COVID-19

[wiseguy04]

Yet we weren’t ever even close to overwhelming the system for the vast majority of the country yet the shutdowns continue. Go back and look. The area under the curve was always the same.

This is what the “Flatten the curve” crowd doesn’t seem to fundamentally understand. The deaths don’t go away, they’re just spread out. It was never intended to save lives from COVID-19, but to prevent non-virus related deaths due to lack of available care at overwhelmed hospitals.

Mission accomplished. With the exception of NYC, we’ve proven that hospitals can handle the load.

 

[jackjack]

I'm a guest, so I'll leave it there. If 4 sources including Trump isn't enough for you, For the 1.5% death rate. If you wish to post a link, I'll be happy to read it.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

I'm a guest, so I'll leave it there. If 4 sources including Trump isn't enough for you, For the 1.5% death rate. If you wish to post a link, I'll be happy to read it.

I’ll miss you so much

 

[UMichfly]

This is what the “Flatten the curve” crowd doesn’t seem to fundamentally understand. The deaths don’t go away, they’re just spread out. It was never intended to save lives from COVID-19, but to prevent non-virus related deaths due to lack of available care at overwhelmed hospitals.

Mission accomplished. With the exception of NYC, we’ve proven that hospitals can handle the load.

Flattening the curve applies to the number of cases, not the total number of deaths. The curve we're trying to flatten is total cases. You are correct that the area under the total cases curve remains the same regardless of flatness. That area represents total cases though, not total deaths. If we don't flatten the cases curve, we become resource limited and then deaths increase.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

Flattening the curve applies to the number of cases, not the total number of deaths. The curve we're trying to flatten is total cases. You are correct that the area under the total cases curve remains the same regardless of flatness. That area represents total cases though, not total deaths. If we don't flatten the cases curve, we become resource limited and then deaths increase.

If capacity is exceeded. Which hasn’t happened

 

[wiseguy04]

If we don't flatten the cases curve, we become resource limited and then deaths increase.

Possibly, but considering the vast majority of COVID deaths also had other underlying medical conditions, I wonder if additional medical resources would have even helped at all.

99% of Those Who Died From Virus Had Other Illness, Italy Says

More than 99% of Italy’s coronavirus fatalities were people who suffered from previous medical conditions, according to a study by the country’s national health authority.

www.bloomberg.com

 

[taxi1]

If we don't flatten the cases curve, we become resource limited and then deaths increase.

Flattening the curve also gives science a chance. We’ve learned a lot about treating patients, like prone position and using CPAPs instead of ventilators. New drugs are under rapid development. Vaccines too. Serum for therapeutics. Delaying getting sick until there is a treatment or a cure obviously lowers the total deaths.

 

[UMichfly]

If capacity is exceeded. Which hasn’t happened

Seems like a good argument for what we've done thus far no? Whether we as a society have the intestinal fortitude to keep the safe escape going until GPWS stops screaming at us is another question however.

 

[wiseguy04]

Whether we as a society have the intestinal fortitude to keep the safe escape going until GPWS stops screaming at us is another question however.

More than 30 million are unemployed, and who knows how many jobs are permanently lost from carrying this on WAY TOO LONG. It’s not sustainable anymore.

A mind-boggling 30 million people have filed for unemployment in 6 weeks. There are likely more without jobs.

"The official count of unemployment insurance claims likely drastically understates the extent of employment reductions," said economists at the EPI.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[Treetop Flyer]

Seems like a good argument for what we've done thus far no? Whether we as a society have the intestinal fortitude to keep the safe escape going until GPWS stops screaming at us is another question however.

Places that have locked down avoided overwhelming hospital capacity. So have places that didn’t. A lot of what we’ve done has hurt us without helping stop the virus

 

[HAL Pilot]

Coronavirus is so yesterday, it's killer hornets you need to worry about now...

 

[Hair Warrior]

Shutting down and promoting a quarantine in the early days was the right thing to do. This virus is no joke, and we had imperfect information about the threat (due to China lying and the WHO repeating the lies). We played it safe and took the matter seriously.

Re-opening the country now in most areas, especially rural America and cities not hit hard, is the right thing to do. It’s overdue. This economic situation is no joke, and will have long term national security implications if we don’t restart the economy. We also have the benefit of time and sample size, so information about this virus is not as murky as when the shutdown began.

There are also Constitutional questions regarding limits on the power to order people to stay home, not practice religious or speech freedoms, or not operate a business (by mere mayor or governor’s order, rather than a law passed by a legislature) that have not yet been fully addressed.

 

[UMichfly]

Places that have locked down avoided overwhelming hospital capacity. So have places that didn’t. A lot of what we’ve done has hurt us without helping stop the virus

Care to provide data backing this up? I have some that disagrees.

Current Michigan Hospital COVID Snapshot. We are past peak cases. Beaumont hospital shows 449 CV19 cases, 226 of whom are in the ICU. That equates to 70% capacity (and infers a total bed capacity of 641, 323 of which are ICU).

Beaumont CV19 Tracker. Beaumont's data show a peak of 1,101 confirmed inpatient COVID-19 on April 7th. That is 172% of capacity. Seems pretty fucking overwhelming. They are just one more many hospital systems here that have been farming ambulatory cases out into areas less impacted.

This is with a restrictive lockdown. I have no interest in seeing what it would look like without that lockdown. Contrary to certain campaign messaging, blind reopening just buys us way way more economic pain several months down the road coupled with a hugely and unnecessarily inflated body count.

 

[Spekkio]

Well they say they have 23k cases and 2,800 deaths, So that's a death rate of 12%.
US has 1.2m cases and 60k deaths. So a death rate of 5%
Australia has a death rate of 1.4% and they say our numbers can be trusted, So I would call 1% conservative. What do you think the death rate per case is?

cfr =/= ifr

 

[Treetop Flyer]

Care to provide data backing this up? I have some that disagrees.

Current Michigan Hospital COVID Snapshot. We are past peak cases. Beaumont hospital shows 449 CV19 cases, 226 of whom are in the ICU. That equates to 70% capacity (and infers a total bed capacity of 641, 323 of which are ICU).

Beaumont CV19 Tracker. Beaumont's data show a peak of 1,101 confirmed inpatient COVID-19 on April 7th. That is 172% of capacity. Seems pretty fucking overwhelming. They are just one more many hospital systems here that have been farming ambulatory cases out into areas less impacted.

This is with a restrictive lockdown. I have no interest in seeing what it would look like without that lockdown. Contrary to certain campaign messaging, blind reopening just buys us way way more economic pain several months down the road coupled with a hugely and unnecessarily inflated body count.

Michigan (likely Detroit and not much else) and Beaumont? Compelling.