New York Flu vs CV

[luisHK]

Wonder if any Swedes on here. I keep seeing articles and talking about how it’s not business as usual. Plenty of things are shut down and unemployment is higher than 2008 already.

So whose telling the real story.

A new article, among the same line of others published recently. Note Sweden fares better compared to Denmark , which the journalist chose as a counter example, than compared to its other neighbors Norway and Finland when it comes to virus related deaths at least

https://www.businessinsider.com/sweden-says-leaving-businesses-open-might-be-working-2020-4?IR=T

 

[LacesOut]

Yep that is what many fail to consider. How many moooooore would have died without any lockdown. In NYC and everywhere else that have been hit hard.

And then as a result of no lockdown the hard hit areas would widened to the point of a worldwide completely out of control 10x 20x 100x pandemic.

But boooy thank god we have Chumpie on top of things.

Can you prove that without lockdown that this would be worse?
You can’t. Because you can’t know how many people have COVID. You can’t even pretend to know.

 

[southall]

Because you can’t know how many people have COVID. You can’t even pretend to know.

Italy, the whole country, has only 10% of the population with antibodies. So Lockdowns saved them for sure. And they locked down hard.
Otherwise deaths could have been around 200K in Italy, instead of just 30K for this first wave. In reality they would have been somewhere between those numbers as people weren't just going to carry on as normal, even if no lockdowns were enforced.

They are starting large scale anti body tests in NewYork this week. If I had to estimate i would say it was around 25% already infected in new york city. But we will soon have real data.

Outside New York, places like Stanford and Colorado did tests already and antibodies were found in around 2.5% of the population.

New York looks like it is the most infected place in the world at the moment.

But if Wuhan had 40,000+ deaths as some speculate. That would imply several million infections, almost herd immunity levels for a city that size.

 

[apdxyk]

In Italy, right after the lockdowns were implemented, mass chaotic movements in every possible direction were observed. So, we can only claim we know what is going on. No numbers from anywhere make any sense any more. That is tragic

 

[southall]

In Italy, right after the lockdowns were implemented, mass chaotic movements in every possible direction were observed. So, we can only claim we know what is going on. No numbers from anywhere make any sense any more. That is tragic

The antibody tests were very recent. They were hoping lots more people had anti bodies so they could start issuing Immunity Passports. But they soon gave up on that idea.

The big/important anti body tests for the US are going to be in New York this week.

 

[toc]

May be countries should give proven preventives like HCQ to it working people and then have them go to work with all precautions. Hopefully new infections will be much less and to the young only 99.5% of whom recover quickly.

It is a very tough scenario. Lockdown to protect people but very quickly these same people need money to earn to keep going on. Lockdowns cannot go forever. Singapore had efficient first round of lockdowns but in few weeks were hit with many times number in cases.

Medical research and infrastructure needs much more boost in funds. These viruses are hitting every 5 years it seems. Even the mightiest of the economic powers, the US has its knees wobbling in terms of ICUs and ventilators etc. This is what happens when 10s of billions are blown up in making the stealth bombers, 5x more stealthy to use them on rag tag armed bitches in Afghan or Syria. US should have left Iraq and Afghan 2 months after the finish of the war. They got their freedoms from psychopathic regimes and it is upto them to carry on with democratic values with some long distance support. Spending 10s of billions per month for more than a decade on foreign country soil results in parking lot ICUs and shortage of medicines. Not to mention beat up high school buildings and cracked up bridges.

 

[Turveyd]

Without lockdowns, there were no processes in place to handle the massive surge in sick and dead.

There needed to be many custom built segregated 'hospitals' in place around the country where anyone who got a bad case of the virus got sent for triage. Most left to die.

The death toll in NYC would have been 50,000+ without lockdowns vs 15,000+ with the current lockdowns (NYC is currently at over 10,000 dead. Will be more than 15,000 by the end of next month).

We are heading towards Flu x10 in NYC: 20,000 CV dead by end of this year vs 2000 flu deaths, even with lockdowns.

Without them it would be been Flu x20, x30 or more in NYC.

Bollox, that was based on worst case projection , lockdowns barely make any difference once the spread gets passed a certain point.

NYC must have a lot of o!d and sick people hence the spike.

Stop repeating what you've been told and think for yourself.

 

[southall]

Bollox, that was based on worst case projection , lockdowns barely make any difference once the spread gets passed a certain point.
NYC must have a lot of o!d and sick people hence the spike.
Stop repeating what you've been told and think for yourself.

Lock downs clearly work in flattening the curve. Whether they are worth the economic cost is another matter.

 

[SunTrader]

Can you prove that without lockdown that this would be worse?
You can’t. Because you can’t know how many people have COVID. You can’t even pretend to know.

Correct because Chumpie did not (and still has not) done much about our capability to do wide spread testing.

It ain't rocket science but more like medical science. CV-19, as well as other infectious viruses that spread through contact, are slowed by duhhhhh not having any or very minimal contact with others. Places like Montana and Idaho have very little contagion because they have very little contact with lots of others, besides their immediate families, friends and neighbors. Who themselves have very little contact outside of their immediate area. Even then it is eventually getting to some of those remote places without much of a lockdown.

The experts (in other words not us) who DO know what they are talking about say widespread testing and social distancing are the key. Duhniers know better.

 

[Turveyd]

Correct because Chumpie did not (and still has not) done much about our capability to do wide spread testing.

It ain't rocket science but more like medical science. CV-19, as well as other infectious viruses that spread through contact, are slowed by duhhhhh not having any or very minimal contact with others. Places like Montana and Idaho have very little contagion because they have very little contact with lots of others, besides their immediate families, friends and neighbors. Who themselves have very little contact outside of their immediate area. Even then it is eventually getting to some of those remote places without much of a lockdown.

The experts (in other words not us) who DO know what they are talking about say widespread testing and social distancing are the key. Duhniers know better.

Testing Testing Testing only valid early stages if your trying to stop it, but as in Singapore it'll come back, so kinda pointless.