Jump to content

Now is a Great Time to Self Quarantine


GeeBee

Recommended Posts

The ability to travel is important to keeping the world running...

Even at our reduced pace...

NJ has produced a list of what are essential businesses... and who can keep the world running...

Some planes keep families together... across large distances...

 

https://covid19.nj.gov/faqs/nj-information/general-public/governor-murphy-announces-statewide-stay-at-home-order-closure-of-all-non-essential-retail-businesses

 

Work if need to...

Maintain social distance...

Use gloves...

Use non-contact electronic payment when able... 

Look forward to when this is all behind us.... :)

Best regards,

-a-

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kortopates said:

I believe we just have to look at Italy to see this is not at all the same as the our annual flu season.  For starters we have flu vaccines such that most of us don't get the flu every year. We won't have similar protection for COVID-19 for possibly up to another 18 months. This morning on the news they were reporting the number of deaths from COVID-19 in Italy has far surpassed their ability to dispose of the bodies. Far beyond what they see for a normal year from flu deaths. Check this page out for some quick chilling statistics: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/   

Italy may not be a good comparison for a few reasons.  First, Italy has been a rather popular destination for Chinese tourists; i.e., they may have had a disproportionate number of visitors with the infection versus other countries.  Second, Italy has demographically aged (susceptible) population.  Third, they have had a very large number of 'ordinary' flu deaths for at least the past five years.  Note the 68,000 flu deaths in the three year study period; not sure where you are getting, "Far beyond what they see for a normal year from flu deaths."

 Here's an excerpt from the journal study (https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(19)30328-5/fulltext):

Results

We estimated excess deaths of 7,027, 20,259, 15,801 and 24,981 attributable to influenza epidemics in the 2013/14, 2014/15, 2015/16 and 2016/17, respectively, using the Goldstein index. The average annual mortality excess rate per 100,000 ranged from 11.6 to 41.2 with most of the influenza-associated deaths per year registered among the elderly. However children less than 5 years old also reported a relevant influenza attributable excess death rate in the 2014/15 and 2016/17 seasons (1.05/100,000 and 1.54/100,000 respectively).
 

Conclusions

Over 68,000 deaths were attributable to influenza epidemics in the study period. The observed excess of deaths is not completely unexpected, given the high number of fragile very old subjects living in Italy. In conclusion, the unpredictability of the influenza virus continues to present a major challenge to health professionals and policy makers.
 
Don't misunderstand me. I am NOT saying we should do nothing.  I am saying we should look closely at whether we are overreacting and causing unrecoverable damage to our economy.
I think we should be paying attention to the points raised by the likes of the Stanford professor I quoted earlier.
It troubles me that it has already become politically incorrect to even question this. (Take a look at aviatoreb's response to my post)
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

I think we should be paying attention to the points raised by the likes of the Stanford professor I quoted earlier.

It troubles me that it has already become politically incorrect to even question this. (Take a look at aviatoreb's response to my post)

You said .5% mortality rate.  So from there I did the arithmetic.  Arithmetic is not partisan.  I will be very happy if you can correct my arithmetic and find an error.  As I computed, the .5% mortality rate that you mentioned yourself leads to 1 million dead in the usa.  I will be very please to use a different mortality rate or a different spread rate with good evidence.  327 million is the population. You also mentioned 1.5% and 2.5% that are 3 and 5 times greater than 0.5 respectively and the obvious arithmetic follows from there lead to 3 to 5 times greater total deaths than would be 1 million.  Again if there is a blind partisan error or a simpler error of some other kind please do correct me and that math.  If there is an error it is with the assumptions - either .5% or 70% and either could well be wrong.  
 

we can’t just reject the answer if we don’t like it / multiplication is arithmetic.  Challenge the assumptions / 70%.  .5%. 327,000,000.  Give me a different mortality rate and we can multiply that out.

Edited by aviatoreb
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, aviatoreb said:

You said .5% mortality rate.  So from there I did the arithmetic.  Arithmetic is not partisan.  I will be very happy if you can correct my arithmetic and find an error.  As I computed, .5% mortality leads to 1 million dead in the usa.  I will be very please to use a different mortality rate or a different spread rate with good evidence.  327 million is the population.

You quoted my post and I don't see where I said any SPECIFIC percentage.  But, fine, let's use 0.5%.  Where did you pull the 70% infection rate from?  Bear in mind that the 1918 flu pandemic, with pretty much ZERO mitigation efforts, infected only 30% of the world's population.

Yet again, I am NOT saying to do nothing.  The present draconian policy will, no doubt, reduce the total number dead.  But, at what cost to society?  It's harsh, and no one likes to admit it, but there is a limit to how much a life is worth.  Is it worth ruining the economy for the next 5 to 10 years, or more, to save 1,000 lives; 10,000 lives; a million?  This cost/risk analysis should not be ignored.  And, I think it is.  We are trading our liberties and economic future based on poor data, with the emotional argument that we need to do 'everything we can' to save lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

You quoted my post and I don't see where I said any SPECIFIC percentage.  But, fine, let's use 0.5%.  Where did you pull the 70% infection rate from?  Bear in mind that the 1918 flu pandemic, with pretty much ZERO mitigation efforts, infected only 30% of the world's population.

Yet again, I am NOT saying to do nothing.  The present draconian policy will, no doubt, reduce the total number dead.  But, at what cost to society?  It's harsh, and no one likes to admit it, but there is a limit to how much a life is worth.  Is it worth ruining the economy for the next 5 to 10 years, or more, to save 1,000 lives; 10,000 lives; a million?  This cost/risk analysis should not be ignored.  And, I think it is.  We are trading our liberties and economic future based on poor data, with the emotional argument that we need to do 'everything we can' to save lives.

You said several tenths of a percent and then later noted that some even said 1.5% and some 2.5%.  You tell me what to use.
 

i have read 70% but yes it is one of the outcomes of modeling so that number is not set in stone.  70% or 30% or something else you tell me what to use.

the population is 327,000,000 or you tell me what to use.

At 30% and .5% I get multiplication 495,000 dead. In 1918 there was no air travel.

but I am hearing numbers multiply out to 50,000 or you mentioned 68,000 by citing it’s comparable to the standard flu.  So please associate to the 3 numbers .05, .7 or 327,000,000 need to be adjusted and how to make 68,000.  Something must be very faulty in my computation  since I keep coming up with numbers 20 times higher and sometimes 100 times higher.

after that multiplication using the numbers whatever they might be only after comes a politics discussion if you want to talk about liberties.  I am trying to stay out of that part - imperfectly I know.  But at the stage of arithmetic it’s not a liberties discussion.  It’s counting.  My point is if you want a liberties discussion or anyway a values discussion, then great please base it on numbers that associate with either this virus and not it’s like the flu skipping the arithmetic and asserting a bottom line number that seems more favorable.

Edited by aviatoreb
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  It's harsh, and no one likes to admit it, but there is a limit to how much a life is worth.  Is it worth ruining the economy for the next 5 to 10 years, or more, to save 1,000 lives; 10,000 lives; a million?  This cost/risk analysis should not be ignored.  And, I think it is.  We are trading our liberties and economic future based on poor data, with the emotional argument that we need to do 'everything we can' to save lives.


This is easy to say when it isn’t one’s OWN life, or the life of a loved one, at stake. And we are VERY far from doing “everything we can,” many places are business as usual, from the videos we’ve seen of partying spring breakers and the like.

Hospitals turning people away because of a lack of ICU beds won’t just impact COVID victims, it will affect ALL people who need that bed. We have fewer beds per person than Italy, much poorer health insurance, and much of the population is underserved by hospitals at all.

People dying in large numbers because they can’t get care while millions more remain (justifiably) sheltered because they don’t want to risk a dean sentence from casual contact with a fact denier...that might have a GDP impact too.

Fortunately each state will be able to make up its own mind, and we shall see whether science prevails...or whether the “suck it up cupcake” group powers through and saves the economy, as they seem intent on doing.

We shall all see soon enough.
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We do not know the mortality rate here, in Italy or anywhere else. We do not know haw many have and or had the virus.  That is not going to change...  Being skeptical of the numbers reported or how they are being reported does not equal not taking the virus seriously.   Media headlines are written to generate clicks. Conspiracy bloggers and youtubers often do the same.  Italy has some unique issues. It has the second oldest population of any country in the world. Northern Italy has also had a regular stream of immigrants both legal and illegal from Wuhan since the nineties.  The death rate in Italy in 2019 was 1.06%.  A meaningful number would be to remove the noise of COVID19 mortality rates and see how Italy is tracking this year.  I certainly expect the rate to be  higher. I do not expect it to meet the hysteria.   Also worth noting headlines suggest that cases are growing by X number.  A truer statement is that the number of positive test results are growing by X number.  The number of actual new cases could be more or less.   Ask your self why none of those articles include the percentage of negative test results?    

Seasonal flu is deadly for older folks and those with comorbidities. Covid19 is indeed more deadly than the seasonal flu. Exactly how much more is yet to be seen.  However, the response to COVID19 far outpaces the response to anything we've ever seen.  

If you want the best available data, the link below is the most comprehensive that I have seen.  Note that each state gets a data grade and that they are all over the place.  Well organized and easy to read. Raw data available in .csv format. No clickbait.

https://covidtracking.com/data/

Edited by Shadrach
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, MikeOH said:

You quoted my post and I don't see where I said any SPECIFIC percentage.  But, fine, let's use 0.5%.  Where did you pull the 70% infection rate from?  Bear in mind that the 1918 flu pandemic, with pretty much ZERO mitigation efforts, infected only 30% of the world's population.

Yet again, I am NOT saying to do nothing.  The present draconian policy will, no doubt, reduce the total number dead.  But, at what cost to society?  It's harsh, and no one likes to admit it, but there is a limit to how much a life is worth.  Is it worth ruining the economy for the next 5 to 10 years, or more, to save 1,000 lives; 10,000 lives; a million?  This cost/risk analysis should not be ignored.  And, I think it is.  We are trading our liberties and economic future based on poor data, with the emotional argument that we need to do 'everything we can' to save lives.

The key difference with the 1918 flu was that (as is usually the case) a significant fraction of the population is already immunized by previous seasons' influenza infections.  This is part of what slows down the spread of the flu season over 6 months and why it tends not to saturate the health care system--the rate of infection is actually slowed down by previously exposures and vaccinated people.  The same factor applies to typical virus infections, both seasonal and endemic.

Note the name of COVID-19 is "novel" coronavirus.  This is called out specifically because it's new and different enough from previous coronavirus that NOBODY has immunity to it.  This means that the rate of transmission will be logarithmic for significantly longer (or for a significantly larger number of people), and will only be slowed by either a significant portion of the population getting infected, or social/environmental measures.

47 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

We do not know the mortality rate here, in Italy or anywhere else. We do not know haw many have and or had the virus.  That is not going to change...  Being skeptical of the numbers reported or how they are being reported does not equal not taking the virus seriously.   Media headlines are written to generate clicks. Conspiracy bloggers and youtubers often do the same.  Italy has some unique issues. It has the second oldest population of any country in the world. Northern Italy has also had a regular stream of immigrants both legal and illegal from Wuhan since the nineties.  The death rate in Italy in 2019 was 1.06%.  A meaningful number would be to remove the noise of COVID19 mortality rates and see how Italy is tracking this year.  I certainly expect the rate to be  higher. I do not expect it to meet the hysteria.   Also worth noting headlines suggest that cases are growing by X number.  A truer statement is that the number of positive test results are growing by X number.  The number of actual new cases could be more or less.   Ask your self why none of those articles include the percentage of negative test results?    

There are some anecdotes coming out from health care in Italy suggesting that the coronavirus has been for far longer there than thought, based on anecdotes of more frequent SARS cases throughout the winter that were not documented because nobody had heard of coronavirus yet.  Not clear how reliable that information is, but it would be a parsimonious explanation as to the situation there--it may simply have been happening for 3-6 weeks longer than in other places, which would account for an order of magnitude in terms of problem size.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can debate what the infection rate is since we do not know the true number, for now, or any time soon.  We can debate the mortality rate per infection since there too it is hard to stabilize our understanding of the data due to many factors.

Another view is the death rate and that is easy to see.  Stated in bulk numbers, the USA had 46 deaths on Mar 21, 111 on Mar 22 and 140 on Mar 23.  From that and/or reaching back I see a doubling rate on the order of double that number every 2 days.  1.4^7~10.  I see this may be >10,000 deaths per day in the usa in 2 weeks and 100,000 in the usa in 3 weeks if this were to continue at this pace.  I pray it will not.  It is difficult to argue that deaths are hearsay, or look the other way.

Edited by aviatoreb
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jaylw314 said:

The key difference with the 1918 flu was that (as is usually the case) a significant fraction of the population is already immunized by previous seasons' influenza infections.  This is part of what slows down the spread of the flu season over 6 months and why it tends not to saturate the health care system--the rate of infection is actually slowed down by previously exposures and vaccinated people.  The same factor applies to typical virus infections, both seasonal and endemic.

Note the name of COVID-19 is "novel" coronavirus.  This is called out specifically because it's new and different enough from previous coronavirus that NOBODY has immunity to it.  This means that the rate of transmission will be logarithmic for significantly longer (or for a significantly larger number of people), and will only be slowed by either a significant portion of the population getting infected, or social/environmental measures.

There are some anecdotes coming out from health care in Italy suggesting that the coronavirus has been for far longer there than thought, based on anecdotes of more frequent SARS cases throughout the winter that were not documented because nobody had heard of coronavirus yet.  Not clear how reliable that information is, but it would be a parsimonious explanation as to the situation there--it may simply have been happening for 3-6 weeks longer than in other places, which would account for an order of magnitude in terms of problem size.

I love and have close ties to Italy.  The problem is that I could believe or disbelieve almost any information coming out of the country.  Corruption is the rule not the exception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shadrach said:

We do not know the mortality rate here, in Italy or anywhere else. We do not know haw many have and or had the virus.  That is not going to change...  Being skeptical of the numbers reported or how they are being reported does not equal not taking the virus seriously.   Media headlines are written to generate clicks. Conspiracy bloggers and youtubers often do the same.  Italy has some unique issues. It has the second oldest population of any country in the world. Northern Italy has also had a regular stream of immigrants both legal and illegal from Wuhan since the nineties.  The death rate in Italy in 2019 was 1.06%.  A meaningful number would be to remove the noise of COVID19 mortality rates and see how Italy is tracking this year.  I certainly expect the rate to be  higher. I do not expect it to meet the hysteria.   Also worth noting headlines suggest that cases are growing by X number.  A truer statement is that the number of positive test results are growing by X number.  The number of actual new cases could be more or less.   Ask your self why none of those articles include the percentage of negative test results?    

Seasonal flu is deadly for older folks and those with comorbidities. Covid19 is indeed more significantly deadly than the seasonal flu. Exactly how much more is yet to be seen.  However, the response to COVID19 far outpaces the response to anything we've ever seen.  

If you want the best available data, the link below is the most comprehensive that I have seen.  Note that each state gets a data grade and that they are all over the place.  Well organized and easy to read. Raw data available in .csv format. No clickbait.

https://covidtracking.com/data/

Thanks for trying to bring sanity to the discussion. But like the talking heads, the doom-and-gloom crowd is emotionally overwhelmed and not listening to anyone or anything. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

I love and have close ties to Italy.  The problem is that I could believe or disbelieve almost any information coming out of the country.  Corruption is the rule not the exception.

Perhaps, but there's no shortage in supply of nihilism these days.  Plus, the theory would at least satisfy Occam's Razor and medically makes the most sense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/22/2020 at 1:34 AM, MikeOH said:

And, all of this is perfectly applicable to the "normal" flu which, EVERY year, kills 20,000 to 40,000 people in the US alone. They are just as dead as the 200 who have succumbed to COVID-19.

Yet, society doesn't bat an eye, nor impose the draconian sanctions we are now experiencing.  As more data is coming in, the R0 number is dropping from the crazy high original estimates...it may well end up close to "normal" flu's 1.3...I've read recent estimates of COVID-19 may end up between 1.5 and 2.5; still a pretty wide range.  Other data is showing the fatality rate may be in the few tenths of a percent range for ideal age groups.  Again, not that different from typical flu.  Older folks don't fare well with flu, or many others, illnesses that younger people tend to weather.

 Is the new normal going to be lockdowns anytime a new strain shows up, simply because we don't yet understand it?  There MUST be a risk/cost analysis done.  Clearly that didn't happen this time.

Conspicuously missing from your assumption is that while flu does kill 40,000 Americans per year, if left to spread on its own we could see well over a million Americans dead in the first year with COVID, not 40,000.  Also add to the mix what we are seeing going in Italian and Spanish hospitals. We may very well see that even if the curve is flattened, and Americans will be horrified. You may very well find your scenario play out very soon as the president is starting to backpedal on the scientists approach, suggesting that we should come out of hibernation in a week. And reports are that Fauci is on the outs with the administration because he won't clamp down on leveling with the American people and constantly correcting the president.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/15/2020 at 9:26 AM, FlyingScot said:

My beauty is torn apart awaiting a muffler rebuild in annual :( but my hangar will sure be clean.

It was in the shop for 5 weeks, and the moment It came out of annual...our governor issued a stay-at-home order. Under blue skies. AAARGH.

Stay safe and healthy everyone...we will get through this - my best to all of you, my Mooney friends. - Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, FlyingScot said:

It was in the shop for 5 weeks, and the moment It came out of annual...our governor issued a stay-at-home order. Under blue skies. AAARGH.

Stay safe and healthy everyone...we will get through this - my best to all of you, my Mooney friends. - Bob

I dropped mine off for its annual last Saturday morning. It was a beautiful, 86 degree day with nice puffy white clouds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, flyboy0681 said:

I dropped mine off for its annual last Saturday morning. It was a beautiful, 86 degree day with nice puffy white clouds.

I tried to fly on Sunday on a gorgeous clear blue day, with my oldest son who is home for the duration from Duke.  Well...I didn't pass the preflight - I had a flat tire waiting for me in the hangar!  But as it turns out - one can still order a tire and tube which will arrive this week.  Just doing my part to stimulate the economy, one flat tire at a time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, aviatoreb said:

I tried to fly on Sunday on a gorgeous clear blue day, with my oldest son who is home for the duration from Duke.  Well...I didn't pass the preflight - I had a flat tire waiting for me in the hangar!  But as it turns out - one can still order a tire and tube which will arrive this week.  Just doing my part to stimulate the economy, one flat tire at a time.

I dropped her off with - two tires and two tubes loaded in the back.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you love great music..........and you're part of the flood-the-internet gang............here's a self-quarantine option for you .................it's the Kat and Dave Show on Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvsGALB9MYI
 
For the past several days, the self-quarantined David Foster [music genius/legend] and his wife, the incredible Katharine McPhee put on a 20 minute musical show from their Los Angeles home.  They are bored staying home so they create a daily casual in-home musical review.  It's hoot!!
Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.