boges said:

Agreed.

I'm not sure why that's the last thing mentioned.

I disagree. It depends on local policy, many are being hospitalized out of precaution, but released if all looks well after 1-2 days. They are not intubated of course, only monitored. Remove those cases from the figure, and I might agree.

As you see there is often more to the story than numbers themselves can tell.

Boges · June 10, 2020

4 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

I disagree. It depends on local policy, many are being hospitalized out of precaution, but released if all looks well after 1-2 days. They are not intubated of course, only monitored. Remove those cases from the figure, and I might agree.

As you see there is often more to the story than numbers themselves can tell.

It would be the main indicator of an impending crisis.

In late March the level of hospitalizations were increasing exponentially, had it continued to increase the system would have been overwhelmed.

OftenWrong · June 10, 2020

Just now, Boges said:

It would be the main indicator of an impending crisis.

In late March the level of hospitalizations were increasing exponentially, had it continued to increase the system would have been overwhelmed.

I cannot argue that supposition, but I would not bet the farm on a low number of data points. It does not mean it's that way when you extrapolate forward.

It is not the need for action, it is the extent to which that action was taken, the specific decisions made, that are at criticism here. There's smart and there's dumb. And then there's continuing to be dumb even after it's clear you were dumb before. That has been my position, and what I see now is stubborn ignorance to see the problem, out of misguided good intentions. But they cannot be ignorant of the social harm being caused, they know.

OftenWrong · June 10, 2020

23 minutes ago, Boges said:

You'd have to give certain examples, where it really made no sense and caused public harm

It is so easy, and I have done that here many times already. It's surprising you are asking this, as I've explained many such examples already. Simply put and without blinking, old age homes my friend. Old age homes.

Many other and more direct examples, attempts at public proclamation by surgeons and specialists, even virologists, are being ignored.

Yet I assert, they are right. Does hindsight give the the right to say that? No. I knew it already, so did they.

OftenWrong · June 10, 2020

Sorry, ok. You were away for a few days.

Quote

Evans admitted that the science shows that wearing a cloth face mask does little to stop transmitting the virus in close proximity. The mask, which has recently become a political tool, is mostly for the psychological well-being of the community, Evans said.

New evidence: Most common place to contract COVID-19 is at home

Boges · June 10, 2020

18 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

It is so easy, and I have done that here many times already. It's surprising you are asking this, as I've explained many such examples already. Simply put and without blinking, old age homes my friend. Old age homes.

Many other and more direct examples, attempts at public proclamation by surgeons and specialists, even virologists, are being ignored.

Yet I assert, they are right. Does hindsight give the the right to say that? No. I knew it already, so did they.

Without a single cite. :rolleyes:

You're all over the place here. You've gone from Sweden and Restaurants to elective surgeries.

Rue · June 10, 2020

I would have OW preferred the government err on the side of caution than unnecessary exposure to the virus. Sure they did not know what they were doing. Yah they made a lot of mistakes and maybe they continue to. Hopefully we learn from this. Hopefully what they should have done after SARS and did not they will now do, i.e., have early testing and warning protocol in place but this will require some kind of surveillance and people like me and my kind have been on this forum cautioning about infringement of civil liberties with surveillance so balancing health prevention with fundamental privacy issues man that won't be easy will it.

Also I hate to say this but some people do not unless you err on the side of caution get what being smart is about when it comes to not spreading viruses. I mean OW we have been spending how many years teaching people to wash their hands and not spit?

Look I agree with you, there may very well have been over-kill or over-management, and I am the first to agree with you on that, but I ease up on government or anyone erring on the side of caution when it comes to life. Its the moral thing to do and Boges is right, you were damned if you did or did not do in this situation.

For me if I do not want to be surveilled I will have to be prepared to take the vaccine if it ever is made. I won't be able to have it both ways. I am no better than my dogs. They get certificates for vaccines for rabies and distemper, etc., so can I. In fact I would prefer if the vaccine for covid 19 is given to me by a vet. I need to be on a leash.

eyeball · June 10, 2020

3 hours ago, Rue said:

Hopefully what they should have done after SARS and did not they will now do, i.e., have early testing and warning protocol in place but this will require some kind of surveillance and people like me and my kind have been on this forum cautioning about infringement of civil liberties with surveillance so balancing health prevention with fundamental privacy issues man that won't be easy will it.

It would be a lot easier if civilians were able to balance these privacy issues by infringing on official secrecy with sousveillance. The government's right to secrecy should be forfeit the minute the public's right to privacy is terminated.

Shady · June 11, 2020

Remember when people couldn’t have funerals for family members that died? It was too dangerous! But George Floyd can be given 3 funerals, packed with people, without risk! It’s like there’s 2 sets of rules.

OftenWrong · June 11, 2020

I gave you people a link, did you read it? No.

But apparently, I'm all over the place. Well, I can only post the links. Others have to do the actual reading.

No comments on what the good doctor said in above link. Maybe he is not a doctor at all, but somehow has psychic powers that enable him to make magical predictions about virology. All those years he spent working daily with patients can't be worth much. What is your opinion?

eyeball · June 11, 2020

11 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

What is your opinion?

I wore one to show some solidarity with folks that were ordered to wear one in the stores I frequented. I notice these are no longer mandatory for most store clerks now so I've stopped wearing them too. I still have one dangling from my mirror for appearances sake and emergencies. I used to be a first responder, old habit I guess.

Masks always seemed like more of a social convention to me given the facts we were told about their efficacy early on along with hesitancy to encourage people to seek out proper masks thereby preventing health care providers from having enough.

Edited June 11, 2020 by eyeball

Boges · June 11, 2020

9 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

I gave you people a link, did you read it? No.

But apparently, I'm all over the place. Well, I can only post the links. Others have to do the actual reading.

No comments on what the good doctor said in above link. Maybe he is not a doctor at all, but somehow has psychic powers that enable him to make magical predictions about virology. All those years he spent working daily with patients can't be worth much. What is your opinion?

From your article

Quote

Evans was keen to point out, though, that precautions still need to be taken when in enclosed spaces in the public, such as grocery stores, because you never know the health status of the stranger next to you.

He said he likes the Japanese’s three C’s to avoid: closed spaces, crowds and close contact.

Which is what we've been doing. The only real places that aren't open now is where the whole point of the activity/task is being in close spaces with other people.

Rue · June 11, 2020

A second wave in South Korea seems to indicate this issue is very complex to manage.

Boges · June 11, 2020

By North American standard, those actually seem tame.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/resurgence-of-virus-threatens-south-korea-s-success-story-1.4979402

We are really going to have to live with this virus. People are going to get it, we need to learn how to better treat it and people need to focus more on good hygiene.

OftenWrong · June 11, 2020

1 hour ago, Boges said:

From your article

Which is what we've been doing.

He also makes the claim that a brief exposure has little chance of becoming an infection. It's prolnged exposure, usually within an enclosed room that gets you enough viral load to be sick.

That implies there is a point of diminishing returns for social distancing, and we have gone well beyond it to the point of creating social harm, for minimal benefit in return. Extensive shutdowns beynd mere basic social distancing practice do not have a major impact on the virus spread. This summarize my position on social distancing.

Today we have a new report on social distancing that also reinforces the notion, it is only useful to a point.

Europe data indicates ending lockdowns 'do not seem to make much difference' to COVID-19 spread

Tucker Carlson points out some interesting details:

Quote

States that never locked down at all -- states where people were allowed to live like Americans and not cower indoors alone -- in the end turned out no worse than states that had mandatory quarantines. The state you probably live in.

The states that locked down at first but were quick to reopen have not seen explosions of coronavirus cases. All of this is the opposite of what they said would happen with great confidence.

The media predicted mass death at places like Lake of the Ozarks and Ocean City, Md. -- places where the middle class dares to vacation. But those deaths never happened. In the end, the Wuhan coronavirus turned out to be a dangerous disease, but a manageable disease, like so many others. Far more dangerous were the lockdowns themselves.

Link

OftenWrong · June 11, 2020

It should well be noted here, now, that as countries open up, no longer using the data as much to make decisions. It's week by week, not by the cases.

What especially needs to be noted now is, the virus infection rate is still rising worldwide. Get that? Rising. Not even holding steady, it never did. What I mean specifically is, the number of cases per day is still going up. Anyone needing a link, no problem I can provide it. Deaths per day has fallen, but leveled off at 4000/ day (worldwide). Not decreasing since mid-May.

So, open up you say? Why is that, Mr. Governor. Explain the rationale now to me, to us, because I remember it being different. I remember, I have a memory.

Boges · June 11, 2020

22 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

He also makes the claim that a brief exposure has little chance of becoming an infection. It's prolnged exposure, usually within an enclosed room that gets you enough viral load to be sick.

That implies there is a point of diminishing returns for social distancing, and we have gone well beyond it to the point of creating social harm, for minimal benefit in return. Extensive shutdowns beynd mere basic social distancing practice do not have a major impact on the virus spread. This summarize my position on social distancing.

Like Schools, Gyms, Malls, Restaurants, Sporting Events etc. Those are places that still remain largely closed.

Quote

Today we have a new report on social distancing that also reinforces the notion, it is only useful to a point.

Europe data indicates ending lockdowns 'do not seem to make much difference' to COVID-19 spread

I'd like to hope that people are being super vigilant on Social Distancing and hygiene now. Plus a lot of the examples listed above aren't widely opened yet.

Let's see what happens when travelling starts up again.

Quote

Tucker Carlson points out some interesting details:

Link

Cite some of the interesting details. That sparsely populated places didn't see the infection rate of densely populated ones?

That's hardly surprising.

Thought many States that have re-opened are now seeing a Spike.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/09/coronavirus-cases-uptick-detected-some-us-states

Edited June 12, 2020 by Boges

Boges · June 12, 2020

Then we have Arizona and Texas.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/us-coronavirus-spreading-south-1.5607770

Quote

Arizona

Republican Gov. Doug Ducey ended Arizona's stay-at-home order on May 15 and eased restrictions on businesses. Arizona residents who were cooped up for six weeks flooded Phoenix-area bar districts, ignoring physical distancing guidelines.

The state began seeing a surge of new cases and hospitalizations about 10 days later.

"It seems pretty clear to me that what we're seeing is directly related to the end of the stay-at-home order," said Will Humble, executive director of the Arizona Public Health Association.

There are no requirements to wear face masks, no major increases in contact tracing to spot and stop evolving outbreaks and no scale-up of infection control at nursing homes, Humble said.

Quote

Texas

Hospitalizations in the state surged past 2,100 on Wednesday for the first time during the pandemic. That's a 42 per cent increase in patients since Memorial Day weekend, when beachgoers swarmed the coastline and a water park near Houston opened to big crowds in defiance of Republican Gov. Greg Abbott's orders.

Texas's percentage of tests coming back positive has also jumped to levels that are among the nation's highest. State officials point to hot spots at meatpacking plants and prisons in rural counties, where thousands of new cases have cropped up but have not offered explanations for a rise in numbers elsewhere.

Rue · June 12, 2020

Excellent debate between Ow and Bog. What can I say. Yah to both.

I think OW this virus may not go away so finding a way to live with it ain't gonna be easy. Professional sports must be worried. They depend on large crowds. TV revenue alone would radically alter their business model. So many businesses are struggling. Small business especially.

Like any mass change some will make money out of it others will be permanently displaced. Forced retirement for many..with no savings.. well it's as challenge...there always are...I prefer to stay matter of fact about it and piss in my cereal over important things like Trudeau's hair cut. Unacceptable. This Covid prevents me from a hair cut look is his handlers decided on trying to make him look like one of us is a joke. Hah. One of us. Bah. I shave my head. All the tough guys do. Me, Rue Paul, Jeremy Statham, the Rock.

Edited June 12, 2020 by Rue