Covid Your Mouth When You Sneeze (Corona Virus/Covid-19 # 2)

[Gaston de Foix]

5 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

NVM 

It was funny.  Do you think it's that stupid to go? 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

5 minutes ago, Fez said:

The Ivy League already cancelled their basketball tournament; giving their automatic MM berth to Yale, who had the best conference record. I think we might see a lot more of that coming; or, at the very least, empty stadium games.

Sure, but if we're freaking about handshakes, what do you think will happen when like a thousand student athletes are going to be sweating on on another for a few hours? And then said athletes interact with a ton of people between games. 

Also, I heard something alarming on MSNBC. The doctors were saying that if you scale for the size of the countries, the U.S. is somewhat mirroring Italy, and they speculated we'll follow the same pattern, just that we're about 10 days behind them. We're 10 days from the start of the tournament. 

6 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

Probably.  But with the delayed action in the US, I'd rather some kids miss out on high school playoffs that have some of their grandparents die.  My sister is a senior in highschool and a varsity athlete in CT, and she's bummed but not angry.  

Also shows some inherent weaknesses in US health policy especially for gig workers.  Sports fans will deal.

I agree, but still, it does suck for them. And to your last point, hopefully this pandemic changes how we approach our healthcare system. I have no problem with either Biden or Sanders beating Republicans over the head with this, as they should.

[Larry of the Lawn]

Just now, Gaston de Foix said:

It was funny.  Do you think it's that stupid to go? 

No, I don't, unless you're planning on hugging a bunch of people over 60 in the next week

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 minute ago, Gaston de Foix said:

It was funny.  Do you think it's that stupid to go? 

If you're youngish and don't regularly interact with older family, friends and co-workers, you'll probably be fine, but it's your call. 

[davos]

1 hour ago, HelenaExMachina said:

I was reading BBC and some concerts have already been cancelled, Pearl Jam, Madonna and Miley Cyrus

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51814696

Also read that Omniplex cinemas IN nI are implementing some kind of empty seat policy:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-51814586

Had tickets to see Pearl Jam in Ottawa a week from this coming Friday.  I was really pumped about it. They have a new album dropping the end of this month and haven't had a proper tour for several years now.  Most fans are being really supportive and understanding of the need to do this.  All that is, except some conservatives among the fans who are throwing a fit about it.  I fully expected this, frankly was a bit surprised that the band took so long to reach the decision to postpone the coming shows.

We should be cancelling or limiting crowds at all public events.  We aren't and are going to pay the price for it.

[Zorral]

27 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Ironically Ireland has cancelled it's St Pat's parades. I guess that confirms US Irish are more Irish* than the Irish.

 

 

*To clarify, I mean more Irish in the adherence to cultural and religious traditions and not in the pejorative sense of the Irish joke variety.

O these kids coming into Manhattan generally aren't Irish, culturally or heritage -- not even Catholic. They are white bros who are on a binge drink, skip school, tradition and think it is a proof of both manhood and cool cred. 

The actual Irish -- Catholic, cultural and blood heritage -- they are obsessed with the annual battle to keep LGBQT people out of the parade vs. LGBQT determination to BE in the parade. 

 

[Zorral]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

I that’s really unfair to sports fans, and as Zorral stated, a lot of people down the chain are going to get shafted hard.  

That was NOT Zorral's point.

They are NOT being SHAFTED.  They are are suffering, and suffering for the public good. Nobody wanted this, but -- do you want your diabetic, smoker dad to die?  Do you want the bills that will come in no matter what the insurance he may have to be treated, even if he doesn't survive?

The point is that continuing with these events puts all kinds of people at risk.  Many infected who have no or mild symptoms will bash around people who are far more susceptible to severe illness and even death.  Staying home isn't just about protecting yourself, even if you are not likely to be hit hard or at all, but protecting others -- and the general health system, so the curve of emergency can be kept flattened -- and leave room for the health systems to deal with all the ongoing health and medical conditions that people from pregnant women to infants to people needing quad bypass, etc. to still be treated.

The public good -- staying alive -- DOES demand sacrifice from us all.

[The Anti-Targ]

12 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

It was funny.  Do you think it's that stupid to go? 

Some places with modest numbers of cases are limiting public events to no more than 1000 people. So if the theatre has a <1000 seat capacity you're probably safe.

the USA if about to officially go over 1000 confirmed cases. Apparently a Ceders-Sinai report thing that's a gross underestimate by a factor of 100 or more, ie they reckon the actual number of cases in the USA is more like 10K. So really in any location where there are official recorded cases multiply the official number by 100, and that could be a better approximation of your exposure risk. So DC with 5 confirmed cases might be more like 500.

While China might be a pyramid and not an iceberg, it would seem at least one reputable medical institution thinks the USA is an iceberg.

[The Anti-Targ]

3 minutes ago, Zorral said:

That was NOT Zorral's point.

 

Referring to ourselves in the third person are we? Though I think it's a typo, since it wasn't you making the original point, I believe.

It is typical of the attitude among many in the free west, that one's life should in no way be inconvenienced in times of extraordinary risk. The social good does not factor into the thinking of an individual's perception of their obligations since their obligation is to self alone. The economic hit (which is a social harm, so not to be simply dismissed) of cancelling most public events needs to be weighed against the the [possible / probable greater] harms caused by the disease running rampant (or more rampant). There's a tipping point where the short term harm is outweighed by the long term benefit.

[Kalbear]

29 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

It was funny.  Do you think it's that stupid to go? 

I think it's stupid to go. It's an unnecessary risk for other people and endangers others safety by potentially spreading it wider. 

This goes for all major gatherings and whatnot. The problem isn't you; the problem is you spreading it to someone else who might be in contact with others. Mostly, it's simply you spreading it. 

I really don't get the part of 'social distancing' that people don't understand. The primary reason we're doing it isn't to ensure you don't get sick - it's to make sure that it doesn't spread widely. 

As a father of a son who doesn't look like he'd have a problem but could require hospitalization if he did get sick (or worse), I really dislike the notion that if you're not vulnerable and if you don't know someone who is, you'll be fine. Can you say that about every single person you're going to come into contact with in the next two weeks?

[Zorral]

4 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Referring to ourselves in the third person are we? Though I think it's a typo, since it wasn't you making the original point, I believe.

  1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

Quote

I that’s really unfair to sports fans, and as Zorral stated, a lot of people down the chain are going to get shafted hard.

As said, that wasn't the point I was making.  But nevermind that I didn't say, as he says I did, the people got shafted.  

Fyre Festival was a shaft and crime. This is as different from that as you can get.

[The Anti-Targ]

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

I think it's stupid to go. It's an unnecessary risk for other people and endangers others safety by potentially spreading it wider. 

This goes for all major gatherings and whatnot. The problem isn't you; the problem is you spreading it to someone else who might be in contact with others. Mostly, it's simply you spreading it. 

I really don't get the part of 'social distancing' that people don't understand. The primary reason we're doing it isn't to ensure you don't get sick - it's to make sure that it doesn't spread widely. 

As a father of a son who doesn't look like he'd have a problem but could require hospitalization if he did get sick (or worse), I really dislike the notion that if you're not vulnerable and if you don't know someone who is, you'll be fine. Can you say that about every single person you're going to come into contact with in the next two weeks?

It does depend on how much credibility you give to the advice coming out of health authorities. If they are recommending limiting contact to gatherings of no more than X number of people, and you think they authorities are being sensible and scientifically sound in their advice, then you can probably feel OK about going. But if you tink the health authorities are not being very credible, then best to be more cautious.

[Kalbear]

1 minute ago, The Anti-Targ said:

It does depend on how much credibility you give to the advice coming out of health authorities. If they are recommending limiting contact to gatherings of no more than X number of people, and you think they authorities are being sensible and scientifically sound in their advice, then you can probably feel OK about going. But if you tink the health authorities are not being very credible, then best to be more cautious.

In this US, credibility is horrifically bad. I think if you live in some actually competent nations you might be okay listening to their advice, but the general rule should be to limit social contact as much as you reasonably can. If it's unreasonable for you to go see a play, well, so be it. 

[Fez]

41 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

I have tickets for a play tomorrow in DC.  Should I go?

I'm so supposed to go to a concert right outside of DC on Saturday night with some friends. I haven't officially bailed yet, but I almost certainly will. The risk just seems too great.

And I say that as someone relatively young and healthy, who teleworks already, and could easily cancel any plans to see friends and stay in my apartment with no physical human contact for probably 3 weeks before needing food (which I could get delivered for free by Amazon Prime). My point being, I'm one of the least likely to get very sick (outside of small children) and least likely to transmit a virus to others. However, I still don't like the risks involved. A 0.2% chance of death, or whatever it is for my age range, is still stupid high to risk for a silly concert. Whatever the low chance of getting the severe symptoms are is also too higher. And, unless I go into total lockdown, I still need to leave my apartment every few days to throw out the trash and check the mail; which means I could still infect someone else in my building.

[Gaston de Foix]

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

In this US, credibility is horrifically bad. I think if you live in some actually competent nations you might be okay listening to their advice, but the general rule should be to limit social contact as much as you reasonably can. If it's unreasonable for you to go see a play, well, so be it. 

Thanks everyone for the feedback.  I tend to agree cancelling is the responsible course. 

 

[The Anti-Targ]

Italy has hit 10K, with still an alarmingly high case fatality rate. I don't know whether to hope it's because Italy has not done a good job of catching all cases. If they haven't caught all cases, and the case fatality rate is more around the 1.5% level ("only" double that of South Korea's), then it means actual cases is more around the 40K mark, which probably means the disease is out of control and for Italy it just needs to run its course. But if they have caught most of the cases and the CFR really is 5%+ then that means there's something very concerning about the disease in Italy. Whether it's some demographic element that makes the Italian population more likely to get seriously ill, or the health system unable to cope with the number of cases needing intense treatment, or Italy has a particularly nasty strain of the virus. I've heard unofficially that there is an S strain and an L strain and the L strain is quite bad compared to the S strain. But that's from Dr John Campbell's YouTube, and I don't think he cited any official publications when he talked about it, so he might be wrong.

[Ormond]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

 

I hope this isn’t too U.S.-centric, but I think the tipping point could be March Madness. If they don’t allow crowds, or worst, cancel the games, most of the entertainment industry in the U.S. is going to shut down, and if that happens I could see most of Europe doing the same too if they haven’t already beat us to it.

?? Most of the LIVE entertainment industry might shut down, but most people get the majority of their entertainment from some kind of electronic media while sitting alone at home already. I would imagine the epidemic will be a boon for cable TV, Netflix, etc. 

[Ormond]

1 hour ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Ironically Ireland has cancelled it's St Pat's parades. I guess that confirms US Irish are more Irish* than the Irish.

 

 

*To clarify, I mean more Irish in the adherence to cultural and religious traditions and not in the pejorative sense of the Irish joke variety.

The whole idea of St. Patrick's Day parades and March 17 as a nonstop party was invented in America. Back in Ireland St. Patrick's Day was a "holy day of obligation" that many people spent in church. The parades in Dublin and Cork only started as a way to attract American tourists. 

[Zorral]

Again, reiteration, repeat: the washing of hands, limiting public gatherings, and staying home as much as possible isn't as much about protecting yourself, particularly if you're not in the most vulnerable groups to severe illness, as it is to

1) PROTECT those who are within the most vulnerable groups -- and NO! BABIES, SMALL CHILDREN, YOUNG CHILDREN are NOT in those groups -- another big difference from flu;

2) TO SLOW DOWN THE ADVANCE OF THE INFECTION THROUGHOUT THE POPULACE, in order to not overwhelm whatever health resources your community has.  Do not forget other health and medical crises haven't stopped because of this novelvirus.

It's vital that one have the correct information, such as it is available now.  Again, it isn't babies and children who are at risk.  It's people who are already sick with something (and no, not all of them by any means are elderly), and they can catch it easily from someone who is carrying the virus, even if non-symptomatic.

 

 

[Mlle. Zabzie]

24 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Italy has hit 10K, with still an alarmingly high case fatality rate. I don't know whether to hope it's because Italy has not done a good job of catching all cases. If they haven't caught all cases, and the case fatality rate is more around the 1.5% level ("only" double that of South Korea's), then it means actual cases is more around the 40K mark, which probably means the disease is out of control and for Italy it just needs to run its course. But if they have caught most of the cases and the CFR really is 5%+ then that means there's something very concerning about the disease in Italy. Whether it's some demographic element that makes the Italian population more likely to get seriously ill, or the health system unable to cope with the number of cases needing intense treatment, or Italy has a particularly nasty strain of the virus. I've heard unofficially that there is an S strain and an L strain and the L strain is quite bad compared to the S strain. But that's from Dr John Campbell's YouTube, and I don't think he cited any official publications when he talked about it, so he might be wrong.

I think Italy has the oldest average population outside of Japan.  I tend to agree that in Italy things are probably at "run its course" levels.  I think the US is also probably "run its course" as well, but we haven't internalized this.  

That said, believe it or not, there will come a time, in the not too distant future, when all headlines are not corona-related.