• Current Events, Politics
    & Science

    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • CEPS Moderators: cduggles | JessFR | mal3volent
  • Bluelight HOT THREADS
  • Let's Welcome Our NEW MEMBERS!

Current Events Outbreak of new SARS-like coronavirus (Covid-19)

JessFR

Sr. Moderator: CEPS
Staff member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
7,456
We have more than enough data at this point to see the potential number of lives lost.

You only need to look at what's happening in other places and extrapolate.

The only way this doesn't end with millions dead, is if either the mortality rate is somehow a fraction of even some of the most optimistic assumptions. Or if preventative action is taken.

Relying on the former is criminally irresponsible. To use the nuke metaphor, it's like saying "well we don't know for sure that the nuke isn't a dud". It's technically true but relying on it is unthinkable.
 

Captain.Heroin

«« Lounge Pariah »» Sr. Moderator: H&R, Words, SLR
Staff member
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
84,169
Location
RIP CH ? - 2020
Or not. It could pass with less medical impact than the flu. Or, we could develop a vaccine/cure. Still too early to predict it will kill 'a hundred thousand' or more.
I don't think there will be any feasible way to innoculate 8 billion people in tandem... considering if you have viruses such as this the vaccine "doesn't work as well" (what is said about having the flu and getting the vaccine "too late" or whatever)... and what not... so if they get sick (and are naturally going to assume if not educated about the virus that "the vaccine gave them the covid" esp if already anti-vaxxers :|) and be less likely to get vaccine #2 or won't report symptoms, under report? Young-enough people may not notice mild-ish symptoms? Are we going to have to innoculate everyone twice for this to work? I am thinking this might be wiser but I'm sure there's people already thinking of it.
 

JessFR

Sr. Moderator: CEPS
Staff member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
7,456
It's true that we really don't have a good idea of just how lethal this virus really is but there's plenty of reason to think that it's significantly worst than the regular flu. And that's on top of the capacity of the health system.

Just waiting and seeing how bad it is a dangerous gamble.

What we really need more than anything else is a lot more testing. So we can establish how bad things really are. Since we can't do that yet, we need to slow it down until we can.
 

Painful One

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 18, 2017
Messages
3,118
This is the situation in China right now.
People are loosing their minds.

This virus is mutating. Strain after strain is coming.
wave after wave.

 

psy997

Bluelighter
Joined
Jul 9, 2012
Messages
2,474
Location
noitacoL
Everything we try to predict at this point remains built upon transient flimsy data. It won't be for a few months until we actually have decent data for projection. By then, it may change, or have already exploded. We simply don't know.
There's pretty good data, TLB. We basically have entire timeline to look at in China considering they've now shut the thing down. Italy is not a complete timeline, but it shows the growth that can occur and is a valuable source of info. South Korea and Singapore are great data points for what happens with adequate responses, etc.

 

mr peabody

Moderator: PM
Staff member
Joined
Aug 31, 2016
Messages
2,451
Location
Frostbite Falls, MN



The economy vs our lives? It's a false choice*

by Siva Vaidhyanathan | The Guardian | 26 Mar 2020

Calls to reopen America have disturbing intellectual roots. And the millions of deaths that could ensue would fuel a depression beyond our imagination.

Republican officials, conservative economists, unqualified pundits, and even the 73-year-old president of the United States have suggested that the short-term economic pain we have just begun inflicting on ourselves to slow the spread of coronavirus might cost too much, just to save the lives of a few million of our most vulnerable neighbors.

The University of Chicago economist Casey Mulligan, who served on President Trump’s council of economic advisers, told the New York Times that shutting down economic activity to slow the virus would be more damaging than doing nothing at all. He prefers some sort of weighing of the costs and benefits of saving lives.

“It’s a little bit like, when you discover sex can be dangerous, you don’t come out and say: there should be no more sex,” Mulligan said. “You should give people guidance on how to have sex less dangerously.”

And on Tuesday Trump announced that he wanted all US business back to normal levels of function by Easter, 12 April. “This cure is worse than the problem,” Trump said.

This is beyond immoral. It’s profoundly stupid. But this mode of thought is all too common among those who can’t see beyond their economic textbooks or their stock portfolios. And it has troubling intellectual roots.

In the late 18th century, Malthus warned that the poor would breed at a rate that would outpace the resources necessary to sustain a growing population, resulting in famine and misery. His predictions failed but were still deployed for decades to limit public amelioration of poverty.

In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, Bentham promoted the idea that public moral decisions should be made to foster the greatest good for the greatest number, forging the calculus that has pushed policymakers and economists to invoke simplified “cost-benefit analyses” to decide if a measure is worthy of consideration.

Overall, this approach is a stark example of a troubling ideology that grips too many of those with power and influence in the world. Economism is a belief system that leads people to believe that everything can be simplified to models and curves, and that it’s possible to count and maximize utility in every circumstance. What economism misses includes complexity, historical contingency and the profound, uncountable power of human emotion.

To set up a false choice between driving the economy into the ground while saving millions of lives or reviving the economy while sacrificing millions of lives ignores a core fact: the global economic depression unleashed by the deaths of millions in the United States, millions in Europe, millions in Asia, millions in India, millions in Mexico and millions in Brazil would be beyond our experience or imagination.

No one would trade with anyone for years. Trade would grind to a halt because of mourning, fear of infection, society-wide trauma and social unrest. Let’s note that despite the late and insufficient responses by North American and European leaders, those leading Mexico and Brazil have yet to take the threat seriously at all. They keep denying the gravity of our situation.

India only this week took measures that it should have taken in January prohibiting most people from leaving home and grounding flights for a month. But millions of Indians have no door to close, no place to store food, and no way to distance themselves from those infected. Corpses will soon pile up, waiting for cremation or burial, reinfecting communities weakened by this disease. No one is ready for the social, spiritual and economic devastation that is sure to come by June.

Anywhere in the world, positing this problem as a tradeoff between the economic interests of the young and the lifespan of the old is a terrible error. As the US Centers for Disease Control explains, those vulnerable to serious or fatal cases of the infection include not just the elderly, but anyone who is obese, diabetic, has high blood pressure, is HIV-positive, has undergone cancer treatment, suffers from asthma or smokes. Those factors are more common among poorer Americans as well as older Americans. And poor Americans occupy all age ranges.

Soon enough, as hospitals around the world overflow with coronavirus patients, exhausting doctors, nurses, orderlies, custodians, medical supplies, ventilators and hospital cash accounts, doctors will have to make moral choices about who lives or dies. We should not supersede their judgment based on a false choice. Economic depression will come, regardless of how many we let die. The question is how long and devastating it will be.

So this is not a matter of young vs old, or even rich vs poor (although that would be more accurate and a more classic story of political conflict in America). Even those with none of the most dangerous conditions, who are as young as 12, could succumb to this powerful virus. It’s all of us vs all of us. Or, if we choose, all of us for all of us.

*From the article here:

 
Last edited:

Captain.Heroin

«« Lounge Pariah »» Sr. Moderator: H&R, Words, SLR
Staff member
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
84,169
Location
RIP CH ? - 2020
This is the situation in China right now.
People are loosing their minds.

This virus is mutating. Strain after strain is coming.
wave after wave.

I have seen the videos of the communist party sealing people inside their buildings, they're likely starving to death, if they can't get out, :( and haven't gotten past the lack of endorphin release to compensate with the pain of starvation. People watching loved ones in families they're locked in together with die, and they all freak out at once... as well... That's got to be the worst thing I've ever fucking seen.

If it mutates quickly it might eventually get less virulent, or whatever... that is very, very fucking scary to watch.
 

Xorkoth

Administrator: PD, TR, P&S
Staff member
Joined
Feb 8, 2006
Messages
44,021
Location
In the mountains
We have more than enough data at this point to see the potential number of lives lost.

You only need to look at what's happening in other places and extrapolate.

The only way this doesn't end with millions dead, is if either the mortality rate is somehow a fraction of even some of the most optimistic assumptions. Or if preventative action is taken.

Relying on the former is criminally irresponsible. To use the nuke metaphor, it's like saying "well we don't know for sure that the nuke isn't a dud". It's technically true but relying on it is unthinkable.
I will say again, you can't say "only 1000 deaths in the US" and have that mean anything, because it takes weeks to kill usually, and the number of cases is just beginning, we keep accelerating faster and faster every day. If you look at the global stats, there are still ~350,000 open cases (not recovered or dead). Of the closed cases, 16% resulted in death. Yes these are just confirmed cases, of which an overwhelming majority required hospitalization, so the death rate in reality is much lower than 16% because most cases are not ever tested for/confirmed. There are probably deaths not reported, in America anyway, as some people will not seek medical attention due to cost. In any case, expect to see the death percentage rise as the days go on, as more people who are currently in the hospital lose their battles.

(By the way I am agreeing with you Jess, probably a different post would have been better to quote)

I would expect rural areas to be hit less hard as there is already much more built-in social distancing. But considering the percentage of the world's (and the US's) population exists in urban/suburban areas, I would expect to see what's happening in NYC happen across the country/world in the coming weeks/months.

China seems to be locking down the info escaping, they even threw out foreign media. If you look at official totals, it would seem China has slowed to a crawl but I doubt that's the case.
 

Captain.Heroin

«« Lounge Pariah »» Sr. Moderator: H&R, Words, SLR
Staff member
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
84,169
Location
RIP CH ? - 2020
Global confirmed cases are now over 500,000. Looks like Italy will surpass China and the U.S. will surpass both in a day or two.
Italy did surpass China a few days ago. I keep up w/ like nothing but that cuz LOCKDOWN sucks.

Or did China get more cases? I keep hearing "no new domestic cases" from them... but maybe that's because they're all sealed in buildings w/o medical help :(
 

Captain.Heroin

«« Lounge Pariah »» Sr. Moderator: H&R, Words, SLR
Staff member
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
84,169
Location
RIP CH ? - 2020


This is very hopeful; I know it looks "bad then worse" as age goes up, but for over 40% of 80+ year olds not to die in Italy (where I trust the #'s a bit more than China also they may be under-reporting the virulence of this or it may have gotten "worse before it got better"...) it's not like 99% fatality for the elderly, and even lower percentages for people who are "on their way", so this is a big sigh of relief for people like me with older loved ones I can't visit or see for the next foreseeable 18 months (which all of the sudden I feel like I want to do... pissed away so many covid-19 free years without visiting/calling enough, I really hate myself for it).

Italy surpassed China in deaths a few days ago, not total cases.
ohh. That makes sense, sorry. Avg. age of population, factoring in younger people have a greater recovery chance, that makes more sense now.

"Case fatality" vs "# of + deaths" is also a big important distinction here.
 

TheLoveBandit

Co-Owner
Joined
Feb 22, 2000
Messages
31,591
Location
Getting to the point ...
There's pretty good data, TLB. We basically have entire timeline to look at in China considering they've now shut the thing down. Italy is not a complete timeline, but it shows the growth that can occur and is a valuable source of info. South Korea and Singapore are great data points for what happens with adequate responses, etc.
I have zero faith in any numbers of any kind coming out of China. Zero.

South Korea, I'll believe. Europe, I'll believe, but we need to know the population effected and how they are counting 'sick' or 'dead' in relation to Wuhan. There are reports that Northern Italy, with a heavy population of Chinese immigrants (some legal, some not) for the clothing industry, arriving from just outside Wuhan, have increased the spread there. And that Italy has an older population, thereby weaker by age on average. And how many deaths are labelled Wuhan Flu when that wasn't the kicker? But I digress.

Middle Eastern data, I doubt. When will we see any African or South American data? Iran, btw, has a direct rail system with just outside Wuhan, didja know? But I digress.

American data I'll mostly believe. But any % or rates are on weak footing. We don't know how many had it before February, and went undiagnosed, or misdiagnosed, and recovered. How much of our numbers are skewed as we only test those showing symptoms, due to limited test kits?

Let's come back to the stats, and interpreting them, and how reliable they are at this point. Remember that Imperial College report that begat the panic? Yeah, seems he's changed his mind

Epidemiologist Behind Highly-Cited Coronavirus Model Admits He Was Wrong, Drastically Revises Model

Ferguson’s model projected 2.2 million dead people in the United States and 500,000 in the U.K. from COVID-19 if no action were taken to slow the virus and blunt its curve.

However, after just one day of ordered lockdowns in the U.K., Ferguson is presenting drastically downgraded estimates, revealing that far more people likely have the virus than his team figured. Now, the epidemiologist predicts, hospitals will be just fine taking on COVID-19 patients and estimates 20,000 or far fewer people will die from the virus itself or from its agitation of other ailments, as reported by New Scientist Wednesday.

Ferguson thus dropped his prediction from 500,000 dead to 20,000.
I'm not hanging my hat on his revised projections. I think he knows only slightly more now than he did before. However, it highlights the fact that .. the facts, are changing.

I wonder how much him testing positive effected his calculations? But, in the rest of the linked text, he indicates

“He now says both that the U.K. should have enough ICU beds and that the coronavirus will probably kill under 20,000 people in the U.K. — more than 1/2 of whom would have died by the end of the year in any case [because] they were so old and sick,” he wrote.

To put this number in context, there are usually thousands of deaths from the flu each year in the U.K. Here is some information from the University of Oxford on deaths ranging from 600-13,000 per year:
...
“One last point here: Ferguson gives the lockdown credit, which is *interesting* — the UK only began [its] lockdown 2 days ago, and the theory is that lockdowns take 2 weeks or more to work,” stressed Berenson. “Not surprisingly, this testimony has received no attention in the US — I found it only in UK papers. Team Apocalypse is not interested.”
 
Last edited:

S.J.P.

Administrator; Moderator: DitM
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2011
Messages
4,473
Location
Canada
Epidemiologist Behind Highly-Cited Coronavirus Model Admits He Was Wrong, Drastically Revises Model

I'm not hanging my hat on his revised projections. I think he knows only slightly more now than he did before. However, it highlights the fact that .. the facts, are changing.
Although I agree these forecasts are just (somewhat-)educated guesses, it should be mentioned the earlier numbers were based on no action being taken and the newer ones include the mitigation measures that are underway.
 
Last edited:

Captain.Heroin

«« Lounge Pariah »» Sr. Moderator: H&R, Words, SLR
Staff member
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
84,169
Location
RIP CH ? - 2020
revealing that far more people likely have the virus than his team figured.
Haha, thought this was covid. I never get the flu 2x in a year. Whatever.

I'll live I guess, I just feel bad for *needing to attain food/etc* in society which put me "out there at least enough" to expose "someone potentially". Kinda sucks.

Professor Gupta led a team of researchers at Oxford in a modeling study which suggests that the virus has been invisibly spreading for at least a month earlier than suspected, concluding that as many as half of the people in the United Kingdom have already been infected by COVID-19.
...I suspected it had been going around longer than anticipated by CDC and more people had it and that many people may be "asymptomatic carriers"... not surprised.

I'm sure I still "have it" but anyone I've been around is still, still after weeks, totally fine.
 

F.U.B.A.R.

Moderator: BDD, OD, LAVA
Staff member
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
15,902
Location
UK
It's fuckin retarded cunts like this that give drug users a bad name. The fact he was in possession of cannabis is irrelevant. But in the eyes of the daily fail, anything that makes these cunts appear even more cuntish is fair game as far as they're concerned.

Unfortunately, they've got a point with this prick.

A real local fuckin hero...

 
Last edited:

TheLoveBandit

Co-Owner
Joined
Feb 22, 2000
Messages
31,591
Location
Getting to the point ...
it should be mentioned the earlier numbers were based on no action being taken and the newer ones include the mitigation measures that are underway.
The report, which outlines impact projections with no mitigation (as mentioned by SJP) as well as various mitigation models. However, mainscream media chose the most horrific and cranked the panic knob.
 

CFC

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Mar 9, 2013
Messages
13,024
Location
The Shire
Aside from the death stats which, fair enough, is the main theme of discussion for most, it was just a really unpleasant infectious experience for me. And I say that in the context of having suffered the coxsackie b virus, hepatitis e, myocarditis & pericarditis and some other stuff in the last 10 years (ie: really painful stuff).
 

Captain.Heroin

«« Lounge Pariah »» Sr. Moderator: H&R, Words, SLR
Staff member
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
84,169
Location
RIP CH ? - 2020
still no faith in the Holy Bible guys?

11
You may eat any clean bird.
12
But these you may not eat: the eagle, the vulture, the black vulture,
13
the red kite, the black kite, any kind of falcon,
14
any kind of raven,
15
the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk,
16
the little owl, the great owl, the white owl,
17
the desert owl, the osprey, the cormorant,
18
the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat.

Ya'll need to get right with the LORT. ;)

I shat myself when someone mentioned this verse to me.
 
Top