COVID-19 Thread

[adambr2]

My personal opinion is that the mortality rate is going to be far, far less than originally anticipated. .

 

I can't imagine that. Initially the guesses were like .1%. Sounds like they are going to be at least 10 times higher, if not 20 times higher. Now it's spreading in sub-Saharan African countries, so I would see world-wide mortality rates increasing.

 

I think he's referring to 3-4% figures the WHO was throwing around at one time and I do think it will be a lot lower than that in the US.

 

Yeah, that's what I was referring to. No, we aren't going to get down to the flu rate around .1% but I think .5 to 1% is likely.

 

South Korea is a perfect illustration of what I'm talking about. By expanding their testing they're able to get a truer number of the infected. So they're a little less than 1%. If you're only able to test those who are already quite ill, of course you'll have higher percentages.

[adambr2]

Germany is a country I'm struggling to understand of how they are managing this so well. Their infection rate is well over 12K people, yet only 28 have died -- a tiny 0.2% mortality rate. What's different?

[FVBrewerFan]

People with asthma are susceptible to getting very sick.That's like 25 million people in the US.

 

From WHO:

Does the new coronavirus affect older people, or are younger people also susceptible?

People of all ages can be infected by the new coronavirus (2019-nCoV). Older people, and people with pre-existing medical conditions (such as asthma, diabetes, heart disease) appear to be more vulnerable to becoming severely ill with the virus.

 

Right. It's not as easy as a just "keep the old people away from everybody" strategy. It's "keep the 50 million Americans over 70 away from everybody." And also "keep the 26 million Americans with diabetes away from everybody." And "keep the 120 million Americans with heart disease away from everybody".

 

Most of those are the same people. Its not 50 plus 70 plus... And nobody ever said it would be easy. It won't be 100% effective, but neither is what we're doing now. Virtually all of us are still going to the grocery store, we're not going to stop the spread.

 

So treat people like adults. Everyone is well aware by now how serious this is if you're an at risk person. So it's up to you if you want to quarantine yourself or not. Maybe you're 60 in good health and realize chances of dying are way lower than a 90 year old with diabetes and bad lungs and say screw it I'm going to live my life. Should be a choice, quarantine if you want.

 

Just seems to me it's the most logical approach. Also for the next one, the one after that, the one after that. We cant shut down for months every couple years.

[homer]

 

Most of those are the same people. Its not 50 plus 70 plus... And nobody ever said it would be easy. It won't be 100% effective, but neither is what we're doing now. Virtually all of us are still going to the grocery store, we're not going to stop the spread.

 

So treat people like adults. Everyone is well aware by now how serious this is if you're an at risk person. So it's up to you if you want to quarantine yourself or not. Maybe you're 60 in good health and realize chances of dying are way lower than a 90 year old with diabetes and bad lungs and say screw it I'm going to live my life. Should be a choice, quarantine if you want.

 

Just seems to me it's the most logical approach. Also for the next one, the one after that, the one after that. We cant shut down for months every couple years.

 

No one's saying what we're doing will be 100% effective. What we're doing is slowing the spread of the virus so our healthcare system can handle it. And social distancing doesn't mean don't go to the grocery store. It means keep your distance from others when you do. Obviously you might occasionally get close to someone but just do your best to stay 6 feet or so away from people. Flattening the curve is the entire reason we are where we are right now.

 

[FVBrewerFan]

Yes, I understand the concept of flattening the curve. And a virtual shutdown of a couple weeks is prudent. My point is it can't go on for 2 months....4...6 like many people are talking about.

 

And social distancing at grocery stores is a half measure. The virus can still live on surfaces for 2 or 3 days depending on the material.

[Jaylyn]

I watched this live and have done so again https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/18/bill-ackman-pleads-to-trump-to-increase-closures-to-save-the-economy-shut-it-down-now.html

I just don't know what to say! If anything, this is an interesting look into human behavior when facing a crisis.

[DHonks]

I watched this live and have done so again https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/18/bill-ackman-pleads-to-trump-to-increase-closures-to-save-the-economy-shut-it-down-now.html

I just don't know what to say! If anything, this is an interesting look into human behavior when facing a crisis.

 

I sure hope he's wrong, but knowing him and his history of shorting stocks, he's probably well positioned for a market meltdown. Every time he goes on the air, he makes money off of panic

[superfly]

I watched this live and have done so again https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/18/bill-ackman-pleads-to-trump-to-increase-closures-to-save-the-economy-shut-it-down-now.html

I just don't know what to say! If anything, this is an interesting look into human behavior when facing a crisis.

 

What an I-diot. Everything is going to 0 but at the same time he’s long a bunch of stuff (and buying today.) Even funnier is him calling Blackstone up and begging forgiveness about things he said about them, and then buying their stock the same night (tonight).

[DHonks]

Germany is a country I'm struggling to understand of how they are managing this so well. Their infection rate is well over 12K people, yet only 28 have died -- a tiny 0.2% mortality rate. What's different?

 

interesting that they also only have 2 reported critical cases and almost all their cases are reported as active.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

[MrTPlush]

It has come out that the NBA teams getting full testing despite zero symptoms are paying a private lab to get them. So yes, these players and celebrities are getting tests based purely on their status.

[pacopete4]

No they’re not. They’re getting tests because they have the money to pay a private lab. They’re not receiving them because they’re athletes and hospitals are putting them above others. Big difference there.

[MrTPlush]

No they’re not. They’re getting tests because they have the money to pay a private lab. They’re not receiving them because they’re athletes and hospitals are putting them above others. Big difference there.

 

Bet if I offered to buy a test for myself they would tell me to hit the road. I don't think it is as simple as buying one.

 

Regardless it is pretty sad NBA teams are buying tests to waste them...and the various celebrities too. It is unnecessary.

[pacopete4]

Betting on something you could never prove. I’d guess though that these private places simply want money. Your money is probably as good as LeBrons in this case.

[adambr2]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/19/politics/trump-fda-anti-viral-treatments-coronavirus/index.html

[pacopete4]

Indiana schools out until May 1st now and have ended state testing for the year.

[adambr2]

Italy has surpassed China in COVID-19 deaths. China had no new local cases yesterday.

[TURBO]

Italy has surpassed China in COVID-19 deaths. China had no new local cases yesterday.

 

Assuming anyone believes a single word China says...

[stoutdude04]

A guy I know in New York had symptoms for 13 days. They wouldn't test him. Finally he was bad enough for ER and they tested him. 4 days it took for results. He has it. 17 days he officially had it. Fortunately he quarantined himself and wasnt selfish. This is a problem. They need to do a better job of making tests available.

[LouisEly]

Germany is a country I'm struggling to understand of how they are managing this so well. Their infection rate is well over 12K people, yet only 28 have died -- a tiny 0.2% mortality rate. What's different?

Well, the biggest factors are who is tested and who contracts it. As for testing, Italy told those who were mildly symptomatic to not come in and get tested. Their denominator is a fraction of what it should be. Germany may be testing everyone who is symptomatic.

 

Then there's the question of who is contracting it. If the Germans who are contracting it are young and relatively healthy, then the mortality rate will be very low. Italy has a terrible health care system, especially primary care, and a lot of people got cross-contaminated within the healthcare system. Many of those people were already sick/poor health/other comorbidities, thus they were higher risk. If it goes around a nursing home, you have to expect a much higher mortality rate than if it goes around a college campus.

[reillymcshane]

This kind of thing is scary:

 

20 family members gathered together earlier this month in New Jersey. Three are now dead and four are hospitalized.

 

https://people.com/health/3-members-of-new-jersey-family-die-from-coronavirus-as-4-more-are-hospitalized/

[Fear The Chorizo]

Italy has surpassed China in COVID-19 deaths. China had no new local cases yesterday.

 

Assuming anyone believes a single word China says...

 

I'd multiply China's published death toll by 10 and that would probably be more accurate.

 

Apparently the country to live through this in style who really knows how to manage an outbreak is north korea....0 cases!!

[LouisEly]

Hotels and cruise ships offering rooms to non-infections disease patients to free up hospital beds.

 

Necessity is the mother of invention.

[adambr2]

Germany is a country I'm struggling to understand of how they are managing this so well. Their infection rate is well over 12K people, yet only 28 have died -- a tiny 0.2% mortality rate. What's different?

Well, the biggest factors are who is tested and who contracts it. As for testing, Italy told those who were mildly symptomatic to not come in and get tested. Their denominator is a fraction of what it should be. Germany may be testing everyone who is symptomatic.

 

Then there's the question of who is contracting it. If the Germans who are contracting it are young and relatively healthy, then the mortality rate will be very low. Italy has a terrible health care system, especially primary care, and a lot of people got cross-contaminated within the healthcare system. Many of those people were already sick/poor health/other comorbidities, thus they were higher risk. If it goes around a nursing home, you have to expect a much higher mortality rate than if it goes around a college campus.

 

Yeah, all true. This is why I wish people would look at context when there is a spike in cases.

 

More positives in and of itself is not a bad thing. It means we're testing more people, finding them and isolating them. People should not use total cases to compare us to Italy. If we're finding more infected because we're getting better and more efficient at testing, that's a good thing. I'm more concerned with the deaths, if they start to spiral out of control then that's much more of a sign of the health care system getting overwhelmed.

[brwrsfan]

It's hard to really compare anything to Italy. Italy is a PRIME area for it to spread very, very quickly. Italy is a relatively small country (roughly 3/4 of the size of California). Yet Italy has a population of over 60 million (compared to about 40 million in CA). So 20 million more people, living in substantially less space. Italy has about 532 people per square mile, compared to 254 for CA.

 

So a LOT of people are living in pretty close capacity to one another. It's also a very old country with almost 25% of the population being over 65 and a median age of over 47 years old (38 in the USA). This equates to a much higher death rate as it's been hitting elderly people hard. They also had such a spike that the hospitals are very overwhelmed and even though they have tests, they haven't been testing or treating people with mild symptoms.

 

It's serious over there and it's something to watch/look at, but there's no real point in making comparisons to their statistics, as it's a dramatically different situation there than it is for most parts of this country (NYC could be an exception though).

 

Sorry, not saying anyone here is doing that, not trying to start any sort of argument of any kind. Just stating that there's some big differences that you can't necessarily see simply reading the statistics (kinda like a 4-4 baseball game with 3 swinging bunts and a blooper looks the same in the box score as 4-4 with 3 rockets and a single off the wall or something).

[et bbal]

I have heard that one of the post disease problems is diminished lung capacity. Given the aerobic nature of basketball, I can understand why a multi-million (billion?) dollar basketball organization would want to know if their players have contracted this disease. And I assume they would be willing to pay a premium to get it done. So I am guessing the fact that the owners are uber-rich is why this has enabled them to get their players tested.