Coronavirus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

And it wasn't a random thought bubble or a sarcastic joke, as Trump is now claiming. This guy really does believe the last person he spoke to, if that person happens to be on his side. https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...mp-coronavirus

---

You can tell just by listening to him that he wasn't sarcastic. But if you hadn't posted this article I would have assumed he just talked to a scientist about sanitizing items and got confused. I didn't know until now someone pitched this to him as a cure. People don't want to believe the person running this country is that stupid. This is a level of stupidity that exceeds anything most people have seen first hand, except that rare person that everyone whispers about "hey that guy is a fucking moron. He said Obama founded ISIS."

It's also worth noting that unless there's some miracle we're not going to have under 60,000 people die in this first wave. We're at 52,000 deaths and not far from peak. What we're finding out and should have known is that it's steep on the ascent and flat on the far side of the peak.

Testing in the U.S. is up to 200,000 a day, which is a 33% increase and in the right direction if it is not just a blip.

Instead of bleach - dry clean

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

And it wasn't a random thought bubble or a sarcastic joke, as Trump is now claiming. This guy really does believe the last person he spoke to, if that person happens to be on his side. https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...mp-coronavirus

---

Donald Trump wasn't being sarcastic when he came up with that crackpot idea,just another of him backpedaling after getting caught saying stupid shit on camera,he also the same clueless buffoon who suggested using nuclear bombs to stop hurricanes and said that windmills causes cancer.

Maybe this is President Quack's messaging to America that it's time to drink the Koolaid?
Does anyone else notice a resemblence?
Attachment 1245592

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by broncofan

It's also worth noting that unless there's some miracle we're not going to have under 60,000 people die in this first wave. We're at 52,000 deaths and not far from peak. What we're finding out and should have known is that it's steep on the ascent and flat on the far side of the peak.

---

That 60,000 deaths prediction was for early August as well, so that's likely to be well exceeded. That's ironic, given that commentators in certain quarters were dismissing the modelling as alarmist after they revised earlier predictions down.
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcar...n-us-by-august

I should add that there are good reasons to think the official death count may be a significant underestimate due to deaths being incorrectly attributed to other causes, especially when people die outside of a hospital.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/06/h...ner/index.html
https://www.thenation.com/article/po...s-death-count/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filghy2

That 60,000 deaths prediction was for early August as well, so that's likely to be well exceeded. That's ironic, given that commentators in certain quarters were dismissing the modelling as alarmist after they revised earlier predictions down.
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcar...n-us-by-august

---

I was looking at the curves for the IHME models and they look symmetrical. It has been pretty accurate on the way up, but then assumes a quick descent for deaths that fall to zero by some time in Mid-May. At that point we will have supposedly gone from mitigation to containment and can open up. Italy and other countries that had very large outbreaks (we're not counting China) have tended to have lots more difficulty bringing infections down than flattening and there are a lot of common sense reasons why.

We don't at this point remove people from their households when they've been diagnosed. In many of the high profile cases I've seen, even attempts to separate family members within a home have been unsuccessful (Chris Cuomo, Idris Elba). Beyond that I'm not sure what we can do at peak here other than distancing. It is good that tests appear to be ramping up again (we had 300,000 yesterday, which hopefully marks a breakthrough). Though it wasn't sufficient to prevent an outbreak, in the long run testing will be important at every stage and one path towards normalization of life.

I posted this before but for those who want to see their countries projections, or their state, here's the website. You can change locations.
https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-states-of-america

How the Chinese Authorities and the World Health Organization Handled the Coronavirus:

https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/04...e-coronavirus/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by broncofan

I was looking at the curves for the IHME models and they look symmetrical. It has been pretty accurate on the way up, but then assumes a quick descent for deaths that fall to zero by some time in Mid-May. At that point we will have supposedly gone from mitigation to containment and can open up. Italy and other countries that had very large outbreaks (we're not counting China) have tended to have lots more difficulty bringing infections down than flattening and there are a lot of common sense reasons why. [/URL]

---

I agree that those projections look overoptimistic. There's no way that herd immunity will be anywhere near achieved over the next month, so they must assume that the virus can be eradicated. No country has been able to achieve that yet, even those that were much more successful in containing the virus. My understanding is that the projections are essentially driven by assumptions on R0, and if it's less than 1 then cases must decline steadily to zero. That seems to assume a world in which nothing goes wrong and people adhere to the guidelines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ben

How the Chinese Authorities and the World Health Organization Handled the Coronavirus:

https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/04...e-coronavirus/

---

The irony is that if the WHO had declared a pandemic and recommended travel restrictions early on, the same people now trying to make them a scapegoat would have dismissed it as alarmism over something that was no worse than regular flu.