re: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) ***W.H.O. DECLARES A GLOBAL PANDEMIC***

No it’s not

Same VA. Same.

quote:

---

1) Because the virus will get spread to the elderly by younger people.

2) It will overload the healthcare system if everyone gets sick at once. Have you paid attention to the "flattening of the curve?"

---

Yes, absolutely understood. On (1), that is why I shifted focus on the extensive quarantine being focused on the at risk population. On (2), yes, agreed again. But, in theory holding all else equal (i.e. the summer does not reduce the virus/no vaccine is produced), wouldn't we just be delaying the eventual spread anyway? My question is, theoretically, we allow this thing to naturally run its course within people who won't require medical resources while shielding those at risk, thus developing our immunity and preventing transmission in the future.

quote:

---

Sorry this pandemic has slightly inconvenienced your life

---

How can you look at the measures taken so far and call that "slight"?! This will probably end up costing in the ballpark of a trillion dollars in lost economic output. It's not the virus doing that, it's our response to it.

So many small businesses will have to shut down for good. And larger businesses will trim down after realizing they don't need so many employees. Many people will be unemployed after all this. The effects will be felt for a long time.

And this is shitty to say, but the worst part is there will be nothing to rebuild when everything calms down. At least after a natural disaster, there are homes and other structures that need repair, which boosts the economy for a while. After this it will just be a prolonged period of gradual improvement.

How many lives is all this worth? Keep in mind that the flu is at this moment still killing over 10 times as many people every day.

quote:

---

Good thing we don’t have any of their underlying factors.

---

You could argue we have worse underlying factors. Obesity, diabetes and heart disease, hypertension.

quote:

---

That’s what the UK is doing.

---

I don't know what method is right, and I don't believe anyone does with certainty. I am just simply wondering if there is a legitimate argument to be made for that approach, taken in conjunction the balance of economic ramifications.

Ell, we don’t have their underlying factors, but also don’t know if we have worse ones.

In the thread with the Kenner Lawyer in serious condition at 45, the theme was “well, he’s fat so of course he’s in ICU”.....

If obesity is a factor, we go straight from “well, we’re not as old as Italy” to “Shiite, but we sure are fatter than them”

We just genuinely do not have data at this point.

quote:

---

And those without?

---

They tested the potential exposures, even if asymptomatic.

quote:

---

Wut?

---

Deaths over current cases will give you a poor measure of CFR if the a) number of cases is increasing exponentially and b) the amount of time from infection to death is a week or longer.

We have a pretty good CFR for China since their peak has passed. We can assume there was a good number of asymptomatic cases. South Korea is probably a best case scenario for the US. They have done a much better job of handling it to date.

quote:

---

We have a pretty good CFR for China since their peak has passed.

---

We would if they hadn't stopped reporting.