Jump to content

Is elimination worth it? NZ


Recommended Posts

After the hardest lockdown New Zealand had a run of no community transmission, four cases of covid-19 of unknown origin were detected in an Auckland family causing the city to go into stage 3 lockdown and the rest of the country stage 2.

Panic buying at supermarkets has commenced

12144838-3x2-large.jpg?v=2

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-12/auckland-coronavirus-lockdown-after-new-cases-appear/12548500?fbclid=IwAR1mzLoYRDk1YjnnxOb2S_rIT2TEtKuJ1kTkaPewU8KQhaHqSuC6DQ1Fc4A#desktop

 

Is it really worth the effort to follow an elimination strategy like New Zealand or keep it at a manageable level.

I would support elimination if you have closed borders with no returned travellers requiring quarantine. Victoria shows what can happen if there is a slip up in  quarantine.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 334
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hello All this discussion about whether we should be trying to save lives is a bit depressing to me.  I have spent my whole working life as a doctor and I embarked on this life to save and improv

Troll

FYI: A person is not a troll because you disagree with them. I got asked a question, and I answered it. I'm not inflammatory, nor calling people names or being a jerk.  I'm sharing my experienc

Posted Images

Can you imagine living in fear like that?
3 people get sick and the entire country can't go outside.  lol, it's insane that in 2020, people tolerate that.

All 5M of them will just be locked inside until the US or UK bail them out with a vaccine.

After many trips and business with them... I used to think Kiwis were tough.
They just sound like a bunch of social media fear induced wusses like their neighbors in AUS. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BlatantEcho said:

Can you imagine living in fear like that?
3 people get sick and the entire country can't go outside.  lol, it's insane that in 2020, people tolerate that.

All 5M of them will just be locked inside until the US or UK bail them out with a vaccine.

After many trips and business with them... I used to think Kiwis were tough.
They just sound like a bunch of social media fear induced wusses like their neighbors in AUS. 

The America's cup says "hi".

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Hawke said:

Why try and achieve the unattainable?  The only way would be to lock EVERYONE into a 2m bubble.  The human species does not work like that.  Managing the infection rate and protecting the vulnerable is the only way to go in my opinion.

I'd put it a little differently.  What is the chance that someone 500 miles away, 50 miles away, or on the other side of a mountain is or will be infected? A country-wide response seems unscientific in a way opposite to the thinking of some US governors.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BlatantEcho said:

Can you imagine living in fear like that?
3 people get sick and the entire country can't go outside.  lol, it's insane that in 2020, people tolerate that.

All 5M of them will just be locked inside until the US or UK bail them out with a vaccine.

After many trips and business with them... I used to think Kiwis were tough.
They just sound like a bunch of social media fear induced wusses like their neighbors in AUS. 

You want tough?  The Romans practiced decimation!  I suppose that isn’t enough for you, though- I’m betting you’re more of a Stalin- roust -people - out —bed - ad- shoot- them - in - the - street- sort of tough!  And before to post the immortal words ‘that’s ridiculous”, I’d look in a mirror.  At least you’ll know the very definition of the word in your very own visage.  But then, you’re probably a crank who believes a mirror isn’t what everybody thinks It is, but is instead a two way videophone to bizzaro world, where someone is mocking you by mimicking your every motion, and sound.  Well, almost every motion- I hear if you look long and hard enough, you’ll see them mess up once in a while.  Rod Serling and Timothy Leary tried to tell the world about this, but to no avail.  But cranks have been known to be correct!  Did you know that LSD is a well known COVID prophylactic?  One tab every 48 hours.  The local wise man at the corner with the sign that says something about repenting was trying to tell us about this the other day....

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SemiSalt said:

I'd put it a little differently.  What is the chance that someone 500 miles away, 50 miles away, or on the other side of a mountain is or will be infected? A country-wide response seems unscientific in a way opposite to the thinking of some US governors.

You have heard of automobiles?  They transport people great distances! :)

Healthy people, sick people, cars don’t care!

And that’s just one of many methods of spreading COVID!  Some are quick!  Like jets!  Zoom zoom!  Some are slow!  Like person to person transmission over the course of months!  ‘Hi Ralph!  Glad you aren’t wearing a mask!  This whole COVID thing is a hoax!  How was Sturgis anyway?’;)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Zonker said:

Troll

I like me, the guy who speaks for personal freedom, contextual risk management and not hurting poor people, is call the troll.

The only acceptable response on this forum is from the rich white people: "Lock down the first world until there is no risk to me."

And, yes, I'm the troll....:wacko:

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BlatantEcho said:

I like me, the guy who speaks for personal freedom, contextual risk management and not hurting poor people, is call the troll.

The only acceptable response on this forum is from the rich white people: "Lock down the first world until there is no risk to me."

And, yes, I'm the troll....:wacko:

I still want to know what you consider tough.  Contextual risk management sounds wonderful until you’re the one drowning in your own fluids, or suffering lingering health problems down the pike because of some abstract notion of acceptable breakage.  Rich people in general are going to ride this out in quarantine, just like the rich and powerful have for centuries who figured out what it is they need to do to survive it- look at studies of centuries of court etiquette, and you can see distancing and PPE strategies at work.  

As far as personal freedom, I’m a bit puzzled by what kind of freedom you’re espousing- freedom to infect?  Freedom from infection?  Freedom of choice?  Right now, like the song says, it’s what you’ve got.  Freedom from choice?  Seems to be what you want.  As far as not hurting poor people, maybe it’s time for you to write McConnell and Trump (or your powers that be) and let them know what it is you’d like them to do for the poor.  Let us know too.  Personally, I think belt tightening would be the worst thing anyone can do, if you don’t want the poor to suffer.

Sorry your feelings are hurt.  Glad you like yourself.
 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/12/2020 at 2:07 PM, BlatantEcho said:

All 5M of them will just be locked inside until the US or UK bail them out with a vaccine.

They just sound like a bunch of social media fear induced wusses like their neighbors in AUS. 

Why the fuck do you think the US or UK will be the vaccine saviour? Many other countries including Australia are working on vaccines. 
 

Germany created the first good test(WHO). The States hubris prevented them from using it and fucked themselves with their own shite test.

The UK had perhaps the worst Covid response of any of the usual suspects. Even worse than the Swedes. Boris had his circle jerk with the Covid patients and down they went.

The chance of the UK & US are the same as any of the other groups that can run phase 3 testing in a rapid way.

More money and more manpower do not lead to scientific discovery. Shite loads of luck plus money plus A few smart hard working people leads to discovery. Read a history book. 
 

I’m an American living in Australia. Where do think I’d rather be?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Hawke said:

The lockdown of Auckland just shows you how dumb our Government is.

  1. You can't leave Auckland by car - road blocks at the 9 exit points (you can walk across though);
  2. You CAN leave Auckland by plane - no checks;
  3. You CAN leave Auckland by boat - no checks;
  4. Great Barrier Island - in lockdown - 80km away via boat;
  5. Two now known to be infected people travel to Rotorua - stay there four days and return to Auckland.  No lockdown of Rotorua;
  6. New testing sites set up - 5 hour queues - no toilets;
  7. Oh and we have let people in now with Visa exemptions so they can go to the sentencing of a murderer;
  8. If you are a butcher or a fresh fruit and vege retailer you can't open in Auckland but the local dairy can as can the big supermarket chains;
  9. .......

your #3 is wrong. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Hawke said:

If community immunity can't be achieved then the world has a really really big problem.  However the science says that this virus when it comes to immunity is no different than any of the other coronaviruses especially its close relatives MERS and SARS.

If immunity does not occur then vaccines are a waste of time.  Vaccines stimulate an immune response.  So when the virus tries to invade you next time the immune system recognises the virus and starts an immune response that prevents the infection from becoming a more serious illness.  It is more likely that a mild to moderate infection of Covid-19 will be just as effective as a vaccine.  

“More likely...”

Sounds sciencey!  

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Amati said:

I still want to know what you consider tough.  Contextual risk management sounds wonderful until you’re the one drowning in your own fluids, or suffering lingering health problems down the pike because of some abstract notion of acceptable breakage.  Rich people in general are going to ride this out in quarantine, just like the rich and powerful have for centuries who figured out what it is they need to do to survive it- look at studies of centuries of court etiquette, and you can see distancing and PPE strategies at work.  

As far as personal freedom, I’m a bit puzzled by what kind of freedom you’re espousing- freedom to infect?  Freedom from infection?  Freedom of choice?  Right now, like the song says, it’s what you’ve got.  Freedom from choice?  Seems to be what you want.  As far as not hurting poor people, maybe it’s time for you to write McConnell and Trump (or your powers that be) and let them know what it is you’d like them to do for the poor.  Let us know too.  Personally, I think belt tightening would be the worst thing anyone can do, if you don’t want the poor to suffer.

Sorry your feelings are hurt.  Glad you like yourself.
 

Lol, my feelings aren't hurt.  The internet is full of idiots, and if I considered their opinions at all in my life, I wouldn't be where I am.  

I believe in this freedom:

The freedom to make your own choices

 

And a government that limits that, for one reason or another, takes that away,
It removes the ability for people to think and act for themselves - for some arbitrary reason.

You happen to agree with the reason 'this time' because you use bad data and don't understand context.
Ok, fine.
Let's say you are right, and I am 100% wrong about Coronavirus.  Locking people inside for 3 years is the only way to save us from ourselves.... (clearly, 3 months doesn't do much)

Do you want to live in that world?
Do you really want to live in a world where other people can dictate what you do?

I don't want to live in that world, personally.
So, I don't.

And I think you, and every person in the world, is much worse off, by giving into autocratic governments that arbitrarily decide what each of us can and can't do.
This time it's 'because of safety' (safety of very old people I guess?)

I believe in the freedom for people to make their own choices.
That's the freedom I mean.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, BlatantEcho said:

Lol, my feelings aren't hurt.  The internet is full of idiots, and if I considered their opinions at all in my life, I wouldn't be where I am.  

I believe in this freedom:

The freedom to make your own choices

 

And a government that limits that, for one reason or another, takes that away,
It removes the ability for people to think and act for themselves - for some arbitrary reason.

You happen to agree with the reason 'this time' because you use bad data and don't understand context.
Ok, fine.
Let's say you are right, and I am 100% wrong about Coronavirus.  Locking people inside for 3 years is the only way to save us from ourselves.... (clearly, 3 months doesn't do much)

Do you want to live in that world?
Do you really want to live in a world where other people can dictate what you do?

I don't want to live in that world, personally.
So, I don't.

And I think you, and every person in the world, is much worse off, by giving into autocratic governments that arbitrarily decide what each of us can and can't do.
This time it's 'because of safety' (safety of very old people I guess?)

I believe in the freedom for people to make their own choices.
That's the freedom I mean.

 

Like the freedom of Sturgis?  Do you believe in your freedom to infect others? In the freedom of others to infect you?  That is the very definition of people dictating what you are  going to do.  That is the world you want to live in?  One of my coffee cups has the words ‘ hell is other people’ on it.  It would seem you agree?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/12/2020 at 10:36 PM, The Dark Knight said:
On 8/12/2020 at 4:37 PM, BlatantEcho said:

Can you imagine living in fear like that?
3 people get sick and the entire country can't go outside.  

that bit I agree with you.

Uninformed.

Changes to most of NZ aren't that big. Wear a mask when you can't social distance, stay out of groups over 100. Check in places for contact tracing.

Auckland is more limited, but it's not a complete shutdown. Groups of 10 max for funerals, weddings, etc. otherwise stick to your household extended bubble.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/13/2020 at 12:22 AM, SemiSalt said:

I'd put it a little differently.  What is the chance that someone 500 miles away, 50 miles away, or on the other side of a mountain is or will be infected? A country-wide response seems unscientific in a way opposite to the thinking of some US governors.

If only that was what's happening.

Greater Auckland is at Level 3.

The rest of the country is at level 2.

We can still have our weekly cruiser's cocktail hours and poker game under level 2.

Quote

Alert Level 2 — Reduce

The disease is contained, but the risk of community transmission remains.

Risk assessment

  • Limited community transmission could be occurring.
  • Active clusters in more than one region.

Range of measures that can be applied locally or nationally

  • People can connect with friends and family, and socialise in groups of up to 100, go shopping, or travel domestically, if following public health guidance.
  • Keep physical distancing of two metres from people you don’t know when out in public or in retail stores. Keep one metre physical distancing in controlled environments like workplaces, where practicable.
  • People 7 years old and older may consider wearing a face covering when physical distancing cannot be maintained.
  • No more than 100 people at gatherings, including weddings, birthdays and funerals and tangihanga.
  • Businesses can open to the public if following public health guidance including physical distancing and record keeping. Alternative ways of working encouraged where possible.
  • Hospitality businesses must keep groups of customers separated, seated, and served by a single person. Maximum of 100 people at a time.
  • All businesses must display a government issued QR code for use with the NZ COVID Tracer App by 19 August.
  • Face coverings are encouraged if you are in close contact with others you don’t know.
  • Sport and recreation activities are allowed, subject to conditions on gatherings, record keeping, and – where practical – physical distancing.
  • Public venues such as museums, libraries and pools can open if they comply with public health measures and ensure 1 metre physical distancing and record keeping.
  • Event facilities, including cinemas, stadiums, concert venues and casinos can have more than 100 people at a time, provided that there are no more than 100 in a defined space, and the groups do not mix.
  • It is safe to send your children to schools, early learning services and tertiary education. There will be appropriate measures in place.
  • People at higher-risk of severe illness from COVID-19 (e.g. those with underlying medical conditions, especially if not well-controlled, and seniors) are encouraged to take additional precautions when leaving home. They may work, if they agree with their employer that they can do so safely.

Detailed information about Alert Level 2

 

 

Quote

Alert Level 3 — Restrict

High risk the disease is not contained.

Risk assessment

  • Multiple cases of community transmission occurring.
  • Multiple active clusters in multiple regions.

Range of measures that can be applied locally or nationally

  • People instructed to stay home in their bubble other than for essential personal movement – including to shop, go to work or school if they have to, local recreation, or to seek medical care.
  • Physical distancing of two metres outside home or one metre in controlled environments like schools and workplaces.
  • Wearing a face covering is strongly encouraged when outside of the home for people
    7 years of age and older.
  • People must stay within their immediate household bubble, but can expand this to connect with close family / whānau, or bring in caregivers, or support isolated people. This extended bubble must remain exclusive.
  • Early learning centres and schools are open for children whose parents have to go to work and have no care giver arrangements, particularly essential workers.
  • People must work from home unless that is not possible.
  • Businesses can open premises, but cannot physically interact with customers.
  • Workers should be kept at least 1 metre apart where possible, and face coverings are strongly recommended.
  • All businesses must display a government issued QR code for use with the NZ COVID Tracer App by 19 August.
  • Low risk local recreation activities are allowed.
  • Public venues are closed (e.g. libraries, museums, cinemas, food courts, gyms, pools, playgrounds, markets).
  • Gatherings of up to 10 people are allowed but only for wedding services, funerals and tangihanga. Physical distancing and public health measures must be maintained.
  • Inter-regional travel is highly limited (e.g. for essential workers, people returning to their primary residence, with limited exemptions for others).
  • People at high risk of severe illness (older people and those with existing medical conditions) are encouraged to stay at home where possible, and take additional precautions when leaving home. They may choose to work.

Detailed information about Alert Level 3

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mate, it's either NZ (or like WA here) or Sweden.

There's only two options.

I am literally, along with every single other West Australia, living life like there was no pandemic.

8 hours ago, Sailing Anarchy. said:

No I am making a guarantee that elimination will not work!!!!!!!!

LoL.

Hey everyone, look at the tard.

Come here, where elimination is working absolutely amazingly. We are living life here like Covid doesn't exist, no qualms at all.

Business is booming for us, which is almost a qualm, I'm chockers now for ages!

No deaths since March, which had 9 total, no cases for 4 months, everything running at 100%

Music festivals are a go, we are sailing like nothing happened (have been for months), hell our top league basketball is running, fans, players, refs, everyone as it was pre-covid. Ha-ha.

No one wears masks, because we don't fucking have to. No social distancing required. Whoop whoop.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/13/2020 at 10:01 AM, Hawke said:

The lockdown of Auckland just shows you how dumb our Government is.

  1. You can't leave Auckland by car - road blocks at the 9 exit points (you can walk across though);
  2. You CAN leave Auckland by plane - no checks;
  3. You CAN leave Auckland by boat - no checks;
  4. Great Barrier Island - in lockdown - 80km away via boat;
  5. Two now known to be infected people travel to Rotorua - stay there four days and return to Auckland.  No lockdown of Rotorua;
  6. New testing sites set up - 5 hour queues - no toilets;
  7. Oh and we have let people in now with Visa exemptions so they can go to the sentencing of a murderer;
  8. If you are a butcher or a fresh fruit and vege retailer you can't open in Auckland but the local dairy can as can the big supermarket chains;
  9. .......

1/ no you can't, common sense and good manners dictate that the spread must be halted and most agree

2/ don't think the plane thing is as easy as that and your reason for flying would need to be pretty darn good to get a boarding pass

3/ no you can't, recreational boating is a no go as rescue may be necessary etc (even in lasers) which admittedly hurts a bit

4/the Barrier  is self contained and unreachable by recreational craft, moreover the locals have I think shut off the water at the wharves again, they live there  and thats the way it is

5/some pretty fierce contact testing going on with regard to this

6/ the difference a day makes, still busy but one relocated to eden park

7/have no probs with that as long as the Q thing happens and is paid for

8/ you're wrong again there, butchers, green grocers etc as well as supermarkets dairies, gas stations etc are open for business as indeed are most places where a 2 meter working distance can be maintained,

9/ all in all though if you cant find something to pass the time and self amuse in the greater Auckland area in the coming 3 weeks you seriously need to review your life... as in get one, no lives are not for sale so it's not just a case of  buying one.... go on ......create one for yourself

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Sailing Anarchy. said:

You have no idea!...  Most businesses are closed down in Auckland, *215,000 are on a subsidy or benefit, most business owners are losing big $$$$ and will fold, yet the govt payed thier employees a wage while the owner goes bust. Auckland economy is on the brink of financial ruin and Ardern gas no plan to get people back into jobs 

* That does not include people who only work one to 20 hours a week, sickness beneficiaries, and support workers not working

The official unemployment number is more like 500,000 ... Of a working population of about 2.8million

I guess you must be listening to different news than me. The presser I listened to this afternoon talked about the impact of level 3 being roughly a -20% hit to the economy, versus level 4 being more like -40%. And the government is extending some benefits and packages to businesses and people to tide them over for the next 12 days, though I tuned out on the details since they're a lot less relevant to me.

I'm guessing you operate under the assumption that everything is a lie then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In theory, the disease can be eliminated in 14 days because CV19 has one glaring weakness, it needs to find new hosts to survive.

Economically it is far less damaging to shut down for 2 weeks than to have prolonged 1 year slow down due to a 1+ year fear of disease.  Economies bounce back from a 14 day shut down.

The ideal option in hindsight would have been travel bans (bans not restrictions, followed by travel with strict quarantine). Regions like WA currently unaffected could use a policy of "protection" with travel ban to disallow entry or exit from neighboring states or and ban on international travel except with quarantine.

The problem with both elimination and protection is that as long as the ROW has it, there is a high risk that any kind of loophole in the travel ban will inevitably lead to infection.  One truck driver delivering supplies to WA , stopping in for a cold drink at a bar in Perth is all that it would take.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, BlatantEcho said:


Do you really want to live in a world where other people can dictate what you do?

...

I believe in the freedom for people to make their own choices.
That's the freedom I mean.

 

I'm confused, are you living in the U.S. ?

Haven't you got a higher incarceration rate than the most crazed dictators in the world?  e.g. Turkmenistan 552/100,000.   USA 655/100,000 

The whole "freedom" thing is a really confusing stance to take, why don't you just drive on the wrong side of the road?  Why let anyone else dictate your side of road choice?  Are you really that weak ?

Paraphrasing Jim Jeffries "You say freedom but in Amsterdam I could smoke a joint while fucking a hooker in front of a policeman".  LOL

Time will tell but methinks some short shutdowns will have a lesser fiscal impact than the ongoing fuckery happening in some places.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sparau said:

I'm confused, are you living in the U.S. ?

Haven't you got a higher incarceration rate than the most crazed dictators in the world?  e.g. Turkmenistan 552/100,000.   USA 655/100,000 

Yeah, but the prisoners are mostly Those People, so it's fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sparau said:

I'm confused, are you living in the U.S. ?

Haven't you got a higher incarceration rate than the most crazed dictators in the world?  e.g. Turkmenistan 552/100,000.   USA 655/100,000 

The whole "freedom" thing is a really confusing stance to take, why don't you just drive on the wrong side of the road?  Why let anyone else dictate your side of road choice?  Are you really that weak ?

Paraphrasing Jim Jeffries "You say freedom but in Amsterdam I could smoke a joint while fucking a hooker in front of a policeman".  LOL

Time will tell but methinks some short shutdowns will have a lesser fiscal impact than the ongoing fuckery happening in some places.

Please, it’s ongoing primitive fuckery, at least at the level of Trumpian “politics” (notice the quotes, please).  I don’t think he’s even made it to the level of corporate feudalism, which blows my whole King Lear metaphor to smithereens.

Damn.  It had almost everything going for it.  Maybe Othello? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, EYESAILOR said:

Economically it is far less damaging to shut down for 2 weeks than to have prolonged 1 year slow down due to a 1+ year fear of disease.  Economies bounce back from a 14 day shut down.

I was thinking that as well, but I am afraid it is not that simple. You cannot have EVERYBODY live in individual total isolation for 14 days; people live in families, or are dependents (children, retirement homes, hospitals, etc.) and live in contact with others.

During that 14 days period, in one of those small groups (household, retirement home, etc.) an asymptomatic patient coud infect someone else on day 6 who could also be asymptomatic and then infect a third person on day 12. So you end up the 14 days period with the first patient no longer contagious, the second one recovering or in deep boo-boo and the third one contagious and not knowing it. You open the gates again, and that third guy will spread the virus in the community again...

The only way to avoid that situation, that I can think of, would be at the end of the confinement to test everybody, and I mean EVERYBODY before you let someone out of confinement. And I understand that it is a proposition that is logistically and practically impossible to implement...

 

The containment vs. elimination question is, to me, THE most important question for the coming months.

At one end of the spectrum, you have the proponents of "let it run" and hope for herd immunity. Right now, we do not even know how long a former patient who contracted the virus and recovered is going to be protected. If it is only a few months, that herd immunity strategy goes down the toilet. And it does not take into account the fact that even if you recover you could have sequels for the rest of your life. So despite what some people may say, this solution HAS an economical impact, on top of a moral impact. The economy WILL suffer, by the loss of workforce, the social/medical cost of the people affected by the virus, the loss of optimism in the future and impact on consumption, etc.

At the other end of the spectrum, you have the "hunker down, everybody" proponents. Even if for the immediate protection of human life, it makes sense, no one can deny that shutting down the economy for a lengthy period of time WILL have a human impact; in individuals financial destruction that will affect them for life, depression, suicide, etc...

 

So containment or elimination? I do not know the answer; maybe it is somewhere in between (if that even makes sense...)

What is sure is that the shouting from one side to the other does not help in finding a solution...

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Laurent said:

What is sure is that the shouting from one side to the other does not help in finding a solution...

In charged debates like this, I always think of the Ozzy Man video of the two Corgis arguing.  At one point, they are arguing about vaccines and one keeps chanting "herd immunity....herd immunity...herd immunity"

Normally his stuff is found on Youtube, but this one is a posted clip from his Mega Compilation #9, which has a lot of other funny internet voice overs as well.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Laurent said:

I was thinking that as well, but I am afraid it is not that simple. You cannot have EVERYBODY live in individual total isolation for 14 days; people live in families, or are dependents (children, retirement homes, hospitals, etc.) and live in contact with others.

During that 14 days period, in one of those small groups (household, retirement home, etc.) an asymptomatic patient coud infect someone else on day 6 who could also be asymptomatic and then infect a third person on day 12. So you end up the 14 days period with the first patient no longer contagious, the second one recovering or in deep boo-boo and the third one contagious and not knowing it. You open the gates again, and that third guy will spread the virus in the community again...

The only way to avoid that situation, that I can think of, would be at the end of the confinement to test everybody, and I mean EVERYBODY before you let someone out of confinement. And I understand that it is a proposition that is logistically and practically impossible to implement...

 

The containment vs. elimination question is, to me, THE most important question for the coming months.

At one end of the spectrum, you have the proponents of "let it run" and hope for herd immunity. Right now, we do not even know how long a former patient who contracted the virus and recovered is going to be protected. If it is only a few months, that herd immunity strategy goes down the toilet. And it does not take into account the fact that even if you recover you could have sequels for the rest of your life. So despite what some people may say, this solution HAS an economical impact, on top of a moral impact. The economy WILL suffer, by the loss of workforce, the social/medical cost of the people affected by the virus, the loss of optimism in the future and impact on consumption, etc.

At the other end of the spectrum, you have the "hunker down, everybody" proponents. Even if for the immediate protection of human life, it makes sense, no one can deny that shutting down the economy for a lengthy period of time WILL have a human impact; in individuals financial destruction that will affect them for life, depression, suicide, etc...

 

So containment or elimination? I do not know the answer; maybe it is somewhere in between (if that even makes sense...)

What is sure is that the shouting from one side to the other does not help in finding a solution...

How about on demand real time testing, for everybody, like the Freestyle Libre?  I mean, if we can send a man to the moon, yackity yack.......the Libre is not the only one, google real time blood testing- & try googling ‘block testing’, which also looks promising, since it could be used as a functional map underpinning real time, any time testing.....for example....

https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2020/06/group-testing-could-screen-entire-us-research-suggests

non of this stuff is secret, and there are other Tons of other approaches out there- IMHO most of this is a lack of curiosity and a lack of imagination on the part of too many, world wide.  But suspicion of bright ideas is not new.  Just look at Trump.  Or Blatant Echo....

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Amati said:

How about on demand real time testing, for everybody, like the Freestyle Libre?  I mean, if we can send a man to the moon, yackity yack.......the Libre is not the only one, google real time blood testing- if block testing looks promising.....for example

https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2020/06/group-testing-could-screen-entire-us-research-suggests

Funny you say that; I was just listening to a guy on NPR (National Public Radio, for the non-US readers) - yeah, I know, I am a F#@§ng liberal - who was exactly arguying for that.

"What we need is an easy test, that you can do at home, cost around $1, which tells you whether you are infectuous or not in less than 10 minutes."

A PCR test will tell you if you have the virus in your body, but you may have it at such a low level, that you are no longer infectuous, apparently. So what we need is something you can do everyday, maybe a bit more "crude" on the accuracy aspect, but can tell black and white, you are infectuous or not.

With such a system, you could go back to work, back to school and check in the morning before you go out if this is OK for you to go out or not..

But the CDC, and WHO have not pushed for the development of this type of test. It is apparently now changing and more focus (and funds) are directed to this sort of test.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Laurent said:

Funny you say that; I was just listening to a guy on NPR (National Public Radio, for the non-US readers) - yeah, I know, I am a F#@§ng liberal - who was exactly arguying for that.

"What we need is an easy test, that you can do at home, cost around $1, which tells you whether you are infectuous or not in less than 10 minutes."

A PCR test will tell you if you have the virus in your body, but you may have it at such a low level, that you are no longer infectuous, apparently. So what we need is something you can do everyday, maybe a bit more "crude" on the accuracy aspect, but can tell black and white, you are infectuous or not.

With such a system, you could go back to work, back to school and check in the morning before you go out if this is OK for you to go out or not..

But the CDC, and WHO have not pushed for the development of this type of test. It is apparently now changing and more focus (and funds) are directed to this sort of test.

 

 

About time.  I’ve been going on for months about this.  It’s kind of like monitoring your heart with a smartphone.  And, FWIW,  NPR in Spokane (near N Idaho.)?  Not exactly liberal.  NPR has 3 stations in Spokane.  3!  

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, sparau said:

I'm confused, are you living in the U.S. ?

Haven't you got a higher incarceration rate than the most crazed dictators in the world?  e.g. Turkmenistan 552/100,000.   USA 655/100,000 

The whole "freedom" thing is a really confusing stance to take, why don't you just drive on the wrong side of the road?  Why let anyone else dictate your side of road choice?  Are you really that weak ?

Paraphrasing Jim Jeffries "You say freedom but in Amsterdam I could smoke a joint while fucking a hooker in front of a policeman".  LOL

Time will tell but methinks some short shutdowns will have a lesser fiscal impact than the ongoing fuckery happening in some places.


I do not currently live in the US, no.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Amati said:

Like the freedom of Sturgis?  Do you believe in your freedom to infect others? In the freedom of others to infect you?  That is the very definition of people dictating what you are  going to do.  That is the world you want to live in?  One of my coffee cups has the words ‘ hell is other people’ on it.  It would seem you agree?

Absolutely.  Why would I be opposed to people being able to gather if they want?

If *I* am scared of virus, then I should take responsibility and not leave the house until their is a vaccine.
But, why would I ask someone else to sacrifice months of their life, their families, their own health - for mine?

I don't roll like that.
 

I've ridden a motorcycle I think one time in my life, and think they are idiotic machines - but, why would I care if 250,000 people gather to talk about them?
Good for them for doing what they love. Why halt that because someone else is scared of (insert anything here)?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BlatantEcho said:

If *I* am scared of virus, then I should take responsibility and not leave the house until their is a vaccine.
But, why would I ask someone else to sacrifice months of their life, their families, their own health - for mine?

Then you're at least selfish and possibly psychopathic. Or a troll.

If you don't care whether you catch the disease or not, nor whether you pass it on to others, that's your right. But it doesn't give you the right to spread the disease to others who might necessarily come into contact with you because they can't stay at home. Even under the most severe travel restrictions, people are still travelling for reasons such as essential services, medical appointments, buy food, etc.

With rights comes responsibility to exercise those rights in ways that minimise effects on others. Your right to wander wherever you please is balanced against the right of someone else to not become sick or to pass it on to an elderly relative who dies as a consequence because you gave them a virus. You might as well argue that there should be no laws at all. If people are concerned about being attacked, robbed or murdered, they should just lock themselves in their houses and never venture out.

If you don't understand that, then you're seriously lacking in empathy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RobG said:

Then you're at least selfish and possibly psychopathic. Or a troll.

If you don't care whether you catch the disease or not, nor whether you pass it on to others, that's your right. But it doesn't give you the right to spread the disease to others who might necessarily come into contact with you because they can't stay at home. Even under the most severe travel restrictions, people are still travelling for reasons such as essential services, medical appointments, buy food, etc.

With rights comes responsibility to exercise those rights in ways that minimise effects on others. Your right to wander wherever you please is balanced against the right of someone else to not become sick or to pass it on to an elderly relative who dies as a consequence because you gave them a virus. You might as well argue that there should be no laws at all. If people are concerned about being attacked, robbed or murdered, they should just lock themselves in their houses and never venture out.

If you don't understand that, then you're seriously lacking in empathy.

FYI: A person is not a troll because you disagree with them.

I got asked a question, and I answered it.
I'm not inflammatory, nor calling people names or being a jerk.  I'm sharing my experiences and my views. That used to be called a dialog or discussion.
Even here, on SA... that was a thing at one point.

*****

A) Your call to empathy is nice, but empty.

I can make the empty argument for anything.  "RobG, why don't you show empathy and let me win the wednesday beer can race? I haven't won lately, and I'm thinking of killing myself if I don't get a bullet in the next race.  What do you say partner?  Your desire to win is hurting me, so, you need to stop racing maybe all season.  Just because, I don't want to get hurt."

 

I mean, it's just a ridiculous argument to make, as it has no end. You are like all the relativists who say 'well, THIS time BlatantEcho.. THIS TIME we have to do it!!'
And, again, that's just an awful argument to make - history is full of examples of temporary power, pushed onto citizens, being a recipient for millions to die.

And... strangely... that's sort of what we're starting to see now, isn't it?



B )  I personally think your attitude causes more harm than any other action.
You have spread hysteria, and alarm to all corners of the world.  Lockdown has never been done on this scale, and it is hurting Billions of people, and killing millions.

And you don't notice that, because, you want everyone to do what YOU think they should do.

Again, you claim you're taking the high ground here, and you just want to control people, "just now, for maybe 3 weeks?  Ok, 3 months now.  1 year, maybe 3 years. But, not forever... just... for a while"

I'm of the opinion people should be treated like adults and make their own decisions. 

Not listen to me, or you. And certainly not an awful government run by morons who are posturing to appear strong so they can get re-elected by bowing to the social media mob spreading fear.


C) The 'you'll kill my grandma' trope is pretty old and tired. I'm impressed your still trying that - most of the alarmists finally gave up on that illogical argument.

Laws are great, and help shape society. There are laws against things like drunk driving, and murder. Stealing, robbery, etc.
But, that is where one person does something else to others.
No one is against laws, order or anything like that. We're against a lack of law and order - where people like you can lock others inside, and demand they wear certain clothes... WITHOUT due process, without any actual debate or data or science.  Just because.. YOU want everyone to do something.
 


If you are worried about your grandma, and she is completely incapable of taking care of herself - is it *really* the right decision to tell everyone else to change their lives, for hers?

Where does it end?  Let's build a sunshade over all of AUS, because the sun causes cancer? Ban busses and planes because sometimes they crash while we are passengars?

What type of moral insanity is that?
And again, you will say 'well, this time it's different!!!!'

And I will again say... uhm, no, it's not. Just because you're upset about this one issue, doesn't force me to care about your opinions this one magical time.
 

Also, if your grandmother is in such bad shape she can't survive a simple virus, what world are you advocating for anyway?
Lock up anyone under the age of 80, because they could cause harm to anyone over 80?


Like, what world do you live in?

 

And this is the issue, you're a relativist. 
"THIS time, dude, THIS time, you've got to listen to me"

'THIS time, wear this thing and cover your face.  THIS time, don't go outside for 3 months.  THIS TIME, no travel for a year'  Because... safety!!...

 

Honestly, I worry infinitely more about how soft our entire world society has gotten, how quickly people were stirred up by social media into a PANIC.  How people like you, and all your friends just threw up your arms and say 'LOCK US INSIDE, PLEASE!!!' DO WHATEVER YOU WANT!!'

That's so much more worrying than a virus that has killed less people in 8 months than die worldwide in a week.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/14/2020 at 12:17 AM, slug zitski said:

Should  be possible to get corona free

At Arlie beach last week the pub we were in were offering 'Buy 5 Corona's get the 6th free.'

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/15/2020 at 6:41 PM, BlatantEcho said:

FYI: A person is not a troll because you disagree with them.

I gave you 3 options, you replied to only the troll option. So selfish or psychopathic—I'll just go with selfish.

On 8/15/2020 at 6:41 PM, BlatantEcho said:

A) Your call to empathy is nice, but empty.

Empathy is required to understand that something you do can help solve someone else's dilemma. By putting up with a relatively short period of hardship, you help everyone return to "normal" quickly. Otherwise, a significant number of people are stuck in a kind of reverse quarantine forever.

It's a bit like someone who says something and when someone says "that's offensive", refuses to apologise because they didn't intend to offend (or so they say). But consider the case where you're walking out of a door and accidentally knock over an old lady. Do you just walk away, saying "I didn't intend to knock her over so not my problem", or do you apologise and help her to her feet, even though it was an accident? You gave up a bit of your freedom (you might have been 30 or 40 metres closer to your destination instead) to help another person.

On 8/15/2020 at 6:41 PM, BlatantEcho said:

B )  I personally think your attitude causes more harm than any other action.
You have spread hysteria, and alarm to all corners of the world.  Lockdown has never been done on this scale, and it is hurting Billions of people, and killing millions.

Actions have repercussions, where actions affect entire communities they need to be judged on the greatest common good. The general wisdom is that so called "lockdowns" are a last ditch response to an outbreak of Covid-19. They seem to work. The consequence of not locking down is judged as worse, and has been shown to be worse in many cases. Of course avoiding a lockdown is a better option, but when all else fails, usually because some selfish people don't take precautions or follow advice, they are a necessary evil.

You might employ reasoned argument such as comparison with Sweden or wherever to show that lockdowns either don't work or aren't necessary. But to rail against a lockdown on the basis that your personal freedom overrides the good of the community simply says your feelings are more important than everyone else's combined. Hence selfish.

On 8/15/2020 at 6:41 PM, BlatantEcho said:

C) The 'you'll kill my grandma' trope is pretty old and tired. I'm impressed your still trying that - most of the alarmists finally gave up on that illogical argument.

Look at Victoria. Because an organisation that was tasked with quarantining people managed to spread the disease instead, an outbreak has occurred that has mostly killed old people. Not a "trope", it's reality. Not illogical, actual. The stats on that one have been obvious since the beginning. It's the same argument for why schools should be closed during an outbreak—not because the kids are particularly at risk, but because they bring the disease home. I'll accept whatever the experts say on that one for each particular case.

Saying we shouldn't worry about trying to stop Covid-19 because, in the grand scheme of things, far more people die of other causes everyday, is nonsensical. You could apply the same logic to any particular cause of death and say it's not worth the hassle. Why do we spend billions each year trying to cure any particular cancer? Or dementia? Or heart disease? Those people are mostly old and about to die of something anyway, what's the point?

Hell, NZ only has about 50 murders per year, why even bother making it a crime? At least half of them probably deserved it anyway…

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's your man B.E., and he's talking about people just like you.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, RobG said:

 Why do we spend billions each year trying to cure any particular cancer? Or dementia? Or heart disease?

 

You really need an answer to this?

To charge you trillions to save you.  You think those cunt drug companies do it so they can get a compassion boner every time they look in the mirror?

 

 

14 minutes ago, RobG said:

Saying we shouldn't worry about trying to stop Covid-19 because, in the grand scheme of things, far more people die of other causes everyday, is nonsensical.

LOL

I know, let's fuck everything over, to save a few thousand people.  Way to think that shit through.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/15/2020 at 5:00 AM, 12 metre said:

In charged debates like this, I always think of the Ozzy Man video of the two Corgis arguing.  At one point, they are arguing about vaccines and one keeps chanting "herd immunity....herd immunity...herd immunity"

Normally his stuff is found on Youtube, but this one is a posted clip from his Mega Compilation #9, which has a lot of other funny internet voice overs as well.

That is some of finest work in the history of childish internet stupidly. Magnificent!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello

All this discussion about whether we should be trying to save lives is a bit depressing to me.  I have spent my whole working life as a doctor and I embarked on this life to save and improve lives.  CV19 has been very hard to make sense of and has left me questioning so many things. I find myself in a society that questions what I previously thought of self evident , doing our best and the sanctity of saving lives.   Even the debate over masks is so confusing for me as a doctor.  Surely if what I do is worthwhile , everyone should want to wear masks? Or is what I do just something that should be balanced against other priorities?   It is hard, and among the overwork and stress of the last few months I am left exhausted at the end of the day.

I do think that the economy was going to take a huge hit anyway. I think that the early lockdowns etc flattened the curve so that our ICUs were not overwhelmed saved many tens of thousands of lives and gave us the breathing space to develop protocols that have massively improved the mortality rate.  I am in the tri state area, CT, that was hard hit by the early CV wave. We did not know what treatments or protocols would work best. We were flying blind. Our death rate was many time shigher than what FL and Texas are experiencing now. It was awful. But the curve was quickly flattened by the lockdown and we regained control and it gave us time to develop better protocols and get our hands on better drug combinations.  

Where do we go now?   I honestly dont know for the next 6 months. If society pitches in with mask wearing and social distancing, there can be some semblance of a resumed economy. But to really defeat the disease we need a vaccine to help us create herd immunity.  

Fr sure, what cannot happen is to allow the disease to keep sreading and just accept loss of life and co-morbidity.  

So I advise

1. Strong localized response. Contact tracing and quarantines and lock downs whereever there is a local outbreak.

2. Strong community support for masks and SD. It cant just come from govenment, your freinds and your community need to want to do their part.

3. Keep the disease in check until the vaccine is here. Then support the vaccine.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EYESAILOR said:

Hello

All this discussion about whether we should be trying to save lives is a bit depressing to me.  I have spent my whole working life as a doctor and I embarked on this life to save and improve lives.  CV19 has been very hard to make sense of and has left me questioning so many things. I find myself in a society that questions what I previously thought of self evident , doing our best and the sanctity of saving lives.   Even the debate over masks is so confusing for me as a doctor.  Surely if what I do is worthwhile , everyone should want to wear masks? Or is what I do just something that should be balanced against other priorities?   It is hard, and among the overwork and stress of the last few months I am left exhausted at the end of the day.

I do think that the economy was going to take a huge hit anyway. I think that the early lockdowns etc flattened the curve so that our ICUs were not overwhelmed saved many tens of thousands of lives and gave us the breathing space to develop protocols that have massively improved the mortality rate.  I am in the tri state area, CT, that was hard hit by the early CV wave. We did not know what treatments or protocols would work best. We were flying blind. Our death rate was many time shigher than what FL and Texas are experiencing now. It was awful. But the curve was quickly flattened by the lockdown and we regained control and it gave us time to develop better protocols and get our hands on better drug combinations.  

Where do we go now?   I honestly dont know for the next 6 months. If society pitches in with mask wearing and social distancing, there can be some semblance of a resumed economy. But to really defeat the disease we need a vaccine to help us create herd immunity.  

Fr sure, what cannot happen is to allow the disease to keep sreading and just accept loss of life and co-morbidity.  

So I advise

1. Strong localized response. Contact tracing and quarantines and lock downs whereever there is a local outbreak.

2. Strong community support for masks and SD. It cant just come from govenment, your freinds and your community need to want to do their part.

3. Keep the disease in check until the vaccine is here. Then support the vaccine.

I do question the effectiveness of the early lockdowns. When my state shutdown the local hospital was projecting being 250 ICU beds short in two weeks and was even in talks with local schools to use the gym as overflow. Two months later we hit 250 cases in the county. The initial estimates were wildly off. 

No doubt that changing peoples patterns of behavior helped to slow spread but could that have been done without the hammer?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, solosailor said:

I can't imagine how bad it would have been if we didn't.

Lots of data out there that not only are 'lockdowns' ineffective, but, they delay the inevitable, slowing herd immunity and also cause a lot of other deaths (not to mention destroying lives by the millions)

Imagine how much better we would all be if we had used our brains and said no to being locked inside?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, solosailor said:

I can't imagine how bad it would have been if we didn't.

In my area, those projections would have been for people that would have been supposedly infected with the virus when/before the lock down started. The estimates were just off and it wasn't due to the lockdown. Granted we were an area with some of the fist outbreaks so maybe the data and knowledge that was used to set the estimates at the time was just bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BlatantEcho said:

Lots of data out there that not only are 'lockdowns' ineffective, but, they delay the inevitable, slowing herd immunity and also cause a lot of other deaths (not to mention destroying lives by the millions)

Imagine how much better we would all be if we had used our brains and said no to being locked inside?

You have a good point. If the stay home order had been optional only the herd immunity morons like you would have ignored and become infected. Darwin mentioned your end of the herd.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BlatantEcho said:

Lots of data out there that not only are 'lockdowns' ineffective, but, they delay the inevitable, slowing herd immunity and also cause a lot of other deaths (not to mention destroying lives by the millions)

Imagine how much better we would all be if we had used our brains and said no to being locked inside?

Yes indeed 

 

it appears that standard good behavior ...masks, distance , hand washing,  plus adequate testing  and quarantine ...is effective and doesn’t destroy the economy 

 

corona  will be around for many years 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BlatantEcho said:

Lots of data out there that not only are 'lockdowns' ineffective, but, they delay the inevitable, slowing herd immunity and also cause a lot of other deaths (not to mention destroying lives by the millions)

Imagine how much better we would all be if we had used our brains and said no to being locked inside?

And about this ‘data’ of yours, since this virus has only just begun and no country has achieved herd immunity, the only source of your ‘data’ was when you reached around back and pulled it out of your arse. But by all means go out and take one for the team. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, slug zitski said:

Yes indeed 

 

it appears that standard good behavior ...masks, distance , hand washing,  plus adequate testing  and quarantine ...is effective and doesn’t destroy the economy 

Not a viable option in the divided states of America as the election of your President demonstrates that around half the electorate are brain dead morons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Not a viable option in the divided states of America as the election of your President demonstrates that around half the electorate are brain dead morons.

It's significantly more than half, but not all of them voted for the asshole.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, impetuous_donkey said:

I do question the effectiveness of the early lockdowns. When my state shutdown the local hospital was projecting being 250 ICU beds short in two weeks and was even in talks with local schools to use the gym as overflow. Two months later we hit 250 cases in the county. The initial estimates were wildly off. 

No doubt that changing peoples patterns of behavior helped to slow spread but could that have been done without the hammer?  

So what you are saying is the lockdown worked.

If it did NOT work, the projections would have come true. Congratulations.

The problem with preventing a disaster is no one gives you credit because the disaster didn't happen, they just bitch about the inconvenience you caused with your actions.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, B.J. Porter said:

So what you are saying is the lockdown worked.

If it did NOT work, the projections would have come true. Congratulations.

The problem with preventing a disaster is no one gives you credit because the disaster didn't happen, they just bitch about the inconvenience you caused with your actions.

The latency of the disease process would say the lock down did not work for the predicted first wave that was to hit but that the projection were wildly off.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, impetuous_donkey said:

The latency of the disease process would say the lock down did not work for the predicted first wave that was to hit but that the projection were wildly off.

On what basis do you say that?

Is the projection of 250 beds WITH the lockdown or without it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BlatantEcho said:

Lots of data out there that not only are 'lockdowns' ineffective

Some were ineffective because they weren't properly implemented. The issues in Victoria aren't because the lockdown didn't work, but because of shoddy practices by those supposedly enforcing quarantine. 

In one nursing home that was locked down, two staff entered to have a party with 4 other staff and avoided Covid-19 protocols. 6 days later, 22 staff and 61 residents had Covid-19. 28 residents died of Covid-19. The facility ran desperately short of staff, with staff/resident ratios as low as 1:19. Many staff had to quarantine because they came into close contact with infected persons, others had to isolate because they tested positive. Casual staff didn't turn up for work because most work across multiple sites and didn't want to have to quarantine or isolate because two health workers broke the lockdown and brought Covid-19 into the facility.

And that's just one facility supposedly in lockdown.

Lockdowns work if implemented early and properly.

5 hours ago, BlatantEcho said:

, but, they delay the inevitable

What inevitability do they delay? It is possible to virtually eliminate the virus, but it takes constant vigilance and good practices.

5 hours ago, BlatantEcho said:

 slowing herd immunity

Herd immunity through natural infection is a myth, it has never occurred in modern history. Ever. Even the worst country in the world, the US, is nowhere near herd immunity after 5.6 million cases and 173,000 deaths in just 6 months.

5 hours ago, BlatantEcho said:

and also cause a lot of other deaths

Data please? There are also many lives being saved. Influenza infections are massively down, the Aus government is now advertising that if you think you have the flu, you more likely have Covid-19 so get tested. Covid-19 deaths in places that had effective lockdowns are a tiny fraction of those in places that didn't.

BlatantEcho? More like BullshitEcho.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, B.J. Porter said:

On what basis do you say that?

Is the projection of 250 beds WITH the lockdown or without it?

That was the 250 ICU without but a 2 week projection. The latency of the diseases symptoms while still being contagious is one of it's most dangerous qualities. the 250 number wasn't seen in my area for months and that was number of cases, the ICU never hit that level. The number should have  granted this was super early on when people said don't wear masks as they might scare patients and they don't do anything anyways (back in March).   For those that don't remember...

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, LB 15 said:

You have a good point. If the stay home order had been optional only the herd immunity morons like you would have ignored and become infected. Darwin mentioned your end of the herd.

That .0014% chance is terrifying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hatin' life said:

That .0014% chance is terrifying.

Just but worth the risk from my perspective. That Aids shit never stopped you getting banged in the Arse.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, impetuous_donkey said:

I do question the effectiveness of the early lockdowns. When my state shutdown the local hospital was projecting being 250 ICU beds short in two weeks and was even in talks with local schools to use the gym as overflow. Two months later we hit 250 cases in the county. The initial estimates were wildly off. 

No doubt that changing peoples patterns of behavior helped to slow spread but could that have been done without the hammer?  

What state?

In NY and NJ, they got perilously close .

In CT the official stats showed us with a cushion of ICU beds but some of those beds were going to be pushing the envelope.  I lent two ventilators to a local hospital.  The ramp up was so fast. The ramp slowed almost immediately 3 days after lockdown and although the number of cases grew, hospitalizations slowed to a controllable number albeit still climbing.  I reckon if they had left it 5 days later we would have been asking for military hospitals 2 weeks after that.

One day they will wrote a book, do a movie about the pandemic in the tri states and our level of preparation or lack therof.

I will credit the three governors, once it dawned on them what they were dealing with, they did mobilize resources .....but there was a time , for the first 5 days or so, we were scrambling and figuring protocols out an changing them daily or weekly.  Given the heads up we had from China and Italy, we might have been a bit further up the learning curve ....but I credit that there were a lot of unknowns globally so maybe we did best we could.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, EYESAILOR said:

What state?

In NY and NJ, they got perilously close .

In CT the official stats showed us with a cushion of ICU beds but some of those beds were going to be pushing the envelope.  I lent two ventilators to a local hospital.  The ramp up was so fast. The ramp slowed almost immediately 3 days after lockdown and although the number of cases grew, hospitalizations slowed to a controllable number albeit still climbing.  I reckon if they had left it 5 days later we would have been asking for military hospitals 2 weeks after that.

One day they will wrote a book, do a movie about the pandemic in the tri states and our level of preparation or lack therof.

I will credit the three governors, once it dawned on them what they were dealing with, they did mobilize resources .....but there was a time , for the first 5 days or so, we were scrambling and figuring protocols out an changing them daily or weekly.  Given the heads up we had from China and Italy, we might have been a bit further up the learning curve ....but I credit that there were a lot of unknowns globally so maybe we did best we could.

Washington

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, EYESAILOR said:

What state?

In NY and NJ, they got perilously close .

In CT the official stats showed us with a cushion of ICU beds but some of those beds were going to be pushing the envelope.  I lent two ventilators to a local hospital.  The ramp up was so fast. The ramp slowed almost immediately 3 days after lockdown and although the number of cases grew, hospitalizations slowed to a controllable number albeit still climbing.  I reckon if they had left it 5 days later we would have been asking for military hospitals 2 weeks after that.

One day they will wrote a book, do a movie about the pandemic in the tri states and our level of preparation or lack therof.

I will credit the three governors, once it dawned on them what they were dealing with, they did mobilize resources .....but there was a time , for the first 5 days or so, we were scrambling and figuring protocols out an changing them daily or weekly.  Given the heads up we had from China and Italy, we might have been a bit further up the learning curve ....but I credit that there were a lot of unknowns globally so maybe we did best we could.

Its good to hear from someone that's actually caught up in the fight.

Thank you, for your work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RobG said:

Data please? There are also many lives being saved. Influenza infections are massively down.

Lockdowns are ensuring that millions of kids and poor people will die. It's just a fact  (recent NYTimes/Unicief/Chicago Tribune articles below)

Let's ignore my focus on liberty / personal freedom / individual rights (who cares anymore?)
Forget increased suicide (thoughts of it up 25% during lockdown)
Forget domestic abuse (apparently you don't care?)
Forget kids not going to school, learning for a year (apparently, they don't matter?)
Forget pain/suffering/misery for those indoors (who cares about others right?)


The 'lockdown crowd', only care about themselves. They are wealthy people or authoritarian governments.
They got scared into this group think where locking people inside is the ONLY reasonably answer to a coronavirus. (despite history never having done it before)
They sacrifice the most vulnerable, for themselves.
They force their views on others, in the sake of their own safety (and yell about it loudly and self righteously, especially online)

"Let's lockdown and stay inside while our food delivery services and Amazon bring everything we need to our doors."

Did DRC lock down?
Did Burkina Faso?
Did Ghanna?
Mali?
What about Togo?
What about the people in Ukraine?

No.  They have lives to live, and they can't eat if they can't work.
So, they didn't get to say 'oh great, let's not work for 6 months, it will be fine'.  They carry on.  Stiff upper lip, going about their lives.
You know what's weird? Covid-19 hasn't caused many deaths in the largest continent in the World.


The ultimate tragedy of 2020 will be how utterly selfish the imposition of lockdown was, on the poorest and most fragile.
Here is some 'data' for you, RobG:

 

NYTimes:  lockdowns will lead to 1.4 million excess TB deaths, 500,000 excess HIV deaths, and 385,000 excess malaria deaths."

Chicago Tribune:  'The biggest monster’ is spreading. And it’s not the coronavirus.'

UNICEF: An additional 6.7 million children under 5 could suffer from wasting this year due to COVID-19

 

*****

Listen, I know you don't like my perspective, but, can you really really claim lockdown saved lives?  I don't see any data that suggests yes.

The countries with the highest death rate per million - all locked down.
Anyone with a brain would say 'well, we took the harshest measures known to homo-sapiens, and wherever we did the harshest measures, we had the worst outcomes.  So, maybe there is no correlation with 'lockdown' and deaths'

And, as you look at the data, those people would be correct.
It's a virus, it doesn't just go away when you lock yourself indoors for 6 months.

 

This thread is about NZL... and after being told 'omg, we did it!  Hooray rich country!  We saved ourselves at the expenses of others'/

Oh... wait... that didn't work.... surprise.

So, let's 'try it again'................

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EYESAILOR said:

What state?

In NY and NJ, they got perilously close .

In CT the official stats showed us with a cushion of ICU beds but some of those beds were going to be pushing the envelope.  I lent two ventilators to a local hospital.  The ramp up was so fast. The ramp slowed almost immediately 3 days after lockdown and although the number of cases grew, hospitalizations slowed to a controllable number albeit still climbing.  I reckon if they had left it 5 days later we would have been asking for military hospitals 2 weeks after that.

One day they will wrote a book, do a movie about the pandemic in the tri states and our level of preparation or lack therof.

I will credit the three governors, once it dawned on them what they were dealing with, they did mobilize resources .....but there was a time , for the first 5 days or so, we were scrambling and figuring protocols out an changing them daily or weekly.  Given the heads up we had from China and Italy, we might have been a bit further up the learning curve ....but I credit that there were a lot of unknowns globally so maybe we did best we could.

My dilemma with the the lockdown is as you mention the numbers in your region stopped growing 3 days after the lockdown. With the way this disease works shouldn't that have not been seen for a week or two? Or was it bad projections at the start? Like you elude to the beginning was very interesting and things such as processes and procedures were constantly being changed and revamped while the data evolved.  

While the lockdown did bring a large amount of fear and a quick change in public behavior I still just have a hard time agreeing with it being the only/ best option.

Link to post
Share on other sites

image.thumb.png.cbe9ed183b89a5b95659f374d83ce6e3.png

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, B.J. Porter said:

So what you are saying is the lockdown worked.

If it did NOT work, the projections would have come true. Congratulations.

The problem with preventing a disaster is no one gives you credit because the disaster didn't happen, they just bitch about the inconvenience you caused with your actions.

He probably still thinks that the y2k bug was a hoax because things continued to work after midnight.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BlatantEcho said:

Lockdowns are ensuring that millions of kids and poor people will die. It's just a fact  (recent NYTimes/Unicief/Chicago Tribune articles below)

Let's ignore my focus on liberty / personal freedom / individual rights (who cares anymore?)
Forget increased suicide (thoughts of it up 25% during lockdown)
Forget domestic abuse (apparently you don't care?)
Forget kids not going to school, learning for a year (apparently, they don't matter?)
Forget pain/suffering/misery for those indoors (who cares about others right?)


The 'lockdown crowd', only care about themselves. They are wealthy people or authoritarian governments.
They got scared into this group think where locking people inside is the ONLY reasonably answer to a coronavirus. (despite history never having done it before)
They sacrifice the most vulnerable, for themselves.
They force their views on others, in the sake of their own safety (and yell about it loudly and self righteously, especially online)

"Let's lockdown and stay inside while our food delivery services and Amazon bring everything we need to our doors."

Did DRC lock down?
Did Burkina Faso?
Did Ghanna?
Mali?
What about Togo?
What about the people in Ukraine?

No.  They have lives to live, and they can't eat if they can't work.
So, they didn't get to say 'oh great, let's not work for 6 months, it will be fine'.  They carry on.  Stiff upper lip, going about their lives.
You know what's weird? Covid-19 hasn't caused many deaths in the largest continent in the World.


The ultimate tragedy of 2020 will be how utterly selfish the imposition of lockdown was, on the poorest and most fragile.
Here is some 'data' for you, RobG:

 

NYTimes:  lockdowns will lead to 1.4 million excess TB deaths, 500,000 excess HIV deaths, and 385,000 excess malaria deaths."

Chicago Tribune:  'The biggest monster’ is spreading. And it’s not the coronavirus.'

UNICEF: An additional 6.7 million children under 5 could suffer from wasting this year due to COVID-19

 

*****

Listen, I know you don't like my perspective, but, can you really really claim lockdown saved lives?  I don't see any data that suggests yes.

The countries with the highest death rate per million - all locked down.
Anyone with a brain would say 'well, we took the harshest measures known to homo-sapiens, and wherever we did the harshest measures, we had the worst outcomes.  So, maybe there is no correlation with 'lockdown' and deaths'

And, as you look at the data, those people would be correct.
It's a virus, it doesn't just go away when you lock yourself indoors for 6 months.

 

This thread is about NZL... and after being told 'omg, we did it!  Hooray rich country!  We saved ourselves at the expenses of others'/

Oh... wait... that didn't work.... surprise.

So, let's 'try it again'................

Newspaper articles are not 'Data' cupcake. You cite the same story published in two different papers about a one doctor claiming 'His' disease is more import a than another and the UNICEF piece states that 'the repercussions of the pandemic are causing more harm to children than the disease itself' , which is where you obviously get your ludicrous position that ignores the lives saved by lockdown.

The rest is just pus oozing from your soiled, sex toy ravished vagina.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BlatantEcho said:

Lockdowns are ensuring that millions of kids and poor people will die. It's just a fact  (recent NYTimes/Unicief/Chicago Tribune articles below)

Let's ignore my focus on liberty / personal freedom / individual rights (who cares anymore?)
Forget increased suicide (thoughts of it up 25% during lockdown)
Forget domestic abuse (apparently you don't care?)
Forget kids not going to school, learning for a year (apparently, they don't matter?)
Forget pain/suffering/misery for those indoors (who cares about others right?)


The 'lockdown crowd', only care about themselves. They are wealthy people or authoritarian governments.
They got scared into this group think where locking people inside is the ONLY reasonably answer to a coronavirus. (despite history never having done it before)
They sacrifice the most vulnerable, for themselves.
They force their views on others, in the sake of their own safety (and yell about it loudly and self righteously, especially online)

"Let's lockdown and stay inside while our food delivery services and Amazon bring everything we need to our doors."

Did DRC lock down?
Did Burkina Faso?
Did Ghanna?
Mali?
What about Togo?
What about the people in Ukraine?

No.  They have lives to live, and they can't eat if they can't work.
So, they didn't get to say 'oh great, let's not work for 6 months, it will be fine'.  They carry on.  Stiff upper lip, going about their lives.
You know what's weird? Covid-19 hasn't caused many deaths in the largest continent in the World.


The ultimate tragedy of 2020 will be how utterly selfish the imposition of lockdown was, on the poorest and most fragile.
Here is some 'data' for you, RobG:

 

NYTimes:  lockdowns will lead to 1.4 million excess TB deaths, 500,000 excess HIV deaths, and 385,000 excess malaria deaths."

Chicago Tribune:  'The biggest monster’ is spreading. And it’s not the coronavirus.'

UNICEF: An additional 6.7 million children under 5 could suffer from wasting this year due to COVID-19

 

*****

Listen, I know you don't like my perspective, but, can you really really claim lockdown saved lives?  I don't see any data that suggests yes.

The countries with the highest death rate per million - all locked down.
Anyone with a brain would say 'well, we took the harshest measures known to homo-sapiens, and wherever we did the harshest measures, we had the worst outcomes.  So, maybe there is no correlation with 'lockdown' and deaths'

And, as you look at the data, those people would be correct.
It's a virus, it doesn't just go away when you lock yourself indoors for 6 months.

 

This thread is about NZL... and after being told 'omg, we did it!  Hooray rich country!  We saved ourselves at the expenses of others'/

Oh... wait... that didn't work.... surprise.

So, let's 'try it again'................

"Will die"?

So they haven't died yet?

So their deaths might not actually happen?

So you want us to not worry about 1 virus but we should worry about other viruses?

I mean, death happens every day. Why should we care?

 

 

If you thought that piece wasn't stupid, I wouldn't be surprised

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

"Will die"?

So they haven't died yet?

So their deaths might not actually happen?

So you want us to not worry about 1 virus but we should worry about other viruses?

I mean, death happens every day. Why should we care?

 

 

If you thought that piece wasn't stupid, I wouldn't be surprised


Kind of like all the people saying:  'if we don't lockdown, millions will die'

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Newspaper articles are not 'Data' cupcake. You cite the same story published in two different papers about a one doctor claiming 'His' disease is more import a than another and the UNICEF piece states that 'the repercussions of the pandemic are causing more harm to children than the disease itself' , which is where you obviously get your ludicrous position that ignores the lives saved by lockdown.

The rest is just pus oozing from your soiled, sex toy ravished vagina.

 

*shrug*

I can't make you read data sets or facts, and if I could, I still couldn't teach you context.
 

You guys all sound like the soldiers that said:  'Destroying the village is the only way to save it'
 

*****

You all want the world to burn to the ground, so that YOU can feel safer. So YOU  can go from a 99.85% chance of survival if you catch the virus, to, 100%.
That's what this is all about.

You all can't stop patting yourselves on the back for this either.  It's just, I've never seen anything like it.  The mob mentality is so strong here.
No one applies any context or empathy to what locking down does to others. No one cares it seems.

 

(I realize that quote wasn't the direct quote from the soldier, but, it's popular enough in history where you know what I mean)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, impetuous_donkey said:

My dilemma with the the lockdown is as you mention the numbers in your region stopped growing 3 days after the lockdown. With the way this disease works shouldn't that have not been seen for a week or two? Or was it bad projections at the start? Like you elude to the beginning was very interesting and things such as processes and procedures were constantly being changed and revamped while the data evolved.  

While the lockdown did bring a large amount of fear and a quick change in public behavior I still just have a hard time agreeing with it being the only/ best option.

Medically speaking the lock down would have a relatively  fast impact on the rate of ramp because it slows the spread immediately. But the number of cases and hospitalizations continued to grow for another 2 weeks because people who were exposed before the lockdown take time to show symptoms, get tested and deteriorate to hospital care.

Prior to the "stay at home" order, the number of cases had been growing exponentially. After the lockdown, the first thing we noticed is that the rate of growth of cases stabilized , then 2 weeks later the number of incoming patients actually started to decline.....and then some significant time later the number of releases actually was higher than the number of incoming.

The lock down worked for what it was supposed to do....but you are right it does not solve the longer term problem .

 

However it gave the rest of the country time to prepare with better protocols and lower mortality.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Keith said:

Its good to hear from someone that's actually caught up in the fight.

Thank you, for your work.

Just to be 100% clear. I was not in the front line or ICU.  My sister was...heroine in my eyes. However I am on staff at 2 hospitals and there was a 2week period when I was involved in monitoring side effects of treatment.  This was relatively "safe" work but it did mean isolating from my husband for just under 4 weeks and it is not something I (or he) ever wants to do again.

On Monday I was scheduled to operate on 6 patients and 2 tested positive for CV19 (so cancelled procedures) which is a bit depressing because I had had a lot of close contact with the patients in pre-op exams on Thursday, so its back to getting tested ...again! Sigh!  

Ironically, one of the patients was a gentleman who had made a fuss about insisting in not wearing a mask and had been refused access to my office until he wore a mask.....he is somewhat chagrined now.  Obviously , despite our prior disagreement, I am wishing and hoping for the best for him. 

One informal observation I will make is that we are observing some longer term effects in patients who recover from CV19. Too early to tell how significant or how long lasting. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Just but worth the risk from my perspective. That Aids shit never stopped you getting banged in the Arse.

LOL.  You sad person.

Link to post
Share on other sites