Jump to content
atdlzpae

Wuhan Coronavirus - are you prepared?

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, meepmeepmayer said:

There literally was a football match (in Italy) between Spain and Italy (if I remember correctly) that is now confirmed to have been a defining, massive virus spreader, and that everyone screamed about not holding, but they did it anyways.

I hear football is literally (not figuratively) life and death for some people in Europe...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brand new modelling study on the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the effectiveness of lock-downs and with some good news on case mortality rates:

Estimating the number of infections and the impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 in 11 European countries

30 March 2020, Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team, Report in: Epidemiology, Public Health and Primary Care

"We estimate that, across all 11 countries between 7 and 43 million individuals have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 up to 28th March, representing between 1.88% and 11.43% of the population.

With current interventions remaining in place to at least the end of March, we estimate that interventions across all 11 countries will have averted 59,000 deaths up to 31 March [95% credible interval 21,000-120,000]. Many more deaths will be averted through ensuring that interventions remain in place until transmission drops to low levels."

If that many people are actually already infected (compared with Johns Hopkins figures), that would decrease the overall mortality rate substantially.

They share all their data and promise to update their results once a week.

https://doi.org/10.25561/77731

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

What I am wondering about is if the places that don't shelter wind up with herd immunity much sooner, and better off in the long run.

Edited by xorbe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, xorbe said:

What I am wondering about is if the places that don't shelter wind up with herd immunity much sooner, and better off in the long run.

At the cost of many more people dying in a short time because of an overburdened health care system, yes. -  See Italy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

That is the implication, yes.  But possibly better off in the long run, that is the question.  ie, by sheltering, we may go in circles with re-infections.  It might be worse than a single upfront cost.  Nobody knows.  That's why I'm wondering to see what happens with those that don't shelter.  Everyone seems snow blind with the short term possibilities, casting long term possibilites aside.

Edited by xorbe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, LanghamP said:

I was surprised to see govnerners from the South (where I live) to now or soon enforce stay at home quarantines as strict as California, because those infected in the South now have apparently the grimmest outcomes. High blood pressure and sedentary lifestyles is a good indicator of Coronavirus mortality. I would have guessed the isolated suburban automobile living would have protected the South a lot, but hypertension trumps lifestyle. So it goes

It's unconstitutional. If you watch some Audit The Audit (great channel!) and police arrests you, you're in for an easy lawsuit for compensation. But remember to wear a camera. ;)

1 hour ago, xorbe said:

What I am wondering about is if the places that don't shelter wind up with herd immunity much sooner, and better off in the long run.

Sooner? I highly doubt it. Better off? I highly doubt it. The chance of it mutating into a new strain (just like flu and cold every season) is almost 100%.

Edited by atdlzpae

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, atdlzpae said:

The chance of it mutating into a immune version (just like flu and cold every season) is almost 100%.

This doesn't agree with what I've read.  Things that spread fast tend to be more stable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, xorbe said:

This doesn't agree with what I've read.  Things that spread fast tend to be more stable.

We know it mutated already - google "S type" and "L type". And that was in China, with almost certainly < 1 million infected.

I know this mutation doesn't fool the immune system, but "tends to be more stable" is a false hope.

Edited by atdlzpae

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Right but tiny mutations, like 8 base pairs out of 30K or something.  Perhaps stable was unclear.

Edited by xorbe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@Gasmantle https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/30/overzealous-police-use-coronavirus-powers-charge-shoppers-buying/

Some independent shops reported that council officers had attempted to tell them what items they could and could not sell, including chocolate eggs and hot cross buns.

https://twitter.com/PoliceWarr/status/1244163251799195649

Overnight 6 people have been summonsed for offences relating to the new corona virus legislation to protect the public:
These included
Out for a drive due to boredom
Returning from parties
Multiple people from the same household going to the shops for non-essential items

Out for a drive due to boredom - WTF??? What's the harm in that?
Multiple people from the same household going to the shops for non-essential items - so now a "judge, jury and executioner" can decide what's an essential item, huh? ;)

https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/coronavirus/non-essential-businesses-selling-essential-items-attempt-to-stay-open

"Any store that sells both essential items and non essential items, in the definitions we have both at our local and state public health orders, they need to close them off, those non-essential items," said Julie Sutor, director of communications for Summit County.

Your mouse broke and you're going to a Walmart anyway? Well good luck, you can't buy it even though it's on the shelve.

https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/fsxpzh/first_laws_proposed_by_the_hungarian_government/

First laws proposed by the Hungarian government on the first day of Rule by Decree
- removal of decision making rights of city mayors
- removal of employment and public administration courts
- removal of the ability to change one’s sex
- removal of the ability of Budapest city council to stop City Park construction projects
- the police is able to access tax records without warrant

all in the name of coronavirus emergency


 

Quote

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

It's staggering how fast the world turned to totalitarianism. We're truly doomed.

Edited by atdlzpae

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread has been a great read so far and I want to thank everyone that had posted. Its remarkable to access to information from literally around the world due to our love of EUCs. 

I only smart enough to that I dont know much so all I can add to this is my opinions and assumptions. 

Watching how here in the US trying to get some form of economic relief quickly turned into a political tug of war I have to imagine it's been the same in most of countries effected as well. 

I dont think things will be quite the same once we get on the other side of this. There will be a loss of freedoms (my opinion) but this time it wont be effecting a minority like banning the use of dirt bikes on your own property. This will be a loss of freedoms for everyone. 

As long as what is lost doesnt mess with day to life very much I dont think the majority will really care too much. But each time an even like this happens more will be lost. 

On a brighter note I did get to show how great a quick trip to the store can be on a wheel today. It's always cool to put smile on peoples face when you roll up and toss a wheel in a shopping cart!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, atdlzpae said:

It's staggering how fast the world turned to totalitarianism. We're truly doomed.

@atdlzpae I quite agree.

Here in the UK where the police can issue a fine for being outside without a good reason it is very vague - what constitutes a good reason? It seems to me that is very much open to interpretation and is a law that is easy to mis-apply.

They have shut all pubs but I like a few pints of the dark stuff now and again so I do jump on my wheel and go to buy a few cans of beer, is that a reasonable cause to be out?  Beer isn't an essential item but I'd argue when all pubs are closed it's reasonable to expect adults to go out and buy a bit of happiness. I'm happy to follow government guidelines as far as is sensible but I'm not going to live like a monk so I'll risk a fine.

Easter eggs have been a bit of a problem as it seems in some areas they are regarded as none essential items and can't be sold - I'm not sure how much other countries celebrate with Easter eggs but here they are part of the culture and most kids would expect their parents to buy them. They might not be essential items but surely it's not unreasonable to want to buy your kids a bit of a treat.

Stopping mass gatherings like music events, sporting events etc would seem to make sense but but stopping people from buying Easter eggs is taking things too far.

 

Edited by Gasmantle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Turkmenistan has a unique way of dealing with this virus thing going around.  :lol:  Ever watch "Borat?"  Never heard of this country before and may never will if they don't recognize the severity of the problem!  :rolleyes:  Coronavirus?  What Coronavirus?

https://www.businessinsider.com/turkmenistan-says-0-covid-19-cases-suppressing-news-coronavirus-2020-4

Edited by Hunka Hunka Burning Love

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, travsformation said:

denying financial aid to small businesses but granting a large rescue package to two large private TV conglomerates, for example

I’m not sure how other countries are protecting their small business employee's but hopefully  your country will be providing a safety net similar to the one being implemented in the US this weekend.

My bank in Ohio tested their SBA Employee Payroll Protection software late last night. They’re beta testing a few select companies before they begin ramping up the full application/ fund distribution process. 

My poor neighbor just invested over $250k on a new glass installation business a few months back. His facility is now shut down and unfortunately he will not qualify for our government’s employee paycheck protection plan.

Currently the US government is only issuing employee paycheck protection disbursements to businesses that have been in operation for over 1 year.

Unfortunately a majority of his family quit their previous jobs to support and work with him. So sad. 

Edited by Rehab1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I haven't actually followed the local domestic news that much for the last few days. Part of the country was isolated, and people can get fined if they try to cross in or out of the "zone" without a good reason (work usually), but other than that, there's no actual curfew declared or such, just a request for people to socially distance themselves, work remotely if possible, avoid visiting stores often etc, and AFAIK, it's going fairly good, people are doing that. Restaurants are allowed only to sell take out and most other such "gathering places" are shutdown.

I haven't been outside except for a smoke and taking out the dog for almost three weeks :P  My spouse handles the groceries, she goes to the store once or twice a week. I "evacuated" my work stuff from the office on Tuesday 17th of March, and immediately afterwards fell ill for the rest of the week. Don't know if it was just seasonal flu or Covid-19 or something else, pretty mild symptoms, fatique and low fever mostly. Still not 100%, but definitely not dying or in need of medical care.

 

Edited by esaj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, mike_bike_kite said:

 

The new rules will start to seem a lot more sensible when people you know start going into intensive care. Most "sensible" people are staying in because they're trying to stop the transmission of the virus and not because they're worried about paying a fine. If you're ignoring the new rules then you're far more likely to catch the virus and obviously more likely to pass it on to others. They'll then pass it on to their families etc. To most people it's just a bad flu but if any of them has an underlying condition such as diabetes or asthma etc then their chances of dying starts to get very real.

The rules are fairly simple. Only go out if:

  • you're shopping for essential food (I'm sure you could include your beer in with the other items)
  • you're getting exercise (allowed once per day)
  • walking your dog
  • you're commuting to work and are an essential worker

 

I go out once per day (not everyday) and live in a small village where I see no one on the way to the shop 5 mins away, people taking exercise for 30 mins everyday come in to more risk categories that I do.

How is a 5 min trip on my own to the shop causing any more risk than someone walking a dog ?

It's about using common sense.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Gasmantle said:

I go out once per day (not everyday) and live in a small village where I see no one on the way to the shop 5 mins away, people taking exercise for 30 mins everyday come in to more risk categories that I do.

How is a 5 min trip on my own to the shop causing any more risk than someone walking a dog ?

It's about using common sense.

 

I'm not judging or morally policing you, so don't take is as such. But since you asked, here's my POV:

- How many people does the shop-keeper come into contact every day? While the rest of us get to stay at home, he's there all day, at risk of being infected. The fewer visits people make, the less risk for him.

- The shopkeeper is at higher risk of being infected. This, when you go to the shop, there's the possibility of him infecting you.

- How many items do you touch in the shop? How many do others? How many people breathe on the items you buy? Do you disinfect them when you get home? Washing your hands and then touching a plastic-covered item (high SARS-CoV-2 "survival time" on such surfaces) that you brought back from the shop but didn't disinfect can be the same as not washing your hands in the first place.

- Do you know who else visits the shop? Their hygiene habits? What they may have touched (door nob, railing, lid of a trash can), either in town, or where they work, or during their commute? Which people they've been in contact with, and the same variables for each of them?

Imagine a single coronavirus-positive person. Now imagine everything the've touched, everyone who's touched what they've touched and everyone they've come into contact with. Now imagine every person they've come to contact with as potentially infected, and imagine everything each one of them has touched and everyone each of them has come into contact with. Potentially exponential propagation. Now ask yourself...do you have a way of knowing for certain how these endless variables come into play in your direct environment and the places you visit? It's impossible.

Common sense might not be as self-evident as one originally thought, in an uncommon situation that's new to all of us. There are just too many variables, making the simplest logic: Stay at home. Minimize going out to the strictly necessary. Limit your trips to the shop to once or twice a week instead of daily, etc. (those are neither imperatives nor suggestions directed at you, I'm just stating what healthcare professionals are recommending)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@travsformationI take your point but common sense is needed.

I can't speak for Spain as I don't know fully what their restrictions are or how the police monitor it, but in the UK it is a shambles.

In Cambodia (pop about 18mil) there are only about 100 case of Covid-19 and so far no deaths, the country is poor and has inadequate healthcare compared to the UK and most other western countries. People in Cambodia takes the risks seriously as poor healthcare means a relatively simple illness could be a death sentence. To protect themselves Cambodians sanitise their hands before boarding buses, going into as shop, getting on a train etc, they go out but are meticulous about how they interact and touch things etc. Experts are of the opinion this has resulted in them being able to contain the virus so far.

Now look at the UK, we are told no to go out to buy an Easter egg etc but when we do where is the hand sanitising at the supermarket or getting on public transport? The vast majority of contagion is through touching infected surfaces - a supermarket must be one of the greatest disease spreaders when people pick things up then put them back, handle trolleys etc.

If we were serious about this the place to start is proper sanitising and not restricting peoples movement where the risk is minimal.

The London Underground is arguably the most densly packed railway in the world and for weeks into the virus spread it has been running at full capacity cramming people into confined carriages with no ventilation - even now it still runs (albeit with less occupancy) - wouldn't it make sense to have staff ensuring people hand cleanse at the entrance and way out? But they don't do it - why not?

It's no good applying rigid rules without thinking it through properly while ignoring the real danger areas.

I'm all for limiting movement but let's apply common sense too - a guy going to a village shop 5 mins away is allegedly in the wrong but I could travel halfway across London without washing hands and spreading germs everywhere but that's ok if I'm going to work.

It isn't as simple as saying a person shouldn't go out - it depends where they are, what time is it, what are they going to do, who will the meet etc.

We have all been stuck at a broken set of traffic lights stuck on red on a quiet road late night with not another car in sight, I don't know about anyone else but I don't sit there all night till the police turn up - I use common sense, make sure it is safe and then drive on. 

Lets all use a bit of common sense, if we aren't careful we'll all lose our freedoms before long.

Edited by Gasmantle

Share this post


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

It's about using common sense.

I guess it depends on your point of view. If you live in a small village where there are currently no cases then the virus probably seems like fiction.  If you're young and healthy then you might even see the virus as a personal infringement. Obviously your elderly neighbours might have their own opinions as you wander about as normal. Similarly for anyone who might have kids with asthma etc. Scientists, doctors and politicians have all been telling us every day to stay in unless we absolutely have to go out. We also know there aren't enough ventilators available. Yet you still go out? Is that really common sense? Personally, I have type 1 diabetes, so the virus is quite bad news for me - I just really hope your opinion is a minority.
 

Share this post


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

 as you wander about as normal. 
 

Whoa, hold on tiger - who said anything about going out as normal?

I clearly said I go out only once per day and not at all most days.

I'm all for restrictions but use a bit of common sense also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...