By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread

John2290 said:
Nearlly 800k, I was expecting 1 million by Saturday cause of suppression but that is looking laughable now, we are still exponentially climbing that curve which is a straight vertical line right now.

Outbreak is just starting to get serious in the US, and in the early phases in india, africa, ect.

So even if things start to slow down abit in europe/middle east... theres still other vast population area's being effected now.



Around the Network
vivster said:
SpokenTruth said:

Extremely hard to manipulate the numbers in the US because of decentralization.  Each county individually reports to their state health boards who then send that data to the CDC and other agencies.  The county data is easily accessible for most of them. 

The corruption in The US happens on all levels. From the lowly sheriff to the president. It might not be a coordinated effort across the country to suppress numbers, but I'm very much sure that on all levels some numbers will be "lost". The highest achievement seems to be re-election and there are people willing to do everything to reach that goal.

The American people trust the CDC more than any President. If the CDC is not allowed to report accurate numbers, or any numbers at all, then all hell would break loose here. 



SpokenTruth said:

This is the positive cases in my county by age group.  That whole notion that "it only affects old" is BS.  Under 55 = 80 cases.  Over 55 = 83 cases.

No one actually ever said that. And no one ever claimed that the virus is less infectious to younger people. What we do see is an incredibly low chance for younger people to develop severe symptoms compared to older people. Like, incredibly low. Low enough to take a chance. Which leads to the correct conclusion that the vast majority of young people has absolutely nothing to fear from the virus. And no singular cases of younger people in ICUs will change that fact.

The statistic you posted even proves that. You see way more older cases because they are more likely to develop serious symptoms and are as such more likely to get tested. It is fair to assume that just as many young people, if not more, are infected by the virus as older people.

Also, I wouldn't actually consider 45-54 year olds "young people". That's the age where you start to develop health issues. You could just as well say that only 46 people under 45 are affected opposed to 117 people 45 and older. Sounds a lot different suddenly, doesn't it?

Last edited by vivster - on 31 March 2020

If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Nighthawk117 said:
vivster said:

The corruption in The US happens on all levels. From the lowly sheriff to the president. It might not be a coordinated effort across the country to suppress numbers, but I'm very much sure that on all levels some numbers will be "lost". The highest achievement seems to be re-election and there are people willing to do everything to reach that goal.

The American people trust the CDC more than any President. If the CDC is not allowed to report accurate numbers, or any numbers at all, then all hell would break loose here. 

Are we talking about the same CDC that people don't trust when it comes to something as simple as vaccinations?



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Ka-pi96 said:
Nighthawk117 said:

The American people trust the CDC more than any President. If the CDC is not allowed to report accurate numbers, or any numbers at all, then all hell would break loose here. 

But... you wouldn't know if they're accurate or not.

If the government is forcing the CDC to "alter" their numbers then unless somebody publicly outs them nobody would know that the CDC's numbers aren't accurate.

In that case, I would expect some CDC people would quit their job and write a book about the scandal.



Around the Network
vivster said:
Nighthawk117 said:

The American people trust the CDC more than any President. If the CDC is not allowed to report accurate numbers, or any numbers at all, then all hell would break loose here. 

Are we talking about the same CDC that people don't trust when it comes to something as simple as vaccinations?

The vast majority of the American public follows and believes in CDC guidelines, info, etc...



Nighthawk117 said:
vivster said:

Are we talking about the same CDC that people don't trust when it comes to something as simple as vaccinations?

The vast majority of the American public follows and believes in CDC guidelines, info, etc...

As do I. I just do not trust local officials to deliver the data that the CDC relies on.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

vivster said:
SpokenTruth said:

This is the positive cases in my county by age group.  That whole notion that "it only affects old" is BS.  Under 55 = 80 cases.  Over 55 = 83 cases.

No one actually ever said that. And no one ever claimed that the virus is less infectious to younger people. What we do see is an incredibly low chance for younger people to develop severe symptoms compared to older people. Like, incredibly low. Low enough to take a chance. Which leads to the correct conclusion that the vast majority of young people has absolutely nothing to fear from the virus. And no singular cases of younger people in ICUs will change that fact.

The statistic you posted even proves that. You see way more older cases because they are more likely to develop serious symptoms and are as such more likely to get tested. It is fair to assume that just as many young people, if not more, are infected by the virus as older people.

What do you consider young and incredibly low. I consider anyone under 40 young nowadays lol.


Absolutely nothing to fear is a bit of a stretch. Driving all year gives you about a 0.6 / 18 = 0.033% chance to die in a car accident every year. (Estimate of getting in an accident once every 18 years based on car insurance data, about 0.6% of car accidents lead to one or more fatalities) Of course you have more control over your own fate while driving (and many minor collisions never get reported, so that estimate is also still high)

So yep, under 20, only 1 in 300 chance to have to go to the hospital and less deadly than driving. However a good chance you end up killing someone else by spreading it on :/

This is however good for a country like India where the average age is 28.

With 70% of the population getting infected still over 2 million people will die :( However that's less than the estimate for the US 2.2 million with only a quarter of the population.

Anyway in our western society, average retirement age is 62. A large part of the workforce can be effected, not just sick old people. 1 in 10 chance to end up in the hospital aren't good odds for your experienced staff.



Norway:
I remember a few pages back, someone discribed something being akin to "nightmare fuel".
It was reguarding the accuracy of these chinese tests that were only ~30% accurate, and haveing false positives as well.
(takeing a healthy patient into a ward, full of infected, becasue of a a false positive)

It turns out in Norway, they found a human error resulted in a mix up of 11 test done at a huspital.
This ment they put 11 healthy people into a ward full of the infected, while sending home, infected (that then thought they where without illness).


UK:

Doing their part in building that herd immunity.

Last edited by JRPGfan - on 31 March 2020

SvennoJ said:
vivster said:

No one actually ever said that. And no one ever claimed that the virus is less infectious to younger people. What we do see is an incredibly low chance for younger people to develop severe symptoms compared to older people. Like, incredibly low. Low enough to take a chance. Which leads to the correct conclusion that the vast majority of young people has absolutely nothing to fear from the virus. And no singular cases of younger people in ICUs will change that fact.

The statistic you posted even proves that. You see way more older cases because they are more likely to develop serious symptoms and are as such more likely to get tested. It is fair to assume that just as many young people, if not more, are infected by the virus as older people.

What do you consider young and incredibly low. I consider anyone under 40 young nowadays lol.


Absolutely nothing to fear is a bit of a stretch. Driving all year gives you about a 0.6 / 18 = 0.033% chance to die in a car accident every year. (Estimate of getting in an accident once every 18 years based on car insurance data, about 0.6% of car accidents lead to one or more fatalities) Of course you have more control over your own fate while driving (and many minor collisions never get reported, so that estimate is also still high)

So yep, under 20, only 1 in 300 chance to have to go to the hospital and less deadly than driving. However a good chance you end up killing someone else by spreading it on :/

This is however good for a country like India where the average age is 28.

With 70% of the population getting infected still over 2 million people will die :( However that's less than the estimate for the US 2.2 million with only a quarter of the population.

Anyway in our western society, average retirement age is 62. A large part of the workforce can be effected, not just sick old people. 1 in 10 chance to end up in the hospital aren't good odds for your experienced staff.

I assume those numbers are based on confirmed cases. If we consider that especially among younger people there are way more unreported cases those numbers really are laughable for anyone under 40. Also not included in those stats are additional health issues like smoking, obesity asthma etc. Which brings down the hospitalization rate for young and healthy people down even further and the fatality rate close to zero. So pretty much what is expected.

I'm well aware of the ramifications of this virus and I wouldn't recommend to any young person to leave their house for any non essential reason. I just don't like the increased dramatization of "OH LOOK, THERE IS A SICK YOUNG PERSON! THAT MEANS THE VIRUS WILL KILL EVERYONE!" when that's incredibly far from the truth.

Last edited by vivster - on 31 March 2020

If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.