OT Coronavirus: America in chaos, News and Updates. One million Americans dead and counting (3 Viewers)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
BigGameDamian said:
Click to expand...


It's interesting how much of their arguments are based in ratings/numbers. As if that changes anything. Also, I believe that Stern averages more "viewers" than that tweet received. But I'm not sure that Donald Jr has the ability to actually think for himself, and just says things that would impress him, thinking it will impress others.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
MWSy3RO.jpg
Click to expand...

TRUTH. People are selfish, conceited, self-centered assholes.

Generally.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
Kids with suspected Covid-related syndrome need immediate attention, doctors say


(CNN) Kids who may have multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, or MIS-C, a troubling complication of Covid-19 infection, need immediate attention and will probably need to be hospitalized, doctors said Tuesday.

Symptoms do not look like the classic symptoms of coronavirus and may mostly include stomach pain and vomiting, along with fever and perhaps a rash, the experts told other doctors during a meeting Tuesday organized by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

It's becoming clear that many of the children with the new syndrome have damage to their hearts and need immediate treatment, they said at the Clinician Outreach and Communication Activity (COCA) briefing. And they believe it's increasingly clear that Covid-19 is involved, even though many of the children test negative for the virus at first and never seemed to have had symptoms of infection.

The syndrome appears to develop two to six weeks after infection with Covid-19 and affects mostly children who were perfectly healthy beforehand. The CDC issued a health alert last week warning pediatricians to be on the lookout, and at least 20 states plus Washington, DC have reported they are investigating possible cases.

"A striking finding here -- alarming -- is that in this group, about half the children already had coronary artery abnormalities," Dr. James Schneider, who heads pediatric critical care at Northwell Health in New York, told the briefing. Because the children were previously healthy, he thinks the abnormalities were caused by MIS-C, possibly as a result of a delayed immune response to the coronavirus.

"Any child at home who has fever, abdominal pain or symptoms such as rash and conjunctivitis should be seen by a pediatrician right away," he advised. "I think we need to have a low threshold for evaluation."

'Alarming' findings

More than half of the 33 children treated for MIS-C at Northwell in April and May had developed some sort of heart dysfunction, Schneider said. "They need good, old-fashioned critical care."

And most of the children had no underlying conditions that might make parents wary. "No definitive underlying conditions predispose children to this," he said.

Infectious disease specialist Dr. Nicholas Rister at Cook Children's Medical Center in Fort Worth, Texas, said he has examined several children with a range of symptoms.

"I feel very terrible -- some patients have said, you know, everything kind of hurts. And then swelling in various points of your body, especially your hands and your feet, and even your mouth," he said at a separate briefing.

"The biggest concern we have right now, especially in kids, is largely stemming from inflammation around the heart," he said. It's one reason doctors at first thought the syndrome was a rare condition known as Kawasaki disease. "And not just the heart but the major vessels around the heart," he added.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/19/health/mis-c-coronavirus-children-doctors-immediate/index.html
Click to expand...

I will wager an healthy guess, that the kids who have this new syndrome were 'asymptomatic.'
 
CupWizier said:
But, what it does show us is that there are many more people out there that are infected that we have no record of. That's the scary part and why this thing can flare up again so easily. Despite the idiot in the white house declaring we have made it past the virus, we have a long ways to go and the sooner this guy is out of there the better the country will be for it as he's a dangerous person (and not in a good way) without even really knowing it.
Click to expand...
It also shows the fallacy that the 'stay at home' orders will eradicate the virus.
We're going to have to deal with this until we can reach herd immunity (via vaccine and/or through natural process).
Protecting the vulnerable and letting everyone else live a 'normal' life with appropriate social distancing measures is the best and fastest way forward.
 
Last edited:
tester551 said:
It also shows the fallacy that the 'stay at home' orders will eradicate the virus.
We're going to have to deal with this until we can reach herd immunity (via vaccine and/or through natural process).
Protecting the vulnerable and letting everyone else live a 'normal' life with appropriate social distancing measures is the best and fastest way forward.
Click to expand...

I don't believe the stay at home order was to eradicate the virus, but instead slow it down so as not to overwhelm our medical facilities and allow time to come up with a game changer.
 
CupWizier said:
I don't believe the stay at home order was to eradicate the virus, but instead slow it down so as not to overwhelm our medical facilities and allow time to come up with a game changer.
Click to expand...

And this was accomplished with great success. Time to let life move on now.
 
The National Guard was deployed to some of the hardest hit areas. They set up testing sites, helped in hospitals, nursing homes, prisons, worked on protocols for contact testing. Many governors and mayors asked their deployment be extended as they were still needed. They were extended until June 24. That was a hard date, not extension allowed, for ending the deployment. As the guard personnel will be in quarantine for 14 days, in reality that means they will be leaving their tasks on June 10. The date was puzzling, it seemed so arbitrary, and no connection with need. Until someone started doing the math.

National Guard personnel deployed in a national emergency for 90 days or more are, under the 9/11 First Responders Act, eligible for educational and retirement benefits.

June 24 is Day 89. So by ending the deployment one day shy of 90 days, the Trump administration screws the National Guardsmen and women out of benefits while leaving states and communities without their assistance.

Thank you for your service.
 
tester551 said:
It also shows the fallacy that the 'stay at home' orders will eradicate the virus.
We're going to have to deal with this until we can reach herd immunity (via vaccine and/or through natural process).
Protecting the vulnerable and letting everyone else live a 'normal' life with appropriate social distancing measures is the best and fastest way forward.
Click to expand...

wut???

please point out anyone claiming that "stay-at-home orders would eradicate the virus"

stay-at-home; social distancing; limiting gatherings...they have been about mitigating the spread, not eradicating the virus. Mitigation designed to save lives and limit the scope of the pandemic.

and contrary to the giant streams of bullshit coming out of the right side of the political spectrum, mitigation works

compare Germany (which acted early with mitigation), USA (which has had piece-meal mitigation), and Sweden (which has had almost no mitigation) in terms of deaths/million:

Germany 98
USA 285
Sweden 380

or compare Oregon (which was early and thoughtful in mitigation policies) to several states that have practiced little mitigation, in terms of deaths/million:

Alabama 105
Florida 98
Oklahoma 76
Kansas 69
Nebraska 68
North Dakota 64
South Dakota 52
Texas 48
Oregon 33

Oregon was lucky in acting early being sandwiched in between two states that had early outbreaks. We started mitigation before there were any clusters or hot spots (we closed the barn door before the cows escaped, unlike NY and California). Only 5 states (Utah, Wyoming, Montana, Alaska, and Hawaii) have fewer deaths/million and fewer cases/million; and 4 of those states are more rural with lower population density, while the other, Hawaii, has a massive border advantage over every other state

(I also think mitigation is more successful when the people cooperate with policies, and Oregonians have done a good job in that respect)
 
Orion Bailey said:
What you said the goal was, has been accomplished. Do you disagree?
Click to expand...

wut??

there is no vaccine and the virus is still out there, strong as ever

upload_2020-5-20_12-5-46.png

http://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/

the goal is to get the leading point of that 'arc' back down to where it was at the beginning. On March 9, about the time that mitigation policies were starting to be implemented, there were 68 new cases; on March 18 there were 1,365 new cases. Yesterday there were 21,551 cases. On March 9, there was 1 new death; on March 18 there were 10 new deaths; yesterday there were 1574 deaths

if the "goal" was to hold steady at 50,000 deaths a month, it was a stupid goal
 
Lanny said:
It does matter.
Suppose you found out you had the Covid-19 virus, would you still go to the grocery store? Would you not wear your mask when ordering from a takeout window? Wouldn't you put on gloves when exchanging money? Wouldn't you get your thrice weekly treatments in an isolation room rather than among all the other patients?
Wouldn't you want the medical staff to have on extra protective gear when treating you?
Would you still kiss your wife goodnight or share food off the same plate?
Nope, knowing would allow me to make better, more informed decisions about my daily life.
Click to expand...

Cant wait for this answer
 
I honestly believe that our some parts of our government has huddled together and decided on a number of deaths that can be deemed as "acceptable" while reopening the country.

It's almost like they consider "X" number of deaths as "collateral damage".
 
Orion Bailey said:
And this was accomplished with great success. Time to let life move on now.
Click to expand...

Orion Bailey said:
What you said the goal was, has been accomplished. Do you disagree?
Click to expand...

Sure, mission mostly accomplished on preventing medical facilities from being completely overrun to this point. We still don't want medical facilities overrun, though. That's why things can't go back to normal.

It's like saying at halftime of a basketball game, we played defense to slow the other team's scoring. We accomplished that, so it's time to ease up on playing defense.
 
wizenheimer said:
wut??

there is no vaccine and the virus is still out there, strong as ever

View attachment 31570

http://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/

the goal is to get the leading point of that 'arc' back down to where it was at the beginning. On March 9, about the time that mitigation policies were starting to be implemented, there were 68 new cases; on March 18 there were 1,365 new cases. Yesterday there were 21,551 cases. On March 9, there was 1 new death; on March 18 there were 10 new deaths; yesterday there were 1574 deaths

if the "goal" was to hold steady at 50,000 deaths a month, it was a stupid goal
Click to expand...

Did you read the post I was reffering to? Had nothing to do with whether we have a vaccine or not.

So you are saying the goal was not to stem the medical and emergency services from being overwhelmed?

Seems that goal post has changed then if you are now saying its about the ARC... because that wasn't the case originally.....


I don't even know where you are coming up with hold steady at 50K deaths...





https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-logic-of-the-lockdown/


"...With widespread infection inevitable, the goal of the lockdown is to slow the spread enough to ensure that all critically ill patients have hospital beds. At the same time, we don’t want to impose any more economic pain than is necessary to keep the case load manageable. Logically, the ideal quarantine policy would be loose enough to keep hospitals near capacity but tight enough to avoid exceeding it..."
 
Minstrel said:
Sure, mission mostly accomplished on preventing medical facilities from being completely overrun to this point. We still don't want medical facilities overrun, though. That's why things can't go back to normal.

It's like saying at halftime of a basketball game, we played defense to slow the other team's scoring. We accomplished that, so it's time to ease up on playing defense.
Click to expand...

Okay, I take that and volley this back.....

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-logic-of-the-lockdown/

"...Now peak resource use is supposedly upon us, but most hospitals are far from overflowing. Thanks to expansion of ICU wings, postponement of non-life-saving care, and overestimation of the number of people who would need to be admitted, some hospitals actually have too little to do rather than too much. Isn’t this strong evidence that the quarantines can be loosened? Even just a partial economic restart could make a significant difference in the lives of people who have lost their jobs or have seen their incomes drop..."
 
Orion Bailey said:
Did you read the post I was reffering to? Had nothing to do with whether we have a vaccine or not.

So you are saying the goal was not to stem the medical and emergency services from being overwhelmed?

Seems that goal post has changed then if you are now saying its about the ARC... because that wasn't the case originally.....


I don't even know where you are coming up with hold steady at 50K deaths...





https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-logic-of-the-lockdown/


"...With widespread infection inevitable, the goal of the lockdown is to slow the spread enough to ensure that all critically ill patients have hospital beds. At the same time, we don’t want to impose any more economic pain than is necessary to keep the case load manageable. Logically, the ideal quarantine policy would be loose enough to keep hospitals near capacity but tight enough to avoid exceeding it..."
Click to expand...

the "goal" was to mitigate the spread. Part of reasoning for that was to relieve the burdens a surge would levy on hospitals. But there were many broader goals as well. That's just obvious, and I'm not going to go down the stupid rabbit hole of a semantic debate

mitigation was about limiting the impacts of the pandemic on all parts of society until treatments/vaccines were available. If the mortality rate is around 1% and a vaccine is available in January, and mitigation keeps total infections at 35 million vs no mitigation and infections at 100 million, that's 650,000 lives saved by mitigation. That's the type of result that motivates mitigation policies, and that's not just about the hospital system.

and it's way too fucking early to be declaring victory and shit-canning the policies that have led to the situation you seem to think warrants business as usual

and by the way, I got to 50,000 deaths/month by projecting yesterday's mortality numbers ove a month. Math
 
Minstrel said:
Sure, mission mostly accomplished on preventing medical facilities from being completely overrun to this point. We still don't want medical facilities overrun, though. That's why things can't go back to normal.

It's like saying at halftime of a basketball game, we played defense to slow the other team's scoring. We accomplished that, so it's time to ease up on playing defense.
Click to expand...

I don't think that analogy would work if you were talking to Stotts.
 
wizenheimer said:
the "goal" was to mitigate the spread. Part of reasoning for that was to relieve the burdens a surge would levy on hospitals. But there were many broader goals as well. That's just obvious, and I'm not going to go down the stupid rabbit hole of a semantic debate

mitigation was about limiting the impacts of the pandemic on all parts of society until treatments/vaccines were available. If the mortality rate is around 1% and a vaccine is available in January, and mitigation keeps total infections at 35 million vs no mitigation and infections at 100 million, that's 650,000 lives saved by mitigation. That's the type of result that motivates mitigation policies, and that's not just about the hospital system.

and it's way too fucking early to be declaring victory and shit-canning the policies that have led to the situation you seem to think warrants business as usual

and by the way, I got to 50,000 deaths/month by projecting yesterday's mortality numbers ove a month. Math
Click to expand...


Lol. Not going down the rabbit hole...
So you are claiming the article I posted and read back a couple months ago were false?

Got it.

And yes, I know what math is. But no one that I know of, certainly not in this confo said anything about a death count, so that statement is irrelevant is my point to saying "I don't know where came up with", But I like your assumption that I didnt know it was math.

That's cute. :)


No one claimed victory of anything other than stemming the emergency services impact, which has been done.

Who is saying everything should be shitcanned? Because one is not in favor of the current guidelines, does not equate to that person wanting zero guidelines. That should be obvious... but apparently not? .....


I still find it very hard to have an up and up conversation around here.......


I asked a question based on a post. It was a disagree or agree question. A yes or no question.

Look at the responses....
 
Orion Bailey said:
Lol. Not going down the rabbit hole...
So you are claiming the article I posted and read back a couple months ago were false?

Got it.

And yes, I know what math is. But no one that I know of, certainly not in this confo said anything about a death count, so that statement is irrelevant is my point to saying "I don't know where came up with", But I like your assumption that I didnt know it was math.

That's cute. :)


No one claimed victory of anything other than stemming the emergency services impact, which has been done.

Who is saying everything should be shitcanned? Because one is not in favor of the current guidelines, does not equate to that person wanting zero guidelines. That should be obvious... but apparently not? .....


I still find it very hard to have an up and up conversation around here.......


I asked a question based on a post. It was a disagree or agree question. A yes or no question.

Look at the responses....
Click to expand...

and once again you derail a thread by complaining about posters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Back
Top