Coronavirus: one version of our near future

goosegg-

I thought there wasn't suppose to be any political crap posted on this site and your link is nothing but a bunch of liberal garbage,

BTW....the sky really isn't falling dude.

This tweet thread is from a Harvard prof about cancelling classes and some of the "whys."

https://twitter.com/jasonfurma...365757693980677?s=09

Goosegg posted:

According to several sources I follow, the US is about 11 days behind Italy in its virus situation  - and following the Italian growth graphs exactly (so far). Here is a multi-part thread by a doctor in Italy's Lombardy region.

This is one possible path some of us will follow:

https://twitter.com/silviast9/...933818654896129?s=09

This scenario is what the US colleges, employers, state, and local governments, are desperately trying to avoid.

We are all in this together, and taking Public Health mitigation measures help the most vulnerable members of our society.

OMG could you pick a worse grouping of tweets to link to? 

among others Chris Hayes, Rachel Maddow, Jake Tapper...and Pocahontas herself. Nice work. 

I have come to the conclusion through-out life that people are just going to believe what they want to believe. Especially after reading the statements in the other thread with concerns about vaccines/autism (by the way I ain't touching that with a 10 foot stick as I refuse to be dragged down debating against Jennifer McCarthy).  But let me give you just one quick scenario as to why these flu percentages/death rates don't hold water esp in the USA. This scenario is known as a "therapeutic wait time" 

Imagine for a moment that you walk into a busy ER/Urgent Care/PCP office with a cough and cold. Hell the news after all has convinced you that the Zombie Apocalypse is happening tomorrow and you think you might be starting to turn. You may be dealing with a low-grade fever that comes and goes with some body aches. However at the time you get triage they take your VS and everything is WNL, but your temp is 99 something. Technically not considered a fever in the medical world but you still feel like crap. Generally you’re in decent shape as a person, but might have some pre-existing conditions such as HTN, Type2DM, etc... this is America after all. The point is you don't have severe COPD requiring supplemental O2, or CHF with an EF under 20, or taking anti-rejection meds for organ transplantation, or dealing with chemo/radiation for cancer, or etc.......... These are the people in the trauma bays getting immediate lifesaving interventions while everyone else is screaming in the waiting room about why he/she went ahead of me.   

***Oh yeah, I forgot to mention the 5 or so mental health patients waiting to be transferred, the 37 abdominal pain patients for which 4 have an immediate concern (and by the way good luck on figuring out which 4 they are), 16 patients with chest pain that need cardiac monitoring, 5 MVC patients (3 minor, 1 major, and 1 that needed to be pronounced on the scene), and how could I forget the GSW who was minding his business while walking to church (by the way he'll be fine, but he is going to jail for that drug-deal gone bad, he just don't know it yet)**** 

Now I ask which one of the two would you test (healthy with cough/cold or sickly with cough/cold)? Which one of the two does the medical staff truly need a diagnosis? I know the Ivory Tower answer is both, but managing resources and time is something that has to be done. If everyone got immediate testing done then you might be able to actually draw pretty accurate conclusions. However we who live in the real world realize that is feasibly impossible. Then while everyone is running around trying to get people seen as effectively as possible do you actually wait to be seen? I feel the need to tell you that many people do not wait and leave without being seen. Just as many stay inside the revolving front door after seeing the mass of people in the waiting room. They come to the conclusion that they aren't that sick, and just go home to get some chicken noodle soup. I'm not saying it's ideal, I'm just letting you know it's called a therapeutic wait time for a reason.

Let me end by giving simple answers to some simple questions:

Is any strain of flu highly contagious - YES

Is the flu dangerous esp to those who are chronically ill - YES

Is the flu dangerous every year regardless of the strain - YES

Was swine flu more dangerous than the regular flu - YES

Why was the swine flu more dangerous - slight increase in mortality rate (more noted with pediatric population if I recall correctly) and no vaccine available at initial discovery. 

What makes corona more dangerous than swine - birds migrate/fly, seems to effect elderly population worse, and no vaccine available at initial discovery. 

Could the political/social climate be to blame for the hysteria - I would rather just refer back to the 10 foot stick, but the truth is slapping me in the face. 

I'm not sure it's possible to talk about coronavirus without being "political'. Politics at its root is about how we citizens decide to live together. Slowing down the rate of covid-19 transmission by social distancing may keep our hospitals and medical system from being overwhelmed, and therefore save lives of the most vulnerable populations (caretakers, medical folks, elderly and sick). I would be disappointed if my kid's seasons got cancelled, but it is better than some of the alternatives. Quite a few of my HS students are worried about inadvertently infecting their grandparents or chronically ill parents. 

Fan2024 posted:

I'm not sure it's possible to talk about coronavirus without being "political'. Politics at its root is about how we citizens decide to live together. Slowing down the rate of covid-19 transmission by social distancing may keep our hospitals and medical system from being overwhelmed, and therefore save lives of the most vulnerable populations (caretakers, medical folks, elderly and sick). I would be disappointed if my kid's seasons got cancelled, but it is better than some of the alternatives. Quite a few of my HS students are worried about inadvertently infecting their grandparents or chronically ill parents. 

The bolded is just not a rational fear IMO. 

"The bolded is just not a rational fear IMO."

Ok, I'll bite. What is the factual basis for asserting this? Do you have clinical data on infectious rates in households backing up your assertion (which, while expressed as an opinion, is actually a conclusion which is based upon which facts)?

The data I read (from the site I use) indicates that social distancing - (which really cannot be maintained in most households), is one of the most effective Public Health measures. Clusters of positives often come from members of a household  - lending support for the theory that proximity to an infected person without protective gear is very, very bad.

So, I've given my facts. Where are yours? (I'll add that Harvard (eg) has a well developed Public Health department; that department has decades and decades of experience and data dealing with pandemic situations. If those men/women say something in the Public Health arena, I defer to their expertise.)

Give me some actual counter-facts I can analyze; dont give naked conclusions without citing actual data and expertise.

Goosegg posted:

"The bolded is just not a rational fear IMO."

Ok, I'll bite. What is the factual basis for asserting this? Do you have clinical data on infectious rates in households backing up your assertion (which, while expressed as an opinion, is actually a conclusion which is based upon which facts)?

The data I read (from the site I use) indicates that social distancing - (which really cannot be maintained in most households), is one of the most effective Public Health measures. Clusters of positives often come from members of a household  - lending support for the theory that proximity to an infected person without protective gear is very, very bad.

So, I've given my facts. Where are yours? (I'll add that Harvard (eg) has a well developed Public Health department; that department has decades and decades of experience and data dealing with pandemic situations. If those men/women say something in the Public Health arena, I defer to their expertise.)

Give me some actual counter-facts I can analyze; dont give naked conclusions without citing actual data and expertise.

Thank you for posting factual links. Thank you for sharing.  It's unbelievable that America's pandemic response team was fired and that while we have been told that everything is under control, it's not.  

Here's some data for you:

*as of March 1. On March 2, the "Total tested" figure was removed from CDC's website.

We're not testing nearly enough, simply because we don't have the tests. If you don't know who has the virus you can't manage its impact.  

Source:  https://www.worldometers.info/...us/covid-19-testing/

I keep thinking back to H1N1. I don't remember nearly this level of chaos. So I looked it up. Apparently 980 schools nationally were closed at its height, so I guess there was some chaos. But I don't remember any universities closing, or sports shutting down, even though young people were particularly affected.

The timing was different.  H1N1 first appeared in April, started spreading, by June they had 26,000 confirmed cases, and estimated there were actually 1 million cases, but it spread fairly slowly over the summer ("only" 477 deaths by early August).  They announced the vaccine in mid-September, and started vaccinating in October.  But, the second wave had already hit.  By Sept. 30 - 936 deaths, by Nov. 15 - 4000 deaths and an estimated 22 million cases, by Dec. 10 - 10,000 deaths and estimated 50 million cases. Then it started tailing off in January. In total they estimate 60 million people in the US got it.  This data mostly comes from the CDC's website.

Right now the CDC's website basically says "we aren't collecting data on this, the states are doing their own testing."  Isn't it the federal government's Center for Disease Control's job to coordinate national information to formulate a national response?

I don't know what all that means for today.  A virus starts slowly, and then it grows exponentially.  Maybe these aggressive measures will help stall it until summer slows it, and then a vaccine can come in.  I hope so.

Here's a link explaining some of the precautionary steps to take:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTYxDMYKyiI

R0 factor of well known infectious diseases ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..._reproduction_number

Goosegg posted:

"The bolded is just not a rational fear IMO."

Ok, I'll bite. What is the factual basis for asserting this? Do you have clinical data on infectious rates in households backing up your assertion (which, while expressed as an opinion, is actually a conclusion which is based upon which facts)?

 

Give me some actual counter-facts I can analyze; dont give naked conclusions without citing actual data and expertise.

Fan2024 stated they have "Quite a few of my HS students are worried about inadvertently infecting their grandparents or chronically ill parents"

Fan2024 bio says they are from New Jersey

New Jersey according to the Johns Hopkins study has 10 cases confirmed.

10 cases across the state of NJ should not lead to "quite few" random kids being concerned about infecting their grandparents.

This is not a rational fear...Goosegg you just need to take a breath and relax a little. 

Early mortality rates for coronavirus likely misleading, experts say.

While some studies peg the death rate to 3.4%, experts expect to see this rate decrease as the health care system starts finding milder cases. (I’m guessing plenty of mild cases will never see a doctor skewing the stats)

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/...ts/story?id=69477312

anotherparent posted:

I keep thinking back to H1N1. I don't remember nearly this level of chaos. So I looked it up. Apparently 980 schools nationally were closed at its height, so I guess there was some chaos. But I don't remember any universities closing, or sports shutting down, even though young people were particularly affected.

The timing was different.  H1N1 first appeared in April, started spreading, by June they had 26,000 confirmed cases, and estimated there were actually 1 million cases, but it spread fairly slowly over the summer ("only" 477 deaths by early August).  They announced the vaccine in mid-September, and started vaccinating in October.  But, the second wave had already hit.  By Sept. 30 - 936 deaths, by Nov. 15 - 4000 deaths and an estimated 22 million cases, by Dec. 10 - 10,000 deaths and estimated 50 million cases. Then it started tailing off in January. In total they estimate 60 million people in the US got it.  This data mostly comes from the CDC's website.

Right now the CDC's website basically says "we aren't collecting data on this, the states are doing their own testing."  Isn't it the federal government's Center for Disease Control's job to coordinate national information to formulate a national response?

I don't know what all that means for today.  A virus starts slowly, and then it grows exponentially.  Maybe these aggressive measures will help stall it until summer slows it, and then a vaccine can come in.  I hope so.

I think one of the factors for it seeming more chaotic day is there are many more people on social media. Information/misinformation is more widely available. 

RJM posted:

Early mortality rates for coronavirus likely misleading, experts say.

While some studies peg the death rate to 3.4%, experts expect to see this rate decrease as the health care system starts finding milder cases. (I’m guessing plenty of mild cases will never see a doctor skewing the stats)

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/...ts/story?id=69477312

^^^^ thank you RJM for some pure common sense.  Grandpa thanks you for letting him out of the locked closet that chicken little put him in 

Sorry - I do teach high school, so I can't post so much during the day. However, if there are 10 confirmed cases in NJ, there are probably somewhere between 100 - 1000 unconfirmed cases (depending  on the percentage sick enough to be tested- 15%-1%) and this grows exponentially, so each week 10× more. So next week, 100 (very ill) confirmed cases and 1000-10,000 unconfirmed cases. Next week's unconfirmed cases have already been infected (assuming 7 day incubation) and are currently walking around. 

For stats geeks and back-of-the-envelope estimators, this article is an interesting read:

https://www.theatlantic.com/id...rse-it-seems/607663/

Fan2024 posted:

However, if there are 10 confirmed cases in NJ, there are probably somewhere between 100 - 1000 unconfirmed cases (depending  on the percentage sick enough to be tested- 15%-1%) and this grows exponentially, so each week 10× more. So next week, 100 (very ill) confirmed cases and 1000-10,000 unconfirmed cases. Next week's unconfirmed cases have already been infected (assuming 7 day incubation) and are currently walking around. 

That is the problem.

ReluctantO'sFan posted:

RJM posted:

Early mortality rates for coronavirus likely misleading, experts say.

While some studies peg the death rate to 3.4%, experts expect to see this rate decrease as the health care system starts finding milder cases. (I’m guessing plenty of mild cases will never see a doctor skewing the stats)

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/...ts/story?id=69477312

^^^^ thank you RJM for some pure common sense.  Grandpa thanks you for letting him out of the locked closet that chicken little put him in 

No, this isn't common sense.  When H1N1 got going in late 2009, there were estimated to be 60,000,000 cases in the US alone.  The fatality count of 12,000 meant a death rate of "only" 0.02%.  If this spreads that far, and has a fatality rate of as low as 1%, that's 600,000 deaths.  Since right now we don't know what either number is going to be, the question is, do we err on the side of trying to prevent it, or fatalistically say, it's going to happen anyway, so what's the point in trying to cut it down?

The point is, unless they can roll out a vaccine over the summer, this is going to explode in the US eventually.  The question is, what should each person do about it right now?

obvious answer is to stay inside, lock the door, change the filter on the HVAC unit weekly and by all means don't order take out!! 

The initial stats on mortality  - especially in reasonably healthy countries with decent health care - had better be misleading.

Lets say we have 700 confirmed cases with 28 deaths. That is 4% - and by all knowledgeable sources  - is wrong because,  simply put, overall death rates are a fraction, the numerator of which is death by the virus and the denominator of which are total confirmed cases. (If you're not looking for or cant find asymptomatic cases, you cant grow the denominator.)

Some here have opined - not unreasonably imo - that the virus overall mortality rate is akin to the seasonal flu: .1%. 

To reach that .1%, the 28 deaths need a denominator of 28,000. So, is the virus particularly deadly or have we missed 27,300 confirmed cases (as of this morning?  And that dearth of data is a very big concern and which would  impact our Public Health approach. 

If you live under a hurricane warning, do you base your decision to leave or stay on where the hurricane was yesterday  (or a week before) or upon the best work of meteorologists for the next few days? Sure, the forecast can be wrong; but which method is based on science  and data and which isn't?

As for my immediate actions: we have anti-microbial wipes in the car and by the door,  we dont hug or shake hands in social settings, we wash with soap and water (face and hands) we're avoiding crowds and social distancing (no more gym for a bit 😣). No extra toilet paper or food; wife got extra medication.  My goal in this: save someone else's vulnerable elder with virtually no cost to me. (Oh, and place bids for some stocks below the current market.)

RJM posted:

Early mortality rates for coronavirus likely misleading, experts say.

While some studies peg the death rate to 3.4%, experts expect to see this rate decrease as the health care system starts finding milder cases. (I’m guessing plenty of mild cases will never see a doctor skewing the stats)

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/...ts/story?id=69477312

That may well be true.  But, there is no question but that this virus is far more deadly than your typical influenza virus, especially in the older population.  Yes, older people (and children) die from the flu every year.  But, have you EVER heard of 19 people in the same nursing facility dying from the flu in a couple weeks time?  Well?  Anybody?  

DesertDuck posted:

goosegg-

I thought there wasn't suppose to be any political crap posted on this site and your link is nothing but a bunch of liberal garbage,

BTW....the sky really isn't falling dude.

This is a ridiculous statement, sorry. Not liberal. 

MTH posted:

RJM posted:

Early mortality rates for coronavirus likely misleading, experts say.

While some studies peg the death rate to 3.4%, experts expect to see this rate decrease as the health care system starts finding milder cases. (I’m guessing plenty of mild cases will never see a doctor skewing the stats)

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/...ts/story?id=69477312

That may well be true.  But, there is no question but that this virus is far more deadly than your typical influenza virus, especially in the older population.  Yes, older people (and children) die from the flu every year.  But, have you EVER heard of 19 people in the same nursing facility dying from the flu in a couple weeks time?  Well?  Anybody?  

The medical answer is Yes. Even the normal flu could do this to the right Petri-Dish. Why do you think we limit the amount of visitors to the ICU??? Many of these ICU patients are discharged back to a nursing home, and trust me it doesn't take much to have them bounce right back. The general public would be shocked at what is being handled at nursing homes.

(also please don't read into this and think I'm slamming nursing homes because I'm not) 

I think its reasonable to assume that CoronaVirus is going under-reported.  Just the lack of test kits would make this factual.   I think I read the US is getting 4million kits next week so expect the total # of cases to explode next week.  Its likely the death count (not rate) for Corona is accurate or close - maybe a misdiagnose as flu vs corona.  Someone made the correct point earlier  - the death rate in the US is not really 4% it's likely much lower than the current stated world average (which is also likely overstated).   Italy has an older population which can make corona deadlier.  China has high levels of pollution which leads to respiratory issues and higher death rates.   I suspect China is also under-reporting the number of cases.  Same with Iran.  However, it seems Corona is more infectious and deadlier than H1N1 (61 m infected and 12,500 dead) and the flu.  SARS, on the other hand, was much deadlier (almost 10%) but not as infectious.

There is nothing political about this.... it's a dangerous virus that is disrupting our lives/economy.  whatever precautions we can take should be taken.  My wife and I are now both mandated to work from home. Our son (Sr. LHP - what its all about) is likely going to be told remote learning at our high school.  While CT canceled all winter sports events (just this am) for the remainder of the season (states only) baseball will at least begin on schedule with pitchers and catchers this weekend.  Lastly, texts from my daughter at Holy Cross seem to indicate pending remote learning there too.  So getting ready to drive to Worcester.   

It is possible that next week all four of us are home together working and learning remotely and I am going to take full advantage of that as we will be empty nesters next year (during school).   Trying to make the most of a tough situation.   What harm are 4-5 weeks of extra precaution (just don't open up and look at your 401k balances)...

A few pieces of light (perhaps).

Both China and South Korea are showing sharp, sustained drops in new confirmed cases. Both countries undertook aggressive action (hard, enforced quarantines and large scale testing). While anyone can quibble with China's credibility, SK is a different, more credible country.

But, we are about a month or more behind those countries.

While Italy's numbers are still quite incredible, over the next several days, we'll see if its aggressive measures are turning the tide.

Other countries actions and the results can be models to implement or discard.

Goosegg posted:

 (Oh, and place bids for some stocks below the current market.)

 

I knew we would find something to agree on!! 

I bought more on Friday 2/28 and bought again yesterday at 350 before closing, lets go!! 

Every year roughly 35,000 people die in automobiles in the US.  No one talks about tearing down the Interstates.

We are being conditioned that everything is a crisis.  When I was young we had snowstorms.  Now we have Blizzards of the month, decade and century.  Forget Hurricanes.  With endless predictions of the end of the world because we are going to melt, the Mayan clock, turn of the century or the election of this or that politician we become hyperbolic lemmings ready to be led over the cliff.  

A few deep breaths and a little common sense and this too shall pass.  But if I am wrong.....

The Spanish Flu was a killer 100 years ago killing 675,000 in US out of about 105MM.  A similar toll today would be roughly 2 MM dead out of 330MM today.  It killed 50MM worldwide out of 1.8 Billion.  That would mean over 150MM dead today globally.  Right  now we are at 4,300 globally - so wake me up when this is as dangerous as cars.

We had a President once that observed:  "We have nothing to fear but fear itself."  It was an inspired thought for a country on the edge.  It has never been more true than now.

luv baseball posted:

Every year roughly 35,000 people die in automobiles in the US.  No one talks about tearing down the Interstates.

In the 1970s there were 25 fatalities per 100,000 people in the US.  Then they changed the laws, and now there are 11 per 100,000.

No-one is saying that all these quarantine measures are going to stop the virus cold.  But if they cut the fatality rate in half (or more, who knows?) are you saying that is not worth it?

For those who express skepticism about the spread, I look at Italy as my proxy. What are you looking at?

I've been pondering the philosophical differences between posters here and I think one difference in thought is the individual v. societal dichotomy  (always a push-pull in our society).

This tweet thread explains why - in potential epidemics - societal needs trump normal individual privileges.

https://twitter.com/DrMichelle...409662410149888?s=09

Here is a YouTube video explaining the concept of (epidemic) disease growth in a population.

https://twitter.com/mattyglesi...554728826896389?s=09

Goosegg posted:

I've been pondering the philosophical differences between posters here and I think one difference in thought is the individual v. societal dichotomy  (always a push-pull in our society).

This tweet thread explains why - in potential epidemics - societal needs trump normal individual privileges.

https://twitter.com/DrMichelle...409662410149888?s=09

Here is a YouTube video explaining the concept of (epidemic) disease growth in a population.

https://twitter.com/mattyglesi...554728826896389?s=09

LOL you and twitter links, you really need to evaluate the approach. Most of your sources linked are liars and the remaining just foolish. Carry on. 

Apologize for being tech illiterate.

Proper tweet link from above:

https://twitter.com/DrMicheelle.../1237409662410149888

One link is to an infectious disease expert, the other is to a mathematician.

Sorry those links seem so . . . .so . . ?

As before, I'm open to all counter-information. But, ad hominem attacks seem to suffice for some. As I once learned, when you have facts, argue the facts; when you have the law, argue the law; when you have neither, just attack ad hominem.

Facts, facts, facts. Present yours.

Here's a thought problem which explains the concept of disease exponential growth: assume a lilly pad doubles each day, assume a lake is totally covered in lilly pads after 48 days. How long until the lake is 50% covered? The answer is why this situation is so risky.

Goosegg posted:

Apologize for being tech illiterate.

Proper tweet link from above:

https://twitter.com/DrMichelle.../1237409662410149888

One link is to an infectious disease expert, the other is to a mathematician.

Sorry those links seem so . . . .so . . ?

As before, I'm open to all counter-information. But, ad hominem attacks seem to suffice for some. As I once learned, when you have facts, argue the facts; when you have the law, argue the law; when you have neither, just attack ad hominem.

Facts, facts, facts. Present yours.

 

Her list seems to be pretty standard stuff, whether it be Corona, flu, or just every day dilligence. Err on the side of caution, if sick stay home, but don't rush to hospital if you have the sniffles, don't touch your face, etc.  I do this stuff all the time (admitted mild germaphobe).  But I flew out to SD and MN last 2 weeks, went to the gym last night, go out to dinner.  But cleaned my hands, took a shower when I got home, etc.

Be smart, not panic-stricken.  And for God's sake, let the kids play!!

Just saw this thread.  I should know better, but it's a slow day and I can't resist.  I am not any kind of medical professional (and I don't play one on TV or Twitter):

1) This is a baseball site, so let's remember one of the many sayings attributed (maybe apocryphally) to Yogi Berra:  "It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future."

2) Viruses aren't "liberal" or "conservative."  Neither is epidemiology.  Any forecasts/predictions right now are based on limited data, and many of them will be wrong.  That doesn't mean the predictions were made in bad faith.  (I'm talking about actual medical and public health professionals here, not media personalities or social media randos.)  I don't think it's helpful (or wise) to dismiss any informed, science-based prediction because you think it will help or hurt your favored political party.

2) Being aware/prepared is not the same as panic.  For now, I'm firmly devoted to the theory that I don't know what will happen.  COVID-19 could be very disruptive without being nearly as bad as the Spanish flu.  No, you are not going to see wagonloads of dead in the streets like during the Black Plague.  Things can still be pretty bad without reaching those levels.  Fwiw (maybe not much), from what I read the main risk is overwhelming the health care system, which is built for seasonal flu response, but not for seasonal flu plus another, simultaneous set of respiratory cases as large or possibly multiples larger.  Again, not masses of people dying in the streets,  but potentially a shortage of ventilators and other care for the primarily elderly folks who need it.

3) We have a doctor in the family who works at a Seattle hospital.  She says testing capabilities are ramping up (they can test up to ~1,000 per day now) and she is far from panicked.  That is encouraging.  The Gates Foundation apparently has thrown its considerable resources into making test kits available--also a good thing.   

DesertDuck posted:

goosegg-

I thought there wasn't suppose to be any political crap posted on this site and your link is nothing but a bunch of liberal garbage,

BTW....the sky really isn't falling dude.

Dude, if you think the topic is inappropriate for the site, then you're free to say so.  But the "liberal garbage" taunt is just hostile (and the fact you have three likes for it is disappointing).  Kudos to Goosegg  for not responding in kind--honestly, I don't know if I would have been able to be that good a HSBaseballweb citizen.  

Goosegg posted:

Apologize for being tech illiterate.

Proper tweet link from above:

https://twitter.com/DrMicheelle.../1237409662410149888

One link is to an infectious disease expert, the other is to a mathematician.

Sorry those links seem so . . . .so . . ?

As before, I'm open to all counter-information. But, ad hominem attacks seem to suffice for some. As I once learned, when you have facts, argue the facts; when you have the law, argue the law; when you have neither, just attack ad hominem.

Facts, facts, facts. Present yours.

Here's a thought problem which explains the concept of disease exponential growth: assume a lilly pad doubles each day, assume a lake is totally covered in lilly pads after 48 days. How long until the lake is 50% covered? The answer is why this situation is so risky.

 

Goose,

I actually don't think we are that far apart, and I'm not one to attack someone's character. However, truthful facts (numbers) are and will always be impossible to give, and this is why I believe the hysteria persist. I have already listed several facts, and could list quite a few more if I had the time, but I will not post erroneous numbers that do nothing more than scare the dickens out of people. I worked directly through the 09 swine in an ER environment, and let me tell you it was actually pretty bad for those of us in the trenches. However, for the general public it was just a blip on the radar. A couple schools shut down locally to deep clean everything for a week or so, and then on with life we went. The next logical thought is to ask yourself, what has changed since?

Chico Escuela posted:

Fwiw (maybe not much), from what I read the main risk is overwhelming the health care system, which is built for seasonal flu response, but not for seasonal flu plus another, simultaneous set of respiratory cases as large or possibly multiples larger.  Again, not masses of people dying in the streets,  but potentially a shortage of ventilators and other care for the primarily elderly folks who need it.

3) We have a doctor in the family who works at a Seattle hospital.  She says testing capabilities are ramping up (they can test up to ~1,000 per day now) and she is far from panicked.  That is encouraging.  The Gates Foundation apparently has thrown its considerable resources into making test kits available--also a good thing.   

A big part of the problem is that most hospitals are already ill-equipped to handle flu outbreaks, let alone something that could send exponentially more patients to the ER.  My daughter is an Emergency Medicine physician.  She works in a relatively new, state of the art Level 1 Trauma Center in one of the largest cities in the country.  Just a few weeks ago they were so flooded with flu cases that they had people on beds in hallways because they didn't have enough rooms for them.  This is not unusual during flu season.  

When you add a ton of new cases into an already taxed system, you have a recipe for disaster.  Hopefully, it will not come to that.   And the medical community is not panicking.  But, you can bet that they're developing contingency plans for what they are going to have to do, if and when the wave hits.

There are many facets to the problem.  Part of it is ER capacity.  Part of it is the number of intensive care units available.  Part of it is the number of hospital beds.  Part of it is all of the rural hospitals that have closed, which sends the more severe cases to the suburban hospitals.  Part of it is the shortage of doctors.  Any doctor that starts showing signs of corona, which they will, is not going to be able to put on a mask and continue working.  He/she is going into quarantine.  Who will replace him/her?  Bigger hospitals and teaching hospitals will be better staffed to handle a few staff losses.  But, some hospitals already have barely enough ER docs to get by. That's why you have so many retired docs doing locum tenens work.

Hopefully, all of this will settle down fairly soon.  But, if it doesn't, the system is really not prepared to handle it.