Fear and Loathing, a Rat Flu Odyssey

[rideit]

and where did you go to school ? laura went to Dartmouth and Virginia law, two of the best in the nation; and I'm pretty sure she got into both on her own merit, I do not know about rudy.

.

Stupid is as stupid does, and she says the most stupid, partisan shit.
I mean, Ben Carson is a neurosurgeon, but also a moron.
Where do you fit on this spectrum?
Oh, right, you think Trump is as sharp as a tack...never mind.

[Conundrum]

Also, I give a shit that Tri-U feels that the thread title is inappropriate.

For one, Tri-U is an upstanding guy.
For two, alienating him and other AZ folks occludes valuable and pertinent information regarding COVID.
For three, c'mon people, if we're the best nation on Earth, we can be better than that.

Me too. I may or may not personally feel that Chinese flu is a racist name for the disease. But if someone I know is Asian (or not) and they are offended by it and ask people not to use it, is it that tough to honor their request? Saying Covid is actually fewer syllables than Chinese Rat Flu.

[seano732]

https://hes32-ctp.trendmicro.com/wis...28076c88f312b4

Yep, sharp as a tack....Oh but he was just being sarcastic. The internet remains undefeated.

[Rideski]

Also, I give a shit that Tri-U feels that the thread title is inappropriate.

For one, Tri-U is an upstanding guy.
For two, alienating him and other AZ folks occludes valuable and pertinent information regarding COVID.
For three, c'mon people, if we're the best nation on Earth, we can be better than that.

To be fair, I did ask in the OP for maggot names.
That said I’ve been meaning to address it and change it for a while now.
But, I’d say it’s debatable we are the best nation on earth.
I say that with the viewpoint of someone with Native American blood.
I find it humorous people (not you) would presume I’m 100% European.
Gimme an hour I need some food.

[MultiVerse]

^ the santa clara study was the low end, on mobile so cant find it atm. will look later. either way - just curious if these studies are generally considered BS or not, they seem v different than what I've been hearing prior to recently



ya this was kinda what I was wondering. how much stock are people putting in these tests

IF the death rate is 5x conventional flu, it seems like a much different thing than the 5% fatality rate that we've been operating under the assumption of yeah?

Some of that is different definitions for the fatality rate. The case fatality rate (CFR) is the number deaths divided by the number of diagnosed cases whereas the infection fatality rate (IFR) is deaths divided by the number of diagnosed + asymptomatic + estimated undiagnosed.

Currently COVID's U.S. CFR is around 1-to-4% and the IFR 0.3-to-1%. Whereas the flu's CFR is ~0.1% and depending on the season its IFR can be an order of magnitude smaller, somewhere between 0.001-to-0.01%.

As testing improves the IFR for COVID will fall. But from what we've seen elsewhere it is still much more deadly than the flu, both because it is more deadly and because a larger percentage of the population is susceptible.

The good news is COVID is a lot less deadly than a lot people thought early on but the numbers and accounts from health care workers establish this is no ordinary flu.

[mall walker]

Some of that is different definitions for the fatality rate. The case fatality rate (CFR) is the number deaths divided by the number of diagnosed cases whereas the infection fatality rate (IFR) is deaths divided by the number of diagnosed + asymptomatic + estimated undiagnosed.

Currently COVID's U.S. CFR is something like 1-to-4% U.S. whereas CFR for the flu is 0.1% CFR. The flu's IFR is an order of magnitude smaller, somewhere between 0.001-to-0.01%.

As testing improves COVID's CFR will likely fall, but from what we've seen elsewhere it is still much more deadly than the flu both because it is more deadly and because a larger percentage of the population is susceptible.

sure sure. even if it was the same fatality rate as the flu, with the much higher infection rate, it would seem like we'd have to do something as a society to address it, I'm not saying "ha gotcha reopen everything". I am just trying to understand whether these studies are "legit" at all, and if so what the consequences of them are

[iceman]

First of all I don't really care that much about the title, but I kinda see it a weirdly historic now. When this thread was started the title was kind of goofy and almost kinda lighthearted, but it was only January and nobody knew what was coming. It kinda captured a moment in a way.

Obviously that has changed. But there are references to the title scattered through the thread, and not that anyone's gonna sit down and read it through, it seems like it ought to stay as created. An easy fix would seem to be, let's just start a new thread, maybe "Covid Phase 2" or some shit.

[skaredshtles]

<snip> it seems like a much different thing than the 5% fatality rate that we've been operating under the assumption of yeah?

I don't know about everybody else, but if we were operating under the assumption of 5% fatality, there should be WAY stricter lockdowns going on.

I thought the general consensus was that this was somewhere between 0.5% and 1%. Which is still a SHITTON of dead people in the end...

[Dhelihiker]

Cuomo yesterday said the NY fatality rate appears to be more around .5% IF THE TESTS ARE ACCURATE.

That's still 5x conventional flu death rate.

So the flu, which has a vaccine, ahh nevermind. This genie will never get put back in the bottle.

[Deebased]

sure sure. even if it was the same fatality rate as the flu, with the much higher infection rate, it would seem like we'd have to do something as a society to address it, I'm not saying "ha gotcha reopen everything". I am just trying to understand whether these studies are "legit" at all, and if so what the consequences of them are

Biggest consequence is the R0 of ~2 is low. . Second is everyone is going to get it (well at least 60-70% of everyone), keeping the population within the hospitals ability to treat is important. Third, Ventilators are all but ineffective so care limitations should no longer be tied to the vent #'s

[mall walker]

Biggest consequence is the R0 of ~2 is low. . Second is everyone is going to get it (well at least 60-70% of everyone), keeping the population within the hospitals ability to treat is important. Third, Ventilators are all but ineffective so care limitations should no longer tied to the vent #'s

yeah, this is what I was wondering. I read something suggesting the R0 was like 5+. a more prevalent / less fatal disease can still kill the same number of people, and despite my not jumping on the "being outdoors is murder" bandwagon in the other thread, I am actually not anti-science. just trying to make sense of the cognitive dissonance of the different information streams that are out there.

[bennymac]

[MultiVerse]

yeah, this is what I was wondering. I read something suggesting the R0 was like 5+. a more prevalent / less fatal disease can still kill the same number of people, and despite my not jumping on the "being outdoors is murder" bandwagon in the other thread, I am actually not anti-science. just trying to make sense of the cognitive dissonance of the different information streams that are out there.

sure sure. even if it was the same fatality rate as the flu, with the much higher infection rate, it would seem like we'd have to do something as a society to address it, I'm not saying "ha gotcha reopen everything". I am just trying to understand whether these studies are "legit" at all, and if so what the consequences of them are

If you aggregate the studies they start to bring the picture into focus. An infection fatality rate somewhere between 0.3% and 1% but with staggering differences by age group and comorbidities, an asymptotic rate somewhere around 40%, and absent control measure an R0 somewhere between 2.5 and 5.7.

R0, for example, varies depending on a host factors like climate, human behavior, and even household size. Things like the number of generations living under one roof on the one hand versus hygiene and wearing mask on the other.

Huckbucket posted a video with a scientist who called SARS2 a dumb virus compared with something like HIV. As other countries have shown this thing is beatable and so our war is not so much with an unseen enemy, but a challenge to American society.

[El Chupacabra]

Dr. Dre says don't do it.

[m2711c]

Frankie says....

[bennymac]

https://mobile.twitter.com/MedCrisis...110494208?s=20

This one is for spats, ripz, and DunningSkiKouger for all their wisdom and insight posted here.

[KQ]

Here's an idea:

How about we stop comparing this virus to anything and just go with the fact that we know very little about this highly contagious and deadly disease for which there is no cure or vaccine except that it has touched most if not all countries on earth through rapid person to person spread and therefore, at the moment, the best course of action is to isolate/protect ourselves from one another until we know more.

Furthermore... let's get this under control THEN go back and try to determine the when, where, how this all started because at this point place of origin seems secondary to controlling/stopping it.

But then.. maybe I'm crazy. I've certainly been feeling that way lately.

[m2711c]

sober rational thought will get you nowhere in this thread....

[The AD]

My bet is he opens it up Monday, May 4th with restrictions like hot water washing stations, hand sanitizer, and mandatory masks. A few of my projects were considered "essential" and have continued through the shutdown with these provisions in place. Also limited number of crews on site.

Precedent has been set with the Boeing factories opening this week.

[The AD]

I don't know about everybody else, but if we were operating under the assumption of 5% fatality, there should be WAY stricter lockdowns going on.

I thought the general consensus was that this was somewhere between 0.5% and 1%. Which is still a SHITTON of dead people in the end...

Correct. I don't remember 5% ever being mentioned unless you were going purely on a ratio of number of known infections vs. death which everyone knew was BS from day one.

[muted]

Furthermore... let's get this under control THEN go back and try to determine the when, where, how this all started because at this point place of origin seems secondary to controlling/stopping it..

But people desperately want to dream they already had it, it's comforting to think they might be in the clear.

[funkendrenchman]

^ the santa clara study was the low end, on mobile so cant find it atm. will look later. either way - just curious if these studies are generally considered BS or not, they seem v different than what I've been hearing prior to recently



ya this was kinda what I was wondering. how much stock are people putting in these tests

IF the death rate is 5x conventional flu, it seems like a much different thing than the 5% fatality rate that we've been operating under the assumption of yeah?

5x the conventional flu would be relatively good news.

[TBS]

To be fair, I did ask in the OP for maggot names.
That said I’ve been meaning to address it and change it for a while now.
But, I’d say it’s debatable we are the best nation on earth.
I say that with the viewpoint of someone with Native American blood.
I find it humorous people (not you) would presume I’m 100% European.
Gimme an hour I need some food.

I vote to name this thread "The Covfefe Flu"

[Ottime]

People figuring that it's just a matter of time before a vaccine eliminates the problem should consider that--
There are a number of viral diseases where the immune system is not able to clear the virus--HIV, Hepatitis C, varicella/zoster (chickenpox/shingles) are examples. Despite decades of work there is no vaccine for the first two. (Hepatitis C can be cleared by an antiviral drug in most cases. Zoster can be prevented from causing clinical shingles by a vaccine). The point being that the immune system is not all-powerful and that we cannot assume there will be a vaccine. Making a vaccine is easy, making one that works isn't.

Newscasters, including on PBS, interviewing scientists frequently allude to the "fact" that it will take a year to 18 months to develop a vaccine, when in truth that is the minimum time it will take, if the effort is ever successful. Lies and false assurances, assuming the public can't handle the truth harms credibility in the long run and leads to widespread backlash when the promised breakthrough fails to materialize. If we had been told the truth about masks from the beginning we wouldn't have airplanes with half the people not wearing masks. If we had told from the beginning that stay at home might need to last for months and had Congress begun providing relief to business and the unemployed from the beginning we would not be having the protests and premature reopenings now. I remember thinking when schools were closed "for two weeks" that the people in charge had to know that 2 weeks would not be nearly enough. Even now, stay at home orders are extended for short periods of time when they should be indefinite.

Cuomo, on The Daily Show the other night, made the point that he was honest about how bad the pandemic would be from the beginning so that New Yorkers would comply with stay-at-home, since he knew that the order couldn't be enforced without voluntary compliance. Now New York has declining cases while other places with less severe outbreaks have still-growing cases.

Agree.

Re: school closure. I was talking with my district and head of school well before school closures. At that level, they were all thinking they were going to stay open until the county told them to close. And even at that point, they were still convinced it would be one or two weeks before we headed back. I would say that about 1/3 of us were trying to get the idea spread that this was it until next school year. I think there was a tremendous amount of denial within the governing structure as things shut down.

Looks like there is still a bunch of denial.

[Buster Highmen]

Me too. I may or may not personally feel that Chinese flu is a racist name for the disease. But if someone I know is Asian (or not) and they are offended by it and ask people not to use it, is it that tough to honor their request? Saying Covid is actually fewer syllables than Chinese Rat Flu.

Next time I'm by the coop, I'll ping you.