Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,281
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Jvinch
    Newest Member
    Jvinch
    Joined

Upstate NY Banter and General Discussion..


 Share

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, MJO812 said:

Have you ever been to the state fair ?

We usually try to make it there once every year just to walk around, get something to eat, check out the sand and butter sculptures, etc.  Now that we’re both retired we can go during the week when crowds aren’t as bad.  The older I get the more I hate putting up with large crowds

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/04/28/health/coronavirus-antibody-tests-terrible/index.htm

 

i also spoke to my father in law who is in charge of the largest hospital in Wyoming and he said he’s been told the antibody test are only 60 percent accurate at best with lots of false positives. So all those numbers that make it seem like there’s 10-12x the number of positives can go out the window. Is there way more positive cases then we have confirmed by positive test? Absolutley, but not to the extent the antibody test are making it seem. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WesterlyWx said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/04/28/health/coronavirus-antibody-tests-terrible/index.htm

 

i also spoke to my father in law who is in charge of the largest hospital in Wyoming and he said he’s been told the antibody test are only 60 percent accurate at best with lots of false positives. So all those numbers that make it seem like there’s 10-12x the number of positives can go out the window. Is there way more positive cases then we have confirmed by positive test? Absolutley, but not to the extent the antibody test are making it seem. 

It would be nice to know what test NYS used. The NY state study is much bigger than anything else we've seen so it should be more accurate even if there is some false positives. You're going to see more problems with the smaller percentages and the smaller test populations. The regional percentages in WNY, CNY, and northern NY would be much more suspect than NYC and NY as a whole because the smaller percentages are going to more affected by false positives. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WesterlyWx said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/04/28/health/coronavirus-antibody-tests-terrible/index.htm

 

i also spoke to my father in law who is in charge of the largest hospital in Wyoming and he said he’s been told the antibody test are only 60 percent accurate at best with lots of false positives. So all those numbers that make it seem like there’s 10-12x the number of positives can go out the window. Is there way more positive cases then we have confirmed by positive test? Absolutley, but not to the extent the antibody test are making it seem. 

So the antibody tests do not work, the virus has mutated into 30 different strains, so a vaccine won't work. Coronavirus has been around forever, Covid-19 is just a mutated version of the common cold. Herd immunity might be the only solution. We cannot lock down the country forever. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, BuffaloWeather said:

So the antibody tests do not work, the virus has mutated into 30 different strains, so a vaccine won't work. Coronavirus has been around forever, Covid-19 is just a mutated version of the common cold. Herd immunity might be the only solution. We cannot lock down the country forever. 

You are correct that it is a mutated version of the common cold however that doesn’t mean anything. The common cold doesn’t have a death rate of 0.6-1.0%. The common cold doesn’t kill 60,000-100,000 Americans in 2 months time with strict social distancing. I agree we can’t be on lockdown forever but to say this is the same as the common cold is ignorant. We also know to reach herd immunity over 1,000,000 people would die. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WesterlyWx said:

You are correct that it is a mutated version of the common cold however that doesn’t mean anything. The common cold doesn’t have a death rate of 0.6-1.0%. The common cold doesn’t kill 60,000-100,000 Americans in 2 months time with strict social distancing. I agree we can’t be on lockdown forever but to say this is the same as the common cold is ignorant. 

Coronavirus death rate is not that high, and I did not compare it to the common cold in how bad this is. Obviously this is far worse than the common cold. I compared it in a way to say that the "coronavirus" is constantly mutating. So we are in an endless battle with it. The common cold has never been able to have a vaccine for it, and thus as a result it's highly unlikely we get a successful one for Covid-19. So herd immunity will likely be the only solution. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BuffaloWeather said:

Coronavirus death rate is not that high, and I did not compare it to the common cold in how bad this is. I compared it to it in a way to say that the "coronavirus" is constantly mutating. So we are in an endless battle with it. The common cold has never been able to have a vaccine for it, and thus as a result it's highly unlikely we get a successful one for Covid-19. 

Yes the death rate is that high. Even if you use the NYS antibody numbers for how many people may already be affected by this the death rate is still 0.8 %. Right now the death rate is like 7-8% which is obviously way to high but the 0.8% death rate is 8 times the death rate of the flu and that’s with strict social distancing in place. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BuffaloWeather said:

Coronavirus death rate is not that high, and I did not compare it to the common cold in how bad this is. I compared it to it in a way to say that the "coronavirus" is constantly mutating. So we are in an endless battle with it. The common cold has never been able to have a vaccine for it, and thus as a result it's highly unlikely we get a successful one for Covid-19. 

The common cold doesn’t have a vaccine because it isn’t that severe compared to even the flu let alone Covid-19. There’s also not a vaccine because with its low severity the OTC drug industry makes billions of dollars every year off people who just have a cold. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BuffaloWeather said:

Coronavirus death rate is not that high, and I did not compare it to the common cold in how bad this is. Obviously this is far worse than the common cold. I compared it in a way to say that the "coronavirus" is constantly mutating. So we are in an endless battle with it. The common cold has never been able to have a vaccine for it, and thus as a result it's highly unlikely we get a successful one for Covid-19. So herd immunity will likely be the only solution. 

Im guessing they haven't bothered creating a vaccine for common coronaviruses because they don't kill people...

You're sounding really ignorant here, man. There's a single study that isn't peer reviewed that suggests strands with varying virulence. 

Herd immunity isn't a solution; it's a result. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, WesterlyWx said:

The common cold doesn’t have a vaccine because it isn’t that severe compared to even the flu let alone Covid-19. There’s also not a vaccine because with its low severity the OTC drug industry makes billions of dollars every year off people who just have a cold. 

Wrong.

A vaccine to prevent the common cold has been difficult to make, primarily because there are more than 200 different varieties of viruses that can cause colds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, WesterlyWx said:

Yes the death rate is that high. Even if you use the NYS antibody numbers for how many people may already be affected by this the death rate is still 0.8 %. Right now the death rate is like 7-8% which is obviously way to high but the 0.8% death rate is 8 times the death rate of the flu and that’s with strict social distancing in place. 

It's actually 12 to 14 times higher...

We can't compare asymptomatic infections of COVID to symptomatic infections of influenza. The IFR of the flu is probably closer to 0.06-0.07%. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OSUmetstud said:

Im guessing they haven't bothered creating a vaccine for common coronaviruses because they don't kill people...

You're sounding really ignorant here, man. There's a single study that isn't peer reviewed that suggests strands with varying virulence. 

Herd immunity isn't a solution; it's a result. 

As I stated previously, a bad flu season kills up to 640,000 people annually. This virus will likely kill a little bit more than that oh a yearly basis. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BuffaloWeather said:

Wrong.

A vaccine to prevent the common cold has been difficult to make, primarily because there are more than 200 different varieties of viruses that can cause colds.

Sure is that part of the story, I believe it. But do you think they would spend billions of dollars to come up with a vaccine for an “illness” of common colds that are relatively benign compared to other illnesses when they can make billions of dollars by selling OTC medications to combat the symptoms of an illness that isn’t deadly what so ever. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BuffaloWeather said:

As I stated previously, a bad flu season kills up to 640,000 people annually. This virus will likely kill a little bit more than that oh a yearly basis. 

If you have 220,000 deaths in 3 months worldwide which is also severely under counted considering there’s thousands of people not counted each day globally because they didn’t get tested or didn’t go into a hospital we will have 1,000,000 plus deaths in a year with extreme social distancing, face coverings, other precautions. This is far deadlier than a common cold or even the flu and I’m so tired of people comparing it to it. The data has shown time and time again that it’s like comparing apples to oranges but yet this argument gets brought up endlessly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, WesterlyWx said:

Yes the death rate is that high. Even if you use the NYS antibody numbers for how many people may already be affected by this the death rate is still 0.8 %. Right now the death rate is like 7-8% which is obviously way to high but the 0.8% death rate is 8 times the death rate of the flu and that’s with strict social distancing in place. 

The rate will stay at .6-.8% regardless of social distancing unless the hospital systems become overwhelmed. Only the infection rate changes when social distancing is relaxed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, OSUmetstud said:

You kill like 1-2.5 million Americans with a "herd immunity solution." Insane that anyone would sign off for that willingly. 

Herd immunity could be accomplished by putting america back to work and isolating those at risk with underlying conditions. You could purposely inoculate healthy young low risk volunteers to speed the process, once a case study has been completed to determine that recovering gives you immunity.

The alternative is that we stay shutdown until we have a vaccine that there is no guarantee of coming. The best years of the flu vaccine only are about 60% effective. So do we stay shutdown for the next year to save 1M people aged 70 and up? That doesn't make sense to me.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Luke_Mages said:

The rate will stay at .6-.8% regardless of social distancing unless the hospital systems become overwhelmed. Only the infection rate changes when social distancing is relaxed.

Okay but with more people contracting the virus with a lax of social distancing more people contract the virus and thus more people die. A .6-.8% death rate is insane for a virus that is as highly transmitable as this. This isn’t MERS it SARS that had a much higher death rate but was much less infectious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Luke_Mages said:

Herd immunity could be accomplished by putting america back to work and isolating those at risk with underlying conditions. You could purposely inoculate healthy young low risk volunteers to speed the process, once a case study has been completed to determine that recovering gives you immunity.

The alternative is that we stay shutdown until we have a vaccine that there is no guarantee of coming. The best years of the flu vaccine only are about 60% effective. So do we stay shutdown for the next year to save 1M people aged 70 and up? That doesn't make sense to me.

That is key I think to reopening everything. There’s still not even evidence that if you have an antibody you are safe from contracting/spreading it again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Rjay locked and unlocked this topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...