Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Corona virus

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor View Post
    Gaven Newsome is suggesting no mass gatherings until a vaccine is available. That sounds dangerous to me. What’s the plan? Force people to vaccinate?
    And what if we never find a vaccine? Do we just live our lives in seclusion?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by CanDB View Post
      Not sure about the details, but there are a lot of deaths and suffering, and that's enough for me. I did hear that there is a different way of reporting them, but I would also expect that the numbers from hospitals and care homes are probably pretty accurate overall. What's your source?
      Google it... there are all kids of articles from all over calling the number of deaths low...or high...NY throwing ones now that are “probable” Covid deaths into the total.
      sigpic

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Butler By'Note View Post
        And what if we never find a vaccine? Do we just live our lives in seclusion?
        Sweet... I’m in!

        Seclusion party.... oh wait...
        sigpic

        Comment


        • Originally posted by EddieMac View Post
          Google it... there are all kids of articles from all over calling the number of deaths low...or high...NY throwing ones now that are “probable” Covid deaths into the total.
          I simply asked him for a source. If someone says the reported numbers are wrong, I suspect they have a solid source to defend it. Usually how it works.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor View Post
            Gaven Newsome is suggesting no mass gatherings until a vaccine is available. That sounds dangerous to me. What’s the plan? Force people to vaccinate?
            Another couple of questions....did he just suggest that, or was he more firm on it? Was it for California only? These things might matter, depending on the context. Even a suggestion should not be interpreted as if that's going to be law of some sort. Maybe the message is, "lets be smart folks and we won't have to resort to such things". I did not hear his words.

            What I do know, say you put 100,000 people tightly together, you better be confident about the situation.

            I do not know that much about his actions so far other than to say that it appears California flattened the curve quicker than many had thought.

            FTR, I have a load of confidence that planet earth will find a good vaccine, maybe sooner than expected.

            Comment


            • From the start of the pandemic to present we consistently hear officials say, “We have to listen to the science. The science must dictate every decision”. This was the case with the forecast models. We’re told to listen to the experts, the scientists and academics.

              In this pandemic two models influenced decisions by public officials. Those models were wildly inaccurate. At first people said, “But they couldn’t account for all the measures put in place”, despite the fact many of those assumptions were included. Fast forward to today and the models are being revised downward again. That’s with all the inputs we’ve had over the last several weeks on the draconian measures.

              What does this tell us about forecast models? They aren’t as scientific as we’re told to believe. We should be skeptical of forecast models.
              Last edited by Fantaztic7; 04-16-2020, 06:26 PM.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by CanDB View Post
                Another couple of questions....did he just suggest that, or was he more firm on it? Was it for California only? These things might matter, depending on the context. Even a suggestion should not be interpreted as if that's going to be law of some sort. Maybe the message is, "lets be smart folks and we won't have to resort to such things". I did not hear his words.

                What I do know, say you put 100,000 people tightly together, you better be confident about the situation.

                I do not know that much about his actions so far other than to say that it appears California flattened the curve quicker than many had thought.

                FTR, I have a load of confidence that planet earth will find a good vaccine, maybe sooner than expected.
                More people will die from other causes today alone than have died from Covid since December. The belief that life can't go on without a vaccine is a flawed one, based on poor modelling. The models said that mass deaths were going to happen, and the hospitals would overrun, that's just not accurate.

                Some examples of reality and why this lockdown is crazy: Models had Saskatchewan having between 6000 and 9000 deaths. So far they've had 4 deaths. Manitoba currently has 8 people in hospital with covid. The Netherlands and Sweden didn't put any restrictions in place, so far their death rate is 11%, which is lower than Italy, Spain, France and the UK. All of whom have had very tight restrictions.

                I'm sorry for anyone that will lose a relative due to this virus, but the reality is that it's not nearly as bad as the models said it would be. Of course the computers needed information fed into it before it could run the models, and when you put garbage in you get garbage out.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Fantaztic7 View Post
                  From the start of the pandemic to present we consistently hear officials say, “We have to listen to the science. The science must dictate every decision”. This was the case with the forecast models. We’re told to listen to the experts, the scientists and academics.

                  In this pandemic two models influenced decisions by public officials. Those models were wildly inaccurate. At first people said, “But they couldn’t account for all the measures put in place”, despite the fact many of those assumptions were included. Fast forward to today and the models are being revised downward again. That’s with all the inputs we’ve had over the last several weeks on the draconian measures.

                  What does this tell us about forecast models? They aren’t as scientific as we’re told to believe. We should be skeptical of forecast models.

                  In order to run the models they need to put in base information, if you put garbage info in, you'll get garbage info out.

                  Follow the science, then lets follow Sweden and the Netherlands, because the virus hasn't overrun everything in either country.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Butler By'Note View Post
                    In order to run the models they need to put in base information, if you put garbage info in, you'll get garbage info out.

                    Follow the science, then lets follow Sweden and the Netherlands, because the virus hasn't overrun everything in either country.
                    I haven’t spent the time to dig into Sweden and Denmark. I’ve read both countries have similar death rates with Sweden taking lighter measures, Denmark shutting down. Not sure if that’s true.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Fantaztic7 View Post
                      From the start of the pandemic to present we consistently hear officials say, “We have to listen to the science. The science must dictate every decision”. This was the case with the forecast models. We’re told to listen to the experts, the scientists and academics.

                      In this pandemic two models influenced decisions by public officials. Those models were wildly inaccurate. At first people said, “But they couldn’t account for all the measures put in place”, despite the fact many of those assumptions were included. Fast forward to today and the models are being revised downward again. That’s with all the inputs we’ve had over the last several weeks on the draconian measures.

                      What does this tell us about forecast models? They aren’t as scientific as we’re told to believe. We should be skeptical of forecast models.
                      Science and facts, the ones you have, are the way to go.

                      I don't know which models you are describing, but as has been discussed before:
                      1) Depends on the assumptions built in
                      2) Depends on how proactive the measures recommended (social distancing, etc.) took hold
                      3) Depends on what we know and don't know about the disease

                      To conclude.....some models were better than others. But even more important, this was an extremely fast evolutionary thing, and those who talk like we should have known more are forgetting the fact that we were learning about this disease in warp like speed, hence the difficulty with the models. It is easy to build models in stagnant environments, but this is the extreme opposite case. Each day we were learning, and are still learning as we go forward. And now that some control is finally being observed, it is easy to say we were too this or that. But I would argue that if you do not use science and facts, and build from there, and combine with medical knowledge and medical experience, you could miss the boat completely.

                      I am glad that some people did not have a say in the way this all went, because we'd be probably walking around right now, and the hospitals would be completely overwhelmed, and the death toll would be sky rocketing. And out of control.

                      Maybe you are right....some models were wrong, because they were poorly constructed. But models are often only as good as the solid info you have, the variables that might influence the outcome, and the speed of change involved. BUT if I was in charge, I would be looking to all the experts, the scientists, the researchers and the medical gurus. Because who of us knows better?

                      I think the most critical variable in all of this was the obedience of most people to conform. If we did not work together, I believe even the bad models would have been, tragically, much more accurate.

                      Science and "facts" are the right way to go.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Butler By'Note View Post
                        More people will die from other causes today alone than have died from Covid since December. The belief that life can't go on without a vaccine is a flawed one, based on poor modelling. The models said that mass deaths were going to happen, and the hospitals would overrun, that's just not accurate.

                        Some examples of reality and why this lockdown is crazy: Models had Saskatchewan having between 6000 and 9000 deaths. So far they've had 4 deaths. Manitoba currently has 8 people in hospital with covid. The Netherlands and Sweden didn't put any restrictions in place, so far their death rate is 11%, which is lower than Italy, Spain, France and the UK. All of whom have had very tight restrictions.

                        I'm sorry for anyone that will lose a relative due to this virus, but the reality is that it's not nearly as bad as the models said it would be. Of course the computers needed information fed into it before it could run the models, and when you put garbage in you get garbage out.
                        The models predicted 62,000 deaths in Ohio (might have been 61k). They’ve had 248 deaths and 73% were age 70 or older.

                        I’m not at all minimizing those 248 deaths as each person is someone’s loved one. Many of those deaths were in one county with an older population.

                        We can take measures to protect more vulnerable people while getting things going again. We simply cannot continue wrecking the economy with draconian lockdowns. Many more people will be impacted with high unemployment.

                        Public officials keep saying we have to follow the science/data. Well, look at the data and recognize we don’t need to continue being locked down.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Fantaztic7 View Post
                          I haven’t spent the time to dig into Sweden and Denmark. I’ve read both countries have similar death rates with Sweden taking lighter measures, Denmark shutting down. Not sure if that’s true.
                          As of April 16th: Denmark 7,074 confirmed cases, 321 deaths on a population of 5,822,763

                          Sweden 12,540 confirmed cases, 1,333 deaths on a population of 10,333,456

                          Obviously Sweden's death rate is worse 11% to 5%, but the percentage of confirmed cases is about the same.

                          Which leads me to what I think we should be doing: quit trying to stop everyone from getting Covid, it's a battle we'll never win. Switch to ensuring that the people who do get it have the best possible outcome.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Fantaztic7 View Post
                            The models predicted 62,000 deaths in Ohio (might have been 61k). They’ve had 248 deaths and 73% were age 70 or older.

                            I’m not at all minimizing those 248 deaths as each person is someone’s loved one. Many of those deaths were in one county with an older population.

                            We can take measures to protect more vulnerable people while getting things going again. We simply cannot continue wrecking the economy with draconian lockdowns. Many more people will be impacted with high unemployment.

                            Public officials keep saying we have to follow the science/data. Well, look at the data and recognize we don’t need to continue being locked down.
                            Fully agree. We'll never be able to stop everyone from getting it, it's foolish to think it's possible. And it's not practical to keep everything shutdown until we think we can get that outcome. It's time to switch to protecting the most vulnerable and working to ensure those that get the virus end up with the best possible outcome.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Butler By'Note View Post
                              As of April 16th: Denmark 7,074 confirmed cases, 321 deaths on a population of 5,822,763

                              Sweden 12,540 confirmed cases, 1,333 deaths on a population of 10,333,456

                              Obviously Sweden's death rate is worse 11% to 5%, but the percentage of confirmed cases is about the same.

                              Which leads me to what I think we should be doing: quit trying to stop everyone from getting Covid, it's a battle we'll never win. Switch to ensuring that the people who do get it have the best possible outcome.
                              Thanks for the data. It would be interesting to know if the age demographics are different. Does Sweden have more people over 65-70? Were more deaths concentrated in that group vs Denmark? Don’t worry about looking it up, more a thought to consider.

                              I think we’ll have approved treatments sooner than the vaccine. Clinical trials are happening with multiple drugs targeting different pathways.
                              Last edited by Fantaztic7; 04-16-2020, 07:20 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Fantaztic7 View Post
                                Thanks for the data. It would be interesting to know if the age demographics are different. Does Sweden have more people over 65-70 and were more of the deaths concentrated in that group vs Denmark. Don’t worry about looking it up, more a thought to consider.

                                I think we’ll have approved treatments sooner than the vaccine. Clinical trials are happening with multiple drugs targeting different pathways.
                                About an hour ago I read a story on CNN about how they've been testing a new drug on people in hospital with severe respiratory symptoms and fever and its led to them leaving the hospital within a few days. The drug was originally created for Ebola, did nothing against it, but is now possibly useful here.

                                https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/16/healt...ial/index.html

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X