Corona Virus

[pelmut]

For six days now the number of reported cases of C 19 in the U.K. hasn't risen; fingers crossed, the lockdown has worked so far.

Does this mean that the rate of new infections has dropped to zero?

Sorry, I didn't make it clear.  The number of new cases reported daily (around 5,000) hasn't risen, so we appear to be out of the exponential increase phase and into the 'flat top' phase.  The number of daily deaths ought to be flattening out quite soon.

[crfriend]

Sorry, I didn't make it clear.  The number of new cases reported daily (around 5,000) hasn't risen, so we appear to be out of the exponential increase phase and into the 'flat top' phase.

No worries on one, and I'm happy about two.

As far as the first point goes, one can immediately tell that everybody must be reporting and using comparable numbers and methodologies, or there must be a mathematical way of aligning any two systems that report differently. This is precisely why I put such a high value on the rate of new infections -- it shows whether more, or fewer, are getting infected daily. From that, using grammar-school arithmetic, getting the total number of "confirmed cases" is trivial -- and it's the number of "confirmed cases" that's getting all the airtime and thus looking "exponential". It's worth noting that just about any data-set can be made to look "exponential" by picking the sample period and the time-scale -- and this is where it's unbelievably easy to lie with statistics. Using graphs makes it even easier to lie about the matter.

That the UK, with a population of slightly shy of 68 million) is only getting 5000-odd new infections per day is encouraging (for citizens there) and looks quite good compared with my home state in the US (with a population of 6.6 million) which is running at around 2000 per day.

The ideal number, of course, in any infectious disease regime is zero infections over time, however that can be difficult -- but not impossible -- to achieve.

Best of luck to my brethren on the eastern side of "the pond"!

[john62]

Here in Oz, "Of the 6,533 confirmed cases in Australia, 67 have died and 3,819 have been reported as recovered from COVID-19. More than 396,000 tests have been conducted across Australia." This is from the Government Website, Victoria, population about 5 million, has had one confirmed case in the last 24 hours.

John

[Fred in Skirts]

Here is the Governments plan for reopening the country. I think it is too early, but the idiots in the general population want it badly. If they do this it will require even more enforcement than the current plan to keep us safe.

https://www.breitbart.com/health/2020/0 ... uidelines/

[Faldaguy]

by Fred in Skirts » Sat Apr 18, 2020 12:03 pm
Here is the Governments plan for reopening the country. I think it is too early, but the idiots in the general population want it badly. If they do this it will require even more enforcement than the current plan to keep us safe.

https://www.breitbart.com/health/2020/0 ... uidelines/

FIS, I fear you are correct. I almost avoided checking your link above given the source. In this instance it seems to have just passed on the official release of the plan, which on the surface does not look too bad. BUT, King T immediately turned around and started tweeting to the other elements of the right about "Liberate..." and out came the guns and more already. Tough "show" I suppose, but too much angst presently could easily tip this thing to genuine violence, if not just the violence of thousands more dying unnecessarily from the resurgence that is bound to follow "opening" the States at this time when none of the stated pre-conditions have been met. What a fool's paradise. I'm praying we can find a flight out soon -- where sanity and concern for one's fellow beings rates a bit more than "'you (government) can't tell me anything -- I'm free to do what I damn well please regardless of impact on anyone else".

[pelmut]

Allow the most vocal states to 'unlock', but seal their borders so that the infection can't spread to neighbouring states ...then let Darwinism take its course.

[Jim]

Allow the most vocal states to 'unlock', but seal their borders so that the infection can't spread to neighbouring states ...then let Darwinism take its course.

But it will be the infirm, the weak, the elderly, not the ones making the foolish decisions, who will suffer the most. Sure, it will get some of those pushing for "liberation" also, but they'll pass it on to the more cautious people because most can't stay totally isolated.

[pelmut]

Allow the most vocal states to 'unlock', but seal their borders so that the infection can't spread to neighbouring states ...then let Darwinism take its course.

But it will be the infirm, the weak, the elderly, not the ones making the foolish decisions, who will suffer the most. Sure, it will get some of those pushing for "liberation" also, but they'll pass it on to the more cautious people because most can't stay totally isolated.

That's the problem -- and even if someone is sensible enough to realise they need to stay isolated, they may be pressured into going back to work in unsafe circumstances.  The only consolation is that the ones who deliberately don't lock down will be dead or recovered in a matter of weeks, so the peak risk of them passing it on to everyone else will be over quite rapidly.

With no vaccine and very little effective medication, the eventual number of deaths will theoretically be the same whichever strategy is followed; in fact the liberal approach will actually result in more deaths because the health services will be overloaded.  Also many people would die early on, who could have been saved if they had lived until a vaccine was eventually found.

[crfriend]

Warning: Extreme cynicism follows with a dollop of sarcasm as well.

But it will be the infirm, the weak, the elderly, not the ones making the foolish decisions, who will suffer the most.

True, but look at it from the perspective of the Boards of Directors of the various for-profit "insurance" rackets. This would be a good thing and would increase profit by removing the sick and inform from the pool leaving only the healthy who do not usually require all that expensive and bottom-line-depleting "care".

The fat-cats are likely thinking just that way and are salivating over it. There is money to be extracted here.

It's not precisely genocide -- and for this we require a new word. How about "econocide".

[denimini]

Perhaps geronticide ........... as a word; I am not suggesting it as a strategy.

[crfriend]

Perhaps geronticide ........... as a word; I am not suggesting it as a strategy.

I'd contemplated that, but it centers a bit too literally around the aged, where I don't think that'd be the intent of those doing the calculations -- it'd just be "an unfortunate side-effect".

Do I want it to play out that way? HELL NO! But in a world where nothing matters but the almighty buck I can imagine it happening. And the mere fact that it can be imagined is, in and of itself, an indicator of a disgusting state of affairs.

Much of the problem here is that we've got the clueless leading the stupid and the only communications tactic being deployed is fear (and in some places, brute force, e.g. curfews).

[Coder]

The problem is many of the restrictions imposed upon us by our governors/tyrants are nonsensical. In some states people are not allowed to fish. Why? I have no idea - maybe the state doesn’t want to have dnr officers out making sure limits are enforced (or whoever enforces limits). So people who might rely on fishing for their sustenance are now forced to find other means to feed themselves. In michigan we can no longer buy paint, flooring, seeds, gardening items (small hardware stores may have an exemption). Golf courses are closed. Other states people are being ticketed for driving around, playing catch (because they didn’t show their ID!). Car washes are closed (well, you know, because danger!).

The problem is we can social distance and engage in many activities that are currently restricted. Rather than shut everything down they should have put into law protections for:

Elderly / at risk individuals

In the form of job protection. They should have made directives to limit exposure in at-risk care centers, and the stimulus should have gone towards a “work core” of people bringing food/supplies to at risk individuals. Honestly that’s what we should be using the national guard and military personnel for.

The problem then are multi-generational households, not sure how you’d deal with those.

Finally, mask wearing and proper hygiene should have been front and center at the beginning of this thing, though with an emphasis on “cloth covering” so medical personnel would have the supplies they needed.

These are just some thoughts - feel free to pick them apart. I just fail to see why we have to immediately follow what our “leaders” tell us, especially when some (not all) of those decisions make no sense whatsoever. People (well, I do) complain CONSTANTLY about how badly politicians make decisions about things, yet feel they and their health departments must know best.

[Kilted_John]

Here's another thing. The professor who wrote this is someone on the left, btw...

https://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2020/04/ ... -park.html

At this time, in the Seattle area, there are few areas where you can get out and be in fresh air, unless you're in your yard or walking through your neighborhood. Out where I live, two trails. The Tolt Pipeline Trail, and the Snoqualmie Valley Trail. Usually, there are few people, if any, on the trails. Ever since the lockdown occured, the trailheads are filled with cars. In Redmond, WA, there's a soccer area that people frequently use for flying radio control aircraft and do their social distancing on a normal day. It also provides access to the Sammamish River Trail that goes through that valley. That area has been closed off. If you want to walk the trail, you have to either park in Woodinville, then walk down, or find some parking lot somewhere in downtown Redmond and hope that someone doesn't tow your vehicle while you're walking. Marymoor Park in Redmond is also completely closed off. Except for family members, I rarely see people closer than 6 feet or 2 meters apart when I've been there. On a weekday, it's possible to have people 1/4 mile apart. Close the playgrounds, restrooms, and maybe put away the picnic tables, so people won't be touching things that might be contaminated. But, let people do their walking, etc, while taking advantage of the UVb rays that are beneficial for our bodies.

It's like that study that one of the east coast colleges did where they had people clothed in a room for some period of time during winter, and others completely nude outdoors. The sick people were the ones in the room. The healthy people, provided they didn't get frostbite, were those outdoors.

[moonshadow]

.... maybe China is finally preparing to foreclose on the U.S. and is clearing national and state lands of occupants? We're already about half disarmed, now unemployed, sick, in fear, in debt, blind, without a reliable media, ignorant, can't half read or write, don't even understand our own constitutions. (Yes we all are subject to at least two... most people don't realize that)...

Yep... we're prime for a foreign takeover....

*shrugs*

Maybe Trump was the good guy all along?

How do you know it's false? Can we really trust the news? Yes? Okay then... which one? They all say something different...

Maybe a good time to learn Chinese?

[crfriend]

Here's a thought-provoking piece that recently appeared in The Atlantic: Trump’s Two Horrifying Plans for Dealing With the Coronavirus posted without comment other than it is an "interesting read".