• Member Statistics

    15,844
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    maley.chris78@gmail.com
    Newest Member
    [email protected]
    Joined
moneypitmike

Coronavirus

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, eduggs said:

Yup.  Young, healthy people are dying too.  That scary fact needs to be more widely shared.  But yes, a much higher percentage of deaths are older people with other health problems.

Young healthy people are dying, but they're very rare cases. I know that no one is completely immune, but the statistics show that most young people that die from this also have underlying health conditions. And this is a point that Cuomo keeps hitting during his press conferences. The overwhelming majority of people that end up dying are people that have underlying health conditions. This virus is great at attacking people with weaker immune systems and weaker lungs. So I didn't get anything wrong as Weathafella claimed. I was just making the point that young healthy people need to be very careful  about spreading it to people that have underlying health conditions. That's why this social distancing is so important. So many people have this and don't even realize it, so everyone needs to be very careful.

 

Let me also say that everyone should exercise, get plenty of sleep and eat healthy (most of the time for eating healthy, I know you have to cheat some). These things boost the immune system, which reduces the chance of catching it and makes it more likely to be a mild case if you do catch it. They also reduce the chance of developing underlying health conditions like high blood pressure, diabetes and heart disease. Too many people don't take their health seriously and really let themselves get into bad shape, which not only makes Coronavirus worse but also leads to many other diseases. It's very odd how some people seem to take offense when a point like this is made, but it's completely true. You won't find one health expert that disagrees with this.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I agree with you in principle here, Jerry. I do.

I'm saying that it should 'start' to inkling efficacy by now, if subtly ... I think it is being offset by other factors - so we're probably just whistling past one another.

Well, even with social distancing, our measures are imperfect. The fact that most people still regularly meet at a central marketplace to get groceries helps perpetuate transmission, for example. And some sizable segment of the population remains either ignorant or willfully cavalier about the risk. I was amazed to see virtually no one wearing gloves or masks or bothering to distance themselves at the super market three days ago. And look at the morons on spring break last week, or the crowds on southern Californian beaches. Also, our measures have not had the force of law behind them and have not been universal across the whole country. Lots of chinks in the armor. Finally, the damn thing is extremely infectious. They say the R0 is somewhere around 2.5, but I've seen some experts quoting numbers closer to 4 to 6. Tough to keep something like that down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, winterwx21 said:

The overwhelming majority of people that end up dying are people that have underlying health conditions

Not sure why this fact when pointed out seems to anger people?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being disabled means I probably wouldn't get a ventilator in the hospital if I got very sick and the infection situation got really bad around here. That's why I intend to stay isolated as much as possible.

 

Share this post


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

Well, even with social distancing, our measures are imperfect. The fact that most people still regularly meet at a central marketplace to get groceries helps perpetuate transmission, for example. And some sizable segment of the population remains either ignorant or willfully cavalier about the risk. I was amazed to see virtually no one wearing gloves or masks or bothering to distance themselves at the super market three days ago. And look at the morons on spring break last week, or the crowds on southern Californian beaches. Also, our measures have not had the force of law behind them and have not been universal across the whole country. Lots of chinks in the armor. Finally, the damn thing is extremely infectious. They say the R0 is somewhere around 2.5, but I've seen some experts quoting numbers closer to 4 to 6. Tough to keep something like that down.

My local Hannifords has taped hash-marks on the floor now and people aren't allowed to stand closer than each.

Meanwhile, Whole "Paycheck" had a line at the door, and the complex is fairly large yet they were only letting in 40 customer occupancy - one at a time. Out and in ...

But, its a weighted numbers game. Those glaring instances of authority and advice flouters don't represent the vast majority taking this more serious and implementing measures.  I think there's some media coverage bias there, making it look like there's some kind of bigger anarchistic thing going on too - for every spin up knee jerk outrage they manifest, they make a million -

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is this the longest thread In the history of AmWx? 
Idk, but it's the most depressing and anxiety-inducing. Lots of good discussion though, but I think for mental health I need to check out for awhile and see what's going on in the Morch thread.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sugarloaf1989 said:

Being disabled means I probably wouldn't get a ventilator in the hospital if I got very sick and the infection situation got really bad around here. That's why I intend to stay isolated as much as possible.

 

And that’s unacceptable in this country.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, kdxken said:

Not sure why this fact when pointed out seems to anger people?

Here's my question: isn't this applicable to any disease? The weak almost always get hit harder.

Share this post


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

And that’s unacceptable in this country.

But it's a fact of life if things get really desperate. I've seen some hospital's have a list of pre existing conditions to treat people who have a good chance at recovery first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sugarloaf1989 said:

But it's a fact of life if things get really desperate. I've seen some hospital's have a list of pre existing conditions to treat people who have a good chance at recovery first.

Some are considering universal DNR orders at this point. If you get to a certain point, they just let you go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hoth said:

Here's my question: isn't this applicable to any disease? The weak almost always get hit harder.

Absolutely.

THE RISKIEST HEALTH CONDITIONS

Put aside age: Underlying health plays a big role. In China, 40% of people who required critical care had other chronic health problems. And there, deaths were highest among people who had heart disease, diabetes or chronic lung diseases before they got COVID-19.

Preexisting health problems also can increase risk of infection, such as people who have weak immune systems including from cancer treatment.

Other countries now are seeing how pre-pandemic health plays a role, and more such threats are likely to be discovered. Italy reported that of the first nine people younger than 40 who died of COVID-19, seven were confirmed to have “grave pathologies” such as heart disease.

The more health problems, the worse they fare. Italy also reports about half of people who died with COVID-19 had three or more underlying conditions, while just 2% of deaths were in people with no preexisting ailments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hoth said:

Here's my question: isn't this applicable to any disease? The weak almost always get hit harder.

Yeah, we don't yet know all the genetic markers and the potential differences from culture to culture in terms of susceptibility. 

Share this post


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

Here's my question: isn't this applicable to any disease? The weak almost always get hit harder.

Sshh...  heretic in this day and age to venture such "impertinent" philosophy - overt mordancy is also particularly shaded in a post Industrial Revolution, convenience addled presumption of vitality that has so deeply ingrained spanning enough generations that it's just unacceptable.

Here's the thing ... I don't know if that's a bad thing?  

What's the purpose of evolving all this technology if we don't at some point attempt to use it - whether in conceit or not... it is part of the evolution to employ these measures, one would think.   Interesting. 

I keep thinking this... 200 years ago, when everyone pretty much walked and survived with diphtheria ... this sort of pandemic would have been considered acceptable losses frankly.  Sure it would... When the life expectancy was considerably less, and also ... population density limited pathogenic efficiency, you better bet there is an "era -relevancy" to the urgency going on. We do this because we can at a state in history.  Otherwise, the ambient threat to daily life itself ...exceeds this threat 1820 ...  But, nowadays, we have the ways and means to fight back - so...this self-imposed stoppage of civility - we need to remember that this illness is not doing this.  We are ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mexico had 475 confirmed cases of COVID-19 - the illness caused by the virus - and six deaths by Thursday. Four of those who died had diabetes and two suffered from hypertension - both conditions that can exacerbate the illness. A seventh Mexican who died in Peru also had diabetes. While four of the victims were over age 60, the other two were 55 and 41.

“Coronavirus isn’t that lethal, except for people who have underlying health conditions that complicate it,” said Dr. Abelardo Avila, a researcher at the Salvador Zubiran National Institute for Medical Sciences and Nutrition. “Unfortunately, that’s the case for many millions of Mexicans.”

When details of the coronavirus deaths in Mexico became public, even health officials who had previously urged the population to remain calm began to acknowledge the scale of the problem the country is facing.

“Obese people, particularly morbidly obese ones, are the ones who are at biggest risk to suffer complications if they contract coronavirus,” said Ricardo Cortes, a Mexican health official.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/mexico-braces-coronavirus-amid-their-own-obesity-diabetes-epidemic-n1170361

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, kdxken said:

Healthy young people succumbing to this virus is few and far between. The numbers are quite small.

Yes, very small but do you want to know someone close who's part of that small percentage, or be one for that matter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is certainly a time lag and reported test numbers vs when they actually get infected. In many (most?) cases people are not getting tested unless they need to be admitted to the hospital. That is often about 7 days after they were first exposed. Then there is the time lag between getting the testing done and getting the results back. which is often anywhere from 24-48 hrs to as much as 7+ days, depending on location. Many cases being reported how occurred about the time many states began to close all but "essential" businesses. Some states still have not shut things down to the same extent as well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Not sure why this fact when pointed out seems to anger people?

Yeah, it's really strange. And it's really strange how some people keep talking about young healthy people dying from this, as if it's a common thing. The statistics overwhelmingly show that younger people with no underlying health conditions do very well with this. The deaths in that group are very rare cases. No one is completely immune and no one should have a cavalier attitude about this (everyone needs to be thoughtful and careful), but you also don't want younger healthy people to be terrified and in a panic state over something that very likely wouldn't be a big deal for them. Stress is a very bad thing and actually weakens the immune system. Being confident about health is a good thing. If you're in truly great shape due to exercising and eating healthy, it makes you more confident about staying healthy and that's a good thing. It seems like some people want everyone to be terrified. Again I get that a cavalier attitude is a bad thing and we want people to be careful, but we also don't want people to live in a panic state.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Mexico had 475 confirmed cases of COVID-19 - the illness caused by the virus - and six deaths by Thursday. Four of those who died had diabetes and two suffered from hypertension - both conditions that can exacerbate the illness. A seventh Mexican who died in Peru also had diabetes. While four of the victims were over age 60, the other two were 55 and 41.

“Coronavirus isn’t that lethal, except for people who have underlying health conditions that complicate it,” said Dr. Abelardo Avila, a researcher at the Salvador Zubiran National Institute for Medical Sciences and Nutrition. “Unfortunately, that’s the case for many millions of Mexicans.”

When details of the coronavirus deaths in Mexico became public, even health officials who had previously urged the population to remain calm began to acknowledge the scale of the problem the country is facing.

“Obese people, particularly morbidly obese ones, are the ones who are at biggest risk to suffer complications if they contract coronavirus,” said Ricardo Cortes, a Mexican health official.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/mexico-braces-coronavirus-amid-their-own-obesity-diabetes-epidemic-n1170361

 

Unfortunately the early reporting on this virus was that it was an older person's illness and that you didn't have much to worry about if you're younger.  I think word is getting around more now that the pre-existing conditions piece is a big factor in this. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the time you are 75 no matter how healthy your past life was you will have underlying health issues.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Yes, very small but do you want to know someone close who's part of that small percentage, or be one for that matter?

Of course not. I don't want anyone to die . I hope everyone does their part to help the vulnerable escape this virus alive.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Not sure I see a huge benefit of testing people without symptoms at this point? Everything is already on lockdown and hospitals are ramping up as best they can. Sure when a antibody test becomes available it would be quite helpful to see who has already had it.

People who know they are infected stop spreading it.  If they aren't tested, they can't know.

People are not on lockdown.  They are in walmart, target, home depot, supermarkets, on the basketball courts, and hanging out with friends.  Symptomatic people should self isolate, even before they receive a positive test.  Meanwhile, the virus silently spreads in the population through the seemingly healthy.  A lot of people think only symptomatic people can spread it.  If we only test sick people, then we will stay far behind.  To get ahead of this, we have to test much more widely.  Asian countries have proven this.  Why we continue to ignore the examples of what works is beyond me.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, winterwx21 said:

Yeah, it's really strange. And it's really strange how some people keep talking about young healthy people dying from this, as if it's a common thing. The statistics overwhelmingly show that younger people with no underlying health conditions do very well with this. The deaths in that group are very rare cases. No one is completely immune and no one should have a cavalier attitude about this (everyone needs to be thoughtful and careful), but you also don't want younger healthy people to be terrified and in a panic state over something that very likely wouldn't be a big deal for them. Stress is a very bad thing and actually weakens the immune system. Being confident about health is a good thing. If you're in truly great shape due to exercising and eating healthy, it makes you more confident about staying healthy and that's a good thing. It seems like some people want everyone to be terrified. Again I get that a cavalier attitude is a bad thing and we want people to be careful, but we also don't want people to live in a panic state.

They shouldn't panic but just be aware and use common sense, that's all I'm saying. If I get it its a small chance I succumb but I don't want to be a carrier either and pass it along to someone that's vulnerable.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Healthy young people succumbing to this virus is few and far between. The numbers are quite small.

It's not that small, especially compared to all other causes of death.  In addition, continuing to give the impression that this is only a problem for older people gives younger people the impression they don't have to take this seriously.  

COVID-19 drastically increases the risk of death for people under 40.  It also drastically increases the risk for permanent lung damage.  That is the message we need to share.  People don't care that much about their grandparents.  They care about themselves.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

They shouldn't panic but just be aware and use common sense, that's all I'm saying. If I get it its a small chance I succumb but I don't want to be a carrier either and pass it along to someone that's vulnerable.

Even if my chance of death is low as a fit 35 year old, I'd still rather not face greater risk of requiring ventilation, intubation or having so much fluid in my lungs I'm turning blue and secreting a pink bloody foam, as is apparently often the case in that 15-20% of cases requiring hospitalization. Panic no, but very conservative behavior minimizing interaction with people, yes.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, eduggs said:

People who know they are infected stop spreading it.  If they aren't tested, they can't know.

People are not on lockdown.  They are in walmart, target, home depot, supermarkets, on the basketball courts, and hanging out with friends.  Symptomatic people should self isolate, even before they receive a positive test.  Meanwhile, the virus silently spreads in the population through the seemingly healthy.  A lot of people think only symptomatic people can spread it.  If we only test sick people, then we will stay far behind.  To get ahead of this, we have to test much more widely.  Asian countries have proven this.  Why we continue to ignore the examples of what works is beyond me.

 

My neighbors had a huge party last night. 1 am they were having a bonfire with probably 25-30 people and no one was social distancing what so ever. Most young people couldn’t care less about this. Sad but true. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, eduggs said:

People who know they are infected stop spreading it.  If they aren't tested, they can't know.

People are not on lockdown.  They are in walmart, target, home depot, supermarkets, on the basketball courts, and hanging out with friends.  Symptomatic people should self isolate, even before they receive a positive test.  Meanwhile, the virus silently spreads in the population through the seemingly healthy.  A lot of people think only symptomatic people can spread it.  If we only test sick people, then we will stay far behind.  To get ahead of this, we have to test much more widely.  Asian countries have proven this.  Why we continue to ignore the examples of what works is beyond me.

 

People who know they are infected stop spreading it.  If they aren't tested, they can't know

What makes you believe these folks who are intentionally risking lives will change their tune with a positive test??

Share this post


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

enough time for what?

I'm asking for a complete flat lining...

 

We're not going to get flat lining without universal and extreme forced distancing.  Asymptomatic people with casual contact can spread COVID.  That means we will continue to see some new cases until we have a vaccine or until the virus is completely eradicated.  It can take several weeks for the virus to spread, for example, within a family from son, to father, to grandfather, including three successive incubation periods.  So a flat lining of cases is far far out in the distant future.  But a switch from exponential to linear increase in cases is definitely attainable even with our embarrassingly lax physical distancing practices.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We also know a fair amount of people get no symptoms. The more widespread testing in Iceland in particular has proven that. That means in the current situation in the US its going to be hard to truly control it with just the measures in place unless you start running out of easily accessible hosts. Maybe warmer weather helps some, although we know there is still significant spread in warmer climes (Brazil, Indonesia, Malaysia, etc. It just might slow it down a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, eduggs said:

We're not going to get flat lining without universal and extreme forced distancing.  Asymptomatic people with casual contact can spread COVID.  That means we will continue to see some new cases until we have a vaccine or until the virus is completely eradicated.  It can take several weeks for the virus to spread, for example, within a family from son, to father, to grandfather, including three successive incubation periods.  So a flat lining of cases is far far out in the distant future.  But a switch from exponential to linear increase in cases is definitely attainable even with our embarrassingly lax physical distancing practices.  

that was a type-o

should have read "I'm NOT ..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...