- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Doctors not testing
Posted on 4/1/20 at 7:33 am to Hopeful Doc
Posted on 4/1/20 at 7:33 am to Hopeful Doc
I'm wondering the method your procedure uses.
0
Posted on 4/1/20 at 7:39 am to Hopeful Doc
quote:
I'm not the goodest at wurds, but I'm not certain I'm wrong there.
Masturbate
Posted on 4/1/20 at 7:53 am to tigerinthebueche
quote:
Your lack of interest in the subject, while noble, is off putting considering doctors are having a hand in how this pandemic is handled
There is this pervasive misconception that nobody is looking at the economic consequences, and it's just not true.
The President literally mentions it every day (multiple times) that they weighed the cost of letting the disease run its course vs the cost of stay at home measures, and the stay at home measures won out. I hate to break it to you, but there would be an economic slowdown once hundreds of thousands to millions of people were all sick at once in various areas and overflowing hospitals. Plus many more deaths.
Now, people also like to point out that there could be an in between solution where old folks stay home and young people walk free. We will probably come to that eventually, but those people are too focused on MORTALITY RATE and not focused enough on HOSPITALIZATION RATE. The goal here is to slow this sucker down as much as possible to preserve resources and buy time. Just because you ain't dead doesn't mean you ain't showing up to hospitals and utilizing limited resources.
Then, there are people who just simply don't believe the virus is as serious as the experts say. They have no reasonable basis for saying this. They just think they can interpret statistics better than those trained and paid to do so and like to overuse the word "pussy" or say meaningless things like "life is a risk".
This post was edited on 4/1/20 at 7:55 am
Posted on 4/1/20 at 8:03 am to Hopeful Doc
quote:
if you do have it and are low risk, you don't need to do anything other than self quarantine.
True. Self quarantine being the operative phrase.
quote:
The numbers will never reflect all cases.
They need to be testing for antibodies. A lot of people think the virus has been here much longer than they say and many of us have already gotten it, defended against it, and are now carrying the antibodies.
quote:
It's to take good care of the people in front of you.
True. As long as it is voluntary, I have no problem with any of this.
Posted on 4/1/20 at 12:02 pm to OsTiger78
In an ideal world, we have isolation centers, blah blah. You get that part. The world isn't ideal. Here is what SHOULD be happening and a healthcare provider should be explaining as people of interest or confirmed are showing up:
quote:
If you have a family and you bring this home there’s about a 95% chance everyone in the home gets it.
There is a published guide on what to do if you are sharing a house with them. The 95% is a guess. It's probably not a horrible guess. But if you're careful, it's possible to NOT get it from someone in the house, but the well-feeling folks should isolate at home from the sick person AND fro, the outside world whenever possible and be extra cautious in public and around others.
quote:
So who goes out for food?
Ideally they're using grocery delivery or relying on well-feeling family and friends to be go-getters. There are cases where neither of these are possible, but most bigger cities have it available (WAITR is delivering groceries)
quote:If you are asymptomatic but exposed, there are some guidelines for self-monitoring and masking and still going into public. These change very frequently.
Who goes to work if they still have a job?
quote:
Who runs out to get meds?
The chance of spread through a drive-through pharmacy window is very low, and the pharmacist/tech should be taking extra precautions. In-store pickup is less than ideal, and again- this is where you rely on family/friends if you've got them. And this is where (the generic) you should offer to help out your neighbor.
The (realistic) goal isn't to stop it from spreading. That's simply not possible unless we close the world down (including hospitals) for, if we are to believe the longest-lasting viral shedder to date at something like 37 days, something like 37 days.
The goal is a controlled burn, not an explosion. Some breakage of quarantine is going to happen. It isn't feasible to lock people in their homes for over a month. This isn't going to kill most of the people that come into contact with it.
There aren't real-world perfect answers, but the goal for those household members is to do as little in public as they can. The way I explain it to everyone is:
1) If you feel like you have a cold, we are just going to treat you like you have a cold. If it gets worse than that, call me, and we can talk about what to do next."
2) Pretend your cold is the worst case of coronavirus ever and that everyone who gets it from you is going to wind up in the hospital or die from it. Don't go around anyone you don't have to for that reason.
It's the best I know how to do for now.
This post was edited on 4/1/20 at 2:42 pm
Posted on 4/1/20 at 12:20 pm to Norbert
quote:
Then, there are people who just simply don't believe the virus is as serious as the experts say. They have no reasonable basis for saying this. They just think they can interpret statistics better than those trained and paid to do so and like to overuse the word "pussy" or say meaningless things like "life is a risk".
The other thing people on this train miss is that Covid isn't the only sickness with potential error built in to mortality rates.
Covid's mortality rates may be affected by people with milder cases not being tested. The same is true for the flu, and basically any other disease. I've avoided going to the doc with plenty of things when I knew there was nothing they could do.
Sometimes there's no simple solution and the choices are about trying to seek the best of bad options. This is one of those times.
Posted on 4/1/20 at 12:26 pm to Higgysmalls
quote:
They will never know how many people actually have the virus cause she told me they are only testing patients that have underlying health problems with respiratory issues
because even though potus told you months ago there were tests aplenty, there werent.
lies will out.
Posted on 4/1/20 at 12:41 pm to CelticDog
quote:
because even though potus told you months ago there were tests aplenty, there werent.
Hmm. I never heard him say that.
I did hear him at a conference 2 weeks ago give capacity then and say it was rapidly expanding with commercial tests and gave estimates on capacity in the future, essentially doubling weekly. It fits what is seen here.
Epidemiologically, testing isn't abundant but getting there rapidly.
For changing what needs to be done for people who needs things changed, it has been pretty good to date. About as good as I could hope for considering the circumstances.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News