Coronavirus COVID-19

[BDKJMU]

And the last state without a confirmed case is....West Virginia...

Alaska is still showing on the John Hopkins arcgis site as having no case, but yesterday they confirmed a international cargo pilot landed in Anchorage with symptoms and has been treated & remains in Alaska in quarantine.

1 case:
-N Dakota
-Idaho
-Alaska

-Wyoming 2 cases
-Montana had 1 case up until today, but now showing 5.

States most cases as of right now (argis site)
Washington: 572
New York: 525
California: 340 (+ 21 Grand Princess)
Mass: 138
Colorado: 101

Most of the rest of the states showing a handful to a few doz..

[93henfan]

[CAA Flagship]

The First 48

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy ... 6A.twitter

Thirty-seven deaths (77% of total) are in Washington state.
>
> Two women in their 90s at Life Care Center died on March 6.
> A woman in her 80s at Life Care Center died on March 6.
> A man in his 70s at Overlake Medical Center died on March 4.
> A man in his 80s at Swedish Issaquah hospital, died on March 9.
> Woman in her 70s with underlying health conditions died on March 11.
>
> Four Washington state deaths are from Snohomish County
>
> A woman in her 70s with underlying health conditions died March 11.
> Woman in her 80s with underlying health conditions died March 10.
> Man in his 80s with underlying health conditions, died March 9 at the Josephine Caring Community
> A man in his 40s with underlying health conditions died but the date has not been specified.
>
> One Washington State death is from Grant County, a patient in his or her 80s.

Four deaths are in California:

A woman, 90s, in assisted living.
A woman, 60s, hospitalized in Santa Clara.
An elderly man in assisted living.
A man, 71, with underlying health conditions who had been on a Grand Princess cruise ship.

Two deaths are in Florida:

A man and woman, both in their 70s, died after returning from foreign travel.

One death is in New Jersey:

A man, 69, who is diabetic and suffered two cardiac arrests, has died.

One death is in South Dakota:

A man in his 60s with underlying medical conditions has died.

One death is in Georgia:

A man, 67, with underlying medical conditions has died.

One death is in Kansas:

A man in his 70s with underlying health conditions died at the Life Care Center in Kansas City.

One death in is Colorado:

A woman in her 80s with underlying health conditions has died.

[CAA Flagship]

I knew it was just a matter of time for this:

[CAA Flagship]

[CAA Flagship]

[BDKJMU]

Italy: On lockdown, see below.

Spain: On lockown: "similar to the one already imposed in Italy, people will be allowed to leave their homes only to buy food and medicine, commute to work, go to hospitals and banks, or take trips related to the care of the young and the elderly. All schools and universities were closed, along with restaurants, bars, hotels and other non-essential retail businesses".

Some flights bound for Spain turned around as word spread of the lockdown.

France On lockown: "announced the closing of all restaurants, cafes, theaters and nonessential shops starting Sunday. France has recorded at least 3,600 infections. It has banned all gatherings of more than 100 people, ordered all schools closed and asked companies to allow workers to stay home".

Germany: many cities closing bars, clubs, cinemas, theaters, concert halls, museums.

Denmark "closed its borders and halted passenger traffic to and from the country. Travelers will be turned away at the border if they are unable to show that they have “a legitimate reason” to enter — for example, if they are Danish citizens or residents".

Poland "planned to close is borders at midnight and deny all foreigners entry unless they lived in Poland or had personal ties there".

Czech Republic closed its borders

Slovakia closed its borders
etc, etc, etc
https://apnews.com/1dde718068517f188b3fa65a7edcbf86
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heal ... SKBN2110LS

WHO has said Europe is now the Epicentre of the virus. But Trimp and Doucheback think Trump shouldn't have ordered the travel ban because Orange Man Bad!

[JohnStOnge]

I think I can safely say that the wrongest thing I ever said on this board was saying, maybe two or three weeks ago, that I think this thing is turning out to be no big deal.

I was hoping at the start that it wasn't real transmissible person to person and the Chinese were getting it by doing things like slaughtering bats.

This really sucks.

[BDKJMU]

Its been like Black Friday shopping in the US- for 3 days in a row. An apparently the going full retard over TP is a phenomenon in much of the world.

[JohnStOnge]

Here's a cheerful note:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lani ... X/fulltext

It says that the death rate among known cases is higher than the 3. something figure we've been hearing. The rationale makes perfect sense. Right now you can go to a site like https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ and see that 156,536 cases and 5,835 deaths have been reported. 5,835/156,536 = 0.037 or 3.7%. That's consistent with the WHO fatality rates we've been hearing.

NOTE: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ is frequently updated so the numbers I just referenced will change.

BUT, about half of those 156,536 cases have not run their course. You can see an indication of that at the https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ site. It says 81,757 cases have had an outcome while 74,779 have not. Among the 74,779 that have not, 5,888 are serious or critical. You get the picture. In the end, a lot of that 5,888 are going to die. There is a lag between the case count and the death count.

Now, all that is among reported cases and we all know most cases have not been reported. But the principle remains. There are some number of cases out there such that the final outcome WILL be fatality. So dividing an estimated number of deaths so far by an estimated number of cases so far understates the ultimate death rate.

[mainejeff]

Oklahoma Governor going full retard tonight.

[BDKJMU]

I think I can safely say that the wrongest thing I ever said on this board was saying, maybe two or three weeks ago, that I think this thing is turning out to be no big deal.

I was hoping at the start that it wasn't real transmissible person to person and the Chinese were getting it by doing things like slaughtering bats.

This really sucks.

You'll be happy to know that today it was announced that Trump tested negative.

[BDKJMU]

Another NBA player tests positive.
https://www.foxnews.com/sports/pistons- ... r-virus-ap

[JohnStOnge]

Here is another interesting thing. It's just something I noticed because there has been debate about the effectiveness of travel bans on specific countries. A couple of months ago the United States made the decision to ban travel from China while Canada did not. At the time it was argued that Canada made the more rational decision. Here is an article on that:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/ ... backed-by/

I read that then decided to just look at case rates to see if there is any indication that the United States is better off than Canada by virtue of having made its decision. I think the answer is no. There are a lot of things that make Canada and the United States different. Nevertheless, they are two neighboring countries with similar cultures that both do a lot of business with China.

As of now the site at https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ indicates 8.6 cases per million population in the United States and 6.7 per million in Canada. There is no indication at all in those numbers to suggest that the United States is better off than Canada is by virtue of one country deciding to do a targeted Travel ban while the other did not. The numbers have increased for both countries since the first time I looked at the question. But it's clear at this point that the United States did not have greater success at preventing the introduction of the virus to its population.

After I initially looked at it I found this: https://www.businessinsider.com/china-t ... one-2020-3

The described research doesn't say travel bans have no benefit at all, but it does suggest that travel bans alone only have modest impacts.

The United States has the second highest reported illness rate among New World nations that are separated from the origin by oceans. Only Panama, at 10.0 per million population, has a higher rate among nations in the Americas. Obviously some of that is due to differences in reporting rates. But it's also clearly obvious that the travel ban didn't work. And, again, there is no suggestion in the data that our neighbor to the North is worse off by virtue of making a different decision.

[JohnStOnge]

By chance just after I typed that last post some lady called Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, Technical Leader for the WHO Coronavirus response, was asked on CNN about all the travel bans. Asked if they are effective. Her answer was basically no. The virus is already circulating.

So Travel bans make us feel like we're doing something. But they really aren't what we should be focusing on at this point.

In Googling "travel bans are not effective" I saw a bunch of things. And the big takeaway I think I got is that by the time one realizes there is a problem and has the impulse to do a travel ban it's too late because of the international nature of the world.

Like for instance there was a Biogen Conference in Boston February 26. Somewhere around 175 people attended. Last I heard there were at least 104 cases linked to that conference. Nobody from China was in a attendance. But some people from Italy were. At that point Italy was not on the radar. We don't know that the people from Italy are the reason for the outbreak. But there is obvious reason for suspicion. And it's an example of a situation in which the ban on Chinese was futile.

Once the pee is in the pool, it's in the pool.

[JohnStOnge]

I think I can safely say that the wrongest thing I ever said on this board was saying, maybe two or three weeks ago, that I think this thing is turning out to be no big deal.

I was hoping at the start that it wasn't real transmissible person to person and the Chinese were getting it by doing things like slaughtering bats.

This really sucks.

You'll be happy to know that today it was announced that Trump tested negative.

Yes I saw that. And odds are he'll stay that way. But the incubation period can be anywhere from something like 2 days to close to two weeks. We've had people in isolation test negative twice, be released, then turn out to be infected.

Like this: https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/02/health/w ... index.html

I think that if he were a normal person he would probably be being told to self isolate based on his close proximity to people who have tested positive. And by "normal" in this context I mean not in the position he's in.

And now Im seeing that poor guy in Nebraska who is perfectly fine symptom wise but 28 days after initial onset of symptoms he's still testing positive so he can't get out.

This thing really sucks.

[CID1990]

Here is another interesting thing. It's just something I noticed because there has been debate about the effectiveness of travel bans on specific countries. A couple of months ago the United States made the decision to ban travel from China while Canada did not. At the time it was argued that Canada made the more rational decision. Here is an article on that:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/ ... backed-by/

I read that then decided to just look at case rates to see if there is any indication that the United States is better off than Canada by virtue of having made its decision. I think the answer is no. There are a lot of things that make Canada and the United States different. Nevertheless, they are two neighboring countries with similar cultures that both do a lot of business with China.

As of now the site at https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ indicates 8.6 cases per million population in the United States and 6.7 per million in Canada. There is no indication at all in those numbers to suggest that the United States is better off than Canada is by virtue of one country deciding to do a targeted Travel ban while the other did not. The numbers have increased for both countries since the first time I looked at the question. But it's clear at this point that the United States did not have greater success at preventing the introduction of the virus to its population.

After I initially looked at it I found this: https://www.businessinsider.com/china-t ... one-2020-3

The described research doesn't say travel bans have no benefit at all, but it does suggest that travel bans alone only have modest impacts.

The United States has the second highest reported illness rate among New World nations that are separated from the origin by oceans. Only Panama, at 10.0 per million population, has a higher rate among nations in the Americas. Obviously some of that is due to differences in reporting rates. But it's also clearly obvious that the travel ban didn't work. And, again, there is no suggestion in the data that our neighbor to the North is worse off by virtue of making a different decision.

It is true that travel bans ALONE have only modest impacts.

That is why they are one part of a broader suggested strategy to slow infection rates so that medical systems can keep up.

Thanks for your cant see the forest for the trees post, John


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CID1990]

China still being China:


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/13/worl ... ticleShare

Let me save some of you some time and ink (and maybe a 1000 word screed from StOCDonge)... Trump does it too


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BDKJMU]

Shit just got real in in the Philly area. Gov said they're closing the state run liquor stores Tues (outdoor interviews were done right outside my local liquor store).
https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/video ... or-stores/

[JohnStOnge]

It is true that travel bans ALONE have only modest impacts.

That is why they are one part of a broader suggested strategy to slow infection rates so that medical systems can keep up.

Thanks for your cant see the forest for the trees post, John

Note that, in the post to which you are responding, I linked the article then wrote:

The described research doesn't say travel bans have no benefit at all, but it does suggest that travel bans alone only have modest impacts.

I think that is a fair representation of what the article says. I could have quoted this paragraph I guess:

The paper added that travel restrictions alone only have modest impacts — other public health interventions, like increasing awareness, isolating sick people, and washing hands frequently, are also necessary to slow the virus' spread.

Also, I intentionally selected that article because it did not say travel bans have NO effect. When I did a Google search a bunch of hits came up with articles saying things like "Why Travel Bans Don't Work During An Outbreak Like Coronavirus." I intentionally avoided such.

Meanwhile: The actual case data provide absolutely no evidence that the United States fared better than Canada by virtue of the United States deciding to have a travel ban while Canada decided not to. They do not show that the travel ban had zero effect either. But there is obviously no dramatic difference whereby having a travel ban avoided a crisis while not having a travel ban did not.

I think it makes sense too. In today's world, by the time we even realize anything is going on with something like that it's been carried all over the place. And it doesn't take a lot of people with something that's as contagious as this apparently is to have a big thing started.

I really do think that travel bans are more of a psychological comfort than a real factor in slowing the spread.

Of course two or three weeks ago I said I thought this would turn out to be no big deal!

[JohnStOnge]

Shit just got real in in the Philly area. Gov said they're closing the state run liquor stores Tues (outdoor interviews were done right outside my local liquor store).
https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/video ... or-stores/

Thankfully, hard liquor is sold in grocery stores in Louisiana. Also convenience stores. So if you stop at a convenience store that sells gas it's almost always also going to have hard liquor in it.

[CID1990]

It is true that travel bans ALONE have only modest impacts.

That is why they are one part of a broader suggested strategy to slow infection rates so that medical systems can keep up.

Thanks for your cant see the forest for the trees post, John

Note that, in the post to which you are responding, I linked the article then wrote:

The described research doesn't say travel bans have no benefit at all, but it does suggest that travel bans alone only have modest impacts.

I think that is a fair representation of what the article says. I could have quoted this paragraph I guess:

The paper added that travel restrictions alone only have modest impacts — other public health interventions, like increasing awareness, isolating sick people, and washing hands frequently, are also necessary to slow the virus' spread.

Also, I intentionally selected that article because it did not say travel bans have NO effect. When I did a Google search a bunch of hits came up with articles saying things like "Why Travel Bans Don't Work During An Outbreak Like Coronavirus." I intentionally avoided such.

Meanwhile: The actual case data provide absolutely no evidence that the United States fared better than Canada by virtue of the United States deciding to have a travel ban while Canada decided not to. They do not show that the travel ban had zero effect either. But there is obviously no dramatic difference whereby having a travel ban avoided a crisis while not having a travel ban did not.

I think it makes sense too. In today's world, by the time we even realize anything is going on with something like that it's been carried all over the place. And it doesn't take a lot of people with something that's as contagious as this apparently is to have a big thing started.

I really do think that travel bans are more of a psychological comfort than a real factor in slowing the spread.

Of course two or three weeks ago I said I thought this would turn out to be no big deal!

Yeah - that’s what my meaning was - that you spilled a gallon of ink on something that was “well duh”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CAA Flagship]

Shit just got real in in the Philly area. Gov said they're closing the state run liquor stores Tues (outdoor interviews were done right outside my local liquor store).
https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/video ... or-stores/

There's always Jersey.

[Ivytalk]

Shit just got real in in the Philly area. Gov said they're closing the state run liquor stores Tues (outdoor interviews were done right outside my local liquor store).
https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/video ... or-stores/

Impeach Wolf!

[kalm]

Shit just got real in in the Philly area. Gov said they're closing the state run liquor stores Tues (outdoor interviews were done right outside my local liquor store).
https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/video ... or-stores/

There's always Jersey.

Great! A bunch of jamokes running around angry with booze withdrawal. What could go wrong?