COVID-19 Thread

[SoCalBrewfan]

Please be cautious and skeptical about that French study, or really any one study promising a miracle cure. There is criticism of the PIs methods, history of data manipulation, and questions about the speed and impartiality of the peer review. The two drugs in question have side effects and are needed by patients with other conditions; they should only be taken under a doctor's care after their efficacy is firmly established or if the situation is truly dire.

 

I would dearly love there to be a promising treatment, and it is of course still possible that this is it, but we haven't done the science yet to be sure. It's irresponsible for politicians or TV stations to suggest that people go out and buy the stuff for self-prescribed use.

[adambr2]

https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-fda-approves-major-breakthrough-in-fight-against-coronavirus

 

This is fantastic news.

[adambr2]

https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-fda-approves-major-breakthrough-in-fight-against-coronavirus

 

This is fantastic news.

[NeedMoreFans]

I don't know whether to put this here or in the "Bugging You" thread, but I'm going with it here.

 

We start online teaching Monday, doing a week of virtual PD then instruction the week after. The district sent out an email yesterday with a Q&A, and it included this:

 

WHEN WORKING REMOTELY, DO I NEED TO SECURE CHILDCARE OUTSIDE OF MY HOME?

The expectation is that you secure childcare. Whether the childcare is outside of your home or in your home is up to you. You cannot watch your children and work at the same time. Employees who are working from home can flex their hours within the workday. You may be eligible to apply for FFCRA leave time if you are unable to secure childcare.

 

So I am somehow supposed to secure childcare either inside or outside of my home in a handful of days? And that childcare is supposed to lead my own kids' online learning with them? And I'm either supposed to bring someone to my house or send my kids somewhere during the safer-at-home order? I can online teach with my kids around. It may not be perfect teaching, but my kids are old enough to be able to do things on their own for periods at a time. Totally ridiculous.

[NeedMoreFans]

I don't know whether to put this here or in the "Bugging You" thread, but I'm going with it here.

 

We start online teaching Monday, doing a week of virtual PD then instruction the week after. The district sent out an email yesterday with a Q&A, and it included this:

 

WHEN WORKING REMOTELY, DO I NEED TO SECURE CHILDCARE OUTSIDE OF MY HOME?

The expectation is that you secure childcare. Whether the childcare is outside of your home or in your home is up to you. You cannot watch your children and work at the same time. Employees who are working from home can flex their hours within the workday. You may be eligible to apply for FFCRA leave time if you are unable to secure childcare.

 

So I am somehow supposed to secure childcare either inside or outside of my home in a handful of days? And that childcare is supposed to lead my own kids' online learning with them? And I'm either supposed to bring someone to my house or send my kids somewhere during the safer-at-home order? I can online teach with my kids around. It may not be perfect teaching, but my kids are old enough to be able to do things on their own for periods at a time. Totally ridiculous.

[MrTPlush]

That is how it is for most people. Is what it is.

[MrTPlush]

That is how it is for most people. Is what it is.

[greeg35]

But it doesn't have to be that way for teachers. I've been teaching remotely for 2 weeks no problem. Ridiculous by the district.

[greeg35]

But it doesn't have to be that way for teachers. I've been teaching remotely for 2 weeks no problem. Ridiculous by the district.

[PeaveyFury]

Absolutely absurd. And now that it's made the media, I'd expect it walked back quickly....

[PeaveyFury]

Absolutely absurd. And now that it's made the media, I'd expect it walked back quickly....

[reillymcshane]

Based on some best-estimates-from-smart-people numbers, the death rate from this would end up being a lot lower than the flu.

The annual flu has a death rate of 0.1%. This is looking like it's more like 1%. It's much, much worse than the flu.

 

Early reports had it higher than 1.0% - so let's hope that keeps going down.

[reillymcshane]

Based on some best-estimates-from-smart-people numbers, the death rate from this would end up being a lot lower than the flu.

The annual flu has a death rate of 0.1%. This is looking like it's more like 1%. It's much, much worse than the flu.

 

Early reports had it higher than 1.0% - so let's hope that keeps going down.

[reillymcshane]

With Day 1 being the first day that death tolls reach double digits, here's the progression in Italy, Spain and the U.S.

 

Day 3

Italy - 27 deaths

Spain - 19

USA - 23

 

Day 6

Italy - 49

Spain - 63

USA - 49

 

Day 9

Italy - 97

Spain - 191

USA - 141

 

Day 12

Italy - 250

Spain - 262

USA - 268

 

Day 13

Italy - 250

Spain - 288

USA - 401 (March 27 - yesterday)

 

Day 16

Italy - 349

Spain - 680

 

Day 19

Italy - 427

Spain - 773 (March 27 - yesterday)

 

Day 22

Italy - 651

 

Day 25

Italy - 683

 

Day 27

Italy - 919 (March 27 - yesterday)

 

Italy has, roughly, had this happening for twice as long as the United States (4 weeks vs. 2 weeks). Spain is right in between at nearly 3 weeks.

 

Spain looks like it will be worse than Italy in short order. The United States is quickly catching up in daily deaths - but a part of that is there are a lot more people.

 

While the rates between Spain and Italy and the US are not an exact comparison, it's probably a more accurate comparison than with China (due to incomplete data) or Korea.

 

Bottom line is that if we follow the trends of Italy and Spain, this is no where near done.

[reillymcshane]

With Day 1 being the first day that death tolls reach double digits, here's the progression in Italy, Spain and the U.S.

 

Day 3

Italy - 27 deaths

Spain - 19

USA - 23

 

Day 6

Italy - 49

Spain - 63

USA - 49

 

Day 9

Italy - 97

Spain - 191

USA - 141

 

Day 12

Italy - 250

Spain - 262

USA - 268

 

Day 13

Italy - 250

Spain - 288

USA - 401 (March 27 - yesterday)

 

Day 16

Italy - 349

Spain - 680

 

Day 19

Italy - 427

Spain - 773 (March 27 - yesterday)

 

Day 22

Italy - 651

 

Day 25

Italy - 683

 

Day 27

Italy - 919 (March 27 - yesterday)

 

Italy has, roughly, had this happening for twice as long as the United States (4 weeks vs. 2 weeks). Spain is right in between at nearly 3 weeks.

 

Spain looks like it will be worse than Italy in short order. The United States is quickly catching up in daily deaths - but a part of that is there are a lot more people.

 

While the rates between Spain and Italy and the US are not an exact comparison, it's probably a more accurate comparison than with China (due to incomplete data) or Korea.

 

Bottom line is that if we follow the trends of Italy and Spain, this is no where near done.

[adambr2]

The problem with trying to pin down a mortality rate on this is that it's extremely difficult this early to account for those that are completely asymptomatic.

 

At its worst, COVID-19 is definitely worse than the flu but I do think there's some data that suggests that in many cases, it's not even harmful. There's a pretty vast spectrum of symptoms.

 

If you could test every single American tomorrow for either current or past COVID-19, how many do you think:

 

1) Already had it come and go

2) Have it currently

 

I think there's a huge range of possible answers to those questions. My total unprofessional guess says that we'll wind up with a mortality rate around 0.5%, far less than current estimates but still 5 times worse than seasonal flu.

[adambr2]

The problem with trying to pin down a mortality rate on this is that it's extremely difficult this early to account for those that are completely asymptomatic.

 

At its worst, COVID-19 is definitely worse than the flu but I do think there's some data that suggests that in many cases, it's not even harmful. There's a pretty vast spectrum of symptoms.

 

If you could test every single American tomorrow for either current or past COVID-19, how many do you think:

 

1) Already had it come and go

2) Have it currently

 

I think there's a huge range of possible answers to those questions. My total unprofessional guess says that we'll wind up with a mortality rate around 0.5%, far less than current estimates but still 5 times worse than seasonal flu.

[Oxy]

I think everybody knows and agrees that the bug itself is much worse than the flu... With all of the measures that have been and will continue to be taken there is still a slim possibility that the overall numbers will end up less deathly than the flu (22,500?). Without any precautions taken, I think it is quite obvious by now that the overall numbers would be decimating to society and cause far more problems than a 30 day lockdown (or whatever it ends up being). Sub/Urban areas will probably be locked down for quite a bit longer, as well as travel restrictions.

 

I'll say that rural schools and churches will be going again before June--with strict trace and track testing and quarantine measures. Now that testing is more widespread and available, we should be able to separate hotspots from unafflicted areas and have appropriate measures in place for each locale.

[Oxy]

I think everybody knows and agrees that the bug itself is much worse than the flu... With all of the measures that have been and will continue to be taken there is still a slim possibility that the overall numbers will end up less deathly than the flu (22,500?). Without any precautions taken, I think it is quite obvious by now that the overall numbers would be decimating to society and cause far more problems than a 30 day lockdown (or whatever it ends up being). Sub/Urban areas will probably be locked down for quite a bit longer, as well as travel restrictions.

 

I'll say that rural schools and churches will be going again before June--with strict trace and track testing and quarantine measures. Now that testing is more widespread and available, we should be able to separate hotspots from unafflicted areas and have appropriate measures in place for each locale.

[MrTPlush]

But it doesn't have to be that way for teachers. I've been teaching remotely for 2 weeks no problem. Ridiculous by the district.

 

What makes teachers special that they should be able to care for their children while working? He even said he wouldn’t be able to work as well doing it...what more needs to be said.

[MrTPlush]

But it doesn't have to be that way for teachers. I've been teaching remotely for 2 weeks no problem. Ridiculous by the district.

 

What makes teachers special that they should be able to care for their children while working? He even said he wouldn’t be able to work as well doing it...what more needs to be said.

[PeaveyFury]

But it doesn't have to be that way for teachers. I've been teaching remotely for 2 weeks no problem. Ridiculous by the district.

 

What makes teachers special that they should be able to care for their children while working? He even said he wouldn’t be able to work as well doing it...what more needs to be said.

 

If you think teachers would be treated 'special' by being allowed to work from home during this and caring for their kids at the same time, I'd suggest that you should look for a new employer. Both my wife and I have specifically been allowed to work from home by our separate employers so that we can care for our kids, and almost all of our friends and neighbors have too.

[PeaveyFury]

But it doesn't have to be that way for teachers. I've been teaching remotely for 2 weeks no problem. Ridiculous by the district.

 

What makes teachers special that they should be able to care for their children while working? He even said he wouldn’t be able to work as well doing it...what more needs to be said.

 

If you think teachers would be treated 'special' by being allowed to work from home during this and caring for their kids at the same time, I'd suggest that you should look for a new employer. Both my wife and I have specifically been allowed to work from home by our separate employers so that we can care for our kids, and almost all of our friends and neighbors have too.

[MrTPlush]

But it doesn't have to be that way for teachers. I've been teaching remotely for 2 weeks no problem. Ridiculous by the district.

 

What makes teachers special that they should be able to care for their children while working? He even said he wouldn’t be able to work as well doing it...what more needs to be said.

 

If you think teachers would be treated 'special' by being allowed to work from home during this and caring for their kids at the same time, I'd suggest that you should look for a new employer. Both my wife and I have specifically been allowed to work from home by our separate employers so that we can care for our kids, and almost all of our friends and neighbors have too.

 

I think it is pretty reasonable for any employer to not allow people to watch their kids while working at home. I don’t think that is absurd or ridiculous. Many have allowed, many have not. I know some have bent their typical rules to where it is, “Well if they are pretty much self sufficient we won’t make a fuss.” As mentioned a lot are also allowing staggered schedules that would not be allowed under normal conditions...or working out of normal hours to get it done.

 

It doesn’t have to be that way for teachers, but at the same time I don’t see why there is some expectation they should get to watch their kids while working.

[MrTPlush]

But it doesn't have to be that way for teachers. I've been teaching remotely for 2 weeks no problem. Ridiculous by the district.

 

What makes teachers special that they should be able to care for their children while working? He even said he wouldn’t be able to work as well doing it...what more needs to be said.

 

If you think teachers would be treated 'special' by being allowed to work from home during this and caring for their kids at the same time, I'd suggest that you should look for a new employer. Both my wife and I have specifically been allowed to work from home by our separate employers so that we can care for our kids, and almost all of our friends and neighbors have too.

 

I think it is pretty reasonable for any employer to not allow people to watch their kids while working at home. I don’t think that is absurd or ridiculous. Many have allowed, many have not. I know some have bent their typical rules to where it is, “Well if they are pretty much self sufficient we won’t make a fuss.” As mentioned a lot are also allowing staggered schedules that would not be allowed under normal conditions...or working out of normal hours to get it done.

 

It doesn’t have to be that way for teachers, but at the same time I don’t see why there is some expectation they should get to watch their kids while working.