Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Corona Virus

Ja Rhule

By Ja Rhule,
in Huddle Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

Davidson Deac II Grand Master

Davidson Deac II

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, NAS said:

So you're the expert now?  I think I'll trust the CDC and WHO than some random Joe on a forum.

https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

At the moment I type this, there are 205,452 confirmed cases with 8,248 deaths.  That's more than 4% fatality rate.  Even if we assume 4 times as many unreported cases, that's still 1% or 10x higher than the flu which is at .01%.  

Death rates vary significantly by country and age.  Italy is getting hit hard due to lower capacity of beds and an older population, compared to Germany who has a very low death rate so far.  

You're right that we don't have enough information which is exactly why we need to assume the worse case scenario instead of wishfully thinking this is like a flu.  All the medical experts are saying don't take the chance and stop trying to downplay it.  

 

 

 

No, I am not an expert.  Just trying to get some accurate information. I was asking you what experts you were referencing that were saying the things you mentioned.  What experts are saying the mortality rate is ten times that of the flu?  I am looking at the CDC website and there isn't anything that says its 10 times that of the flu.  You provided a link to a map that doesn't do any comparison to flu deaths and doesn't provide context.   And flu deaths vary depending on the strain.

Edited by Davidson Deac II
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NAS Grand Master

NAS

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Davidson Deac II said:

No, I am not an expert.  I was asking you what experts you were referencing that were saying the things you mentioned.  What experts are saying the mortality rate is ten times that of the flu?  I am looking at the CDC website and there isn't anything that says its 10 times that of the flu.  You provided a link to a map that doesn't do any comparison to flu deaths and doesn't provide context

https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-cures/487086-coronavirus-10-times-more-lethal-than-seasonal

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-11/fauci-warns-coronavirus-far-more-lethal-than-seasonal-flu

 

Edited by NAS
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NAS Grand Master

NAS

Posted
Posted

Copied:. Good explanation here:

Feeling confused as to why Coronavirus is a bigger deal than Seasonal flu?  Here it is in a nutshell.   I hope this helps.  Feel free to share this to others who don’t understand...   

It has to do with RNA sequencing....  I.e. genetics.

Seasonal flu is an “all human virus”.  The DNA/RNA chains that make up the virus are recognized by the human immune system.  This means that your body has some immunity to it before it comes around each year...  you get immunity two ways...through exposure to a virus, or by getting a flu shot.  

Novel viruses, come from animals....  the WHO tracks novel viruses in animals, (sometimes for years watching for mutations). Usually these viruses only transfer from animal to animal (pigs in the case of H1N1) (birds in the case of the Spanish flu).  But once, one of these animal viruses mutates, and starts to transfer from animals to humans... then it’s a problem,  Why? Because we have no natural or acquired immunity.. the RNA sequencing of the genes inside the virus isn’t human, and the human immune system doesn’t recognize it so, we can’t fight it off. 

Now.... sometimes, the mutation only allows transfer from animal to human, for years it’s only transmission is  from an infected animal to a human before  it finally mutates so that it can now transfer human to human... once that happens..we have a new contagion phase.  And depending on the fashion of this new mutation, thats what decides how contagious, or how deadly it’s gonna be..

H1N1 was deadly....but it did not mutate in a way that was as deadly as the Spanish flu.    It’s RNA was slower to mutate and it attacked its host differently, too.  

Fast forward. 

Now, here comes this Coronavirus... it existed in animals only, for nobody knows how long...but one day, at an animal market, in Wuhan China, in December 2019, it mutated and made the jump from animal to people.  At first, only animals could give it to a person... But here is the scary part.... in just TWO WEEKS it mutated again and gained the ability to jump from human to human.   Scientists call this quick ability, “slippery”

This Coronavirus, not being in any form a “human” virus (whereas we would all have some natural or acquired immunity). Took off like a rocket.  And this was because, Humans have no known immunity...doctors have no known medicines for it.

And it just so happens that this particular mutated animal virus, changed itself in such a way the way that it causes great damage to human lungs..

That’s why Coronavirus is different from seasonal flu, or H1N1 or any other type of influenza....  this one is slippery AF.   And it’s a lung eater...And, it’s already mutated AGAIN, so that we now have two strains to deal with, strain s, and strain L....which makes it twice as hard to develop a vaccine.

We really have no tools in our shed, with this.  History has shown that fast and immediate closings of public places has helped in the past pandemics.  Philadelphia and Baltimore were reluctant to close events in 1918 and they were the hardest hit in the US during the Spanish Flu.

Factoid:  Henry VIII stayed in his room and allowed no one near him, till the Black Plague passed...(honestly...I understand him so much better now). Just like us, he had no tools in his shed, except social isolation...

And let me end by saying....right now it’s hitting older folks harder... but this genome is so slippery...if it mutates again (and it will). Who is to say, what it will do next.  

Be smart folks...  

#flattenthecurve.  Stay home...  and share this to those that just are not catching on.  

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted

If this take is correct, we're just plain good and proper fuged. We can't go on lockdown for 18 months and still have an economy to comeback to. I don't think society would have it anyway. There would be massive social unrest.

We better hope that there can be some successful anti-virals found and a vaccine fast tracked. Because that paints a picture that would probably make the Great Depression look like a soft quarter in comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
App Panther Mentor

App Panther

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

If this take is correct, we're just plain good and proper fuged. We can't go on lockdown for 18 months and still have an economy to comeback to. I don't think society would have it anyway. There would be massive social unrest.

We better hope that there can be some successful anti-virals found and a vaccine fast tracked. Because that paints a picture that would probably make the Great Depression look like a soft quarter in comparison.

I'm not sure what 'take' your referring to, but if it's the Imperial College study, it has alot of flaws and not being well received in scientific community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LinvilleGorge Grand Master

LinvilleGorge

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, App Panther said:

I'm not sure what 'take' your referring to, but if it's the Imperial College study, it has alot of flaws and not being well received in scientific community.

Oops, left out the link.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-virus-plan-anticipates-18-190626012.html

What very well could be left out of this article is that it very well could be based on a worst case scenario in where there are literally zero developments in terms of fighting this disease from a medical standpoint. I find that highly unlikely given some already promising preliminary returns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • csx
      How long do you feel it takes for a head coach to turn a team around?

      By csx · Posted

      Canales has his msjor issue not doing the obvious regarding running Dowdle but with an average QB we would be in the playoffs with an average QB. 
    • kungfoodude
      How long do you feel it takes for a head coach to turn a team around?

      By kungfoodude · Posted

      1. fug TikTak, I ain't clicking that stupid poo. 2. This is really very situationally dependent. Coaching is a huge part but sometimes you step into a scenario where a lot of building needs to happen that is largely out of your control  Recent examples(Last season's hiring cycle): 1. Ben Johnson Johnson chose the OVERWHELMINGLY best open coaching job due to a combination of solid ownership, a solid front office and the most talented roster of the open jobs from that cycle. Negatives were, insanely stacked division. Results have so far indicated that this coaching change has been a massive boost. 2. Mike Vrabel Vrabel went a different direction. He went to a franchise that has solid ownership, a mediocre front office and one of the worst roster in the NFL. However, he has a track record of NFL head coaching success AND lucked into one of the easiest schedules in NFL history(I believe 3rd easiest). Even with that caveat, a clear indicator that coaching has been a huge boost. 3. Pete Carroll Carroll chose one of the NFL's most voliate franchises. Notoriously bad ownership, very bad front office and a terrible roster. But, Carroll is a HOF caliber NFL HC with success at every stop. At the moment, coaching has not been able to overcome the apparent obstacles. In fact, it's been a complete diaster to the extent that Carroll has already fired multiple coaches. One could certainly argue that pethaps Pete has lost his touch but regardless, this coaching change didn't result in a turnaround and Carroll's future there seems in doubt. 4. Aaron Glenn Glenn's first HC opportunity was a doozy. Near worst ownership, a mediocre front office(at best) and a talented core group of players on an underwhelming roster. This experiment has been quite the ride to date. Glenn's personnel decisions have seemingly led to multiple close game losses(2-5 in games decided by one score or less) and the FO decided to have a roster firesale prior to the trade deadline for a wealth of draft capital. The question will be if Glenn will be given the time to actually see this future draft capital realized, now that a significant chunk of the talented core is not longer there. Coaching has not made a difference but is the franchise now setting him up to fail further? 5. Liam Coen Coen picked a mixed bag. Terrible ownership, a remade front office he essentially had a hand in selecting(or at the miminum influenced) and a middling roster. The early results show promise even if the roster shows significant flaws(and Coen shows visible frustration with his "franchise" QB every Sunday). Could be close to turning a 4 win team into a playoff berth. Coaching has mattered. 6. Brian Schottenheimer This was resoundingly viewed as a bad hire but it's also under challenging circumstances. Bad ownership in the sense that the ownership is also the front office, a future Tepper dream I assume. Very talented but very flawed roster. The initial results have been...interesting. A Cowboys team that was a bad 7-10 after a previous streak of three 12 win seasons is now....mediocre? Couple that with wild roster changes prior to the start of the season and up to the trade deadline and it makes for an incomplete picture. It's not much progress but it doesn’t appear to be regressing either. TBD. 6. Kellen Moore Moore chose the most challenging of all openings. The Saints are in the midst of a simulateous roster teardown and attempted rebuild. Decent ownership, a mixed bag in the front office(great at evaluating draft talent, less so in free agency and in salary cap management). The Saints have been awful but, they were expected to be awful. To that note, they were net sellers before the trade deadline. It was reported that Moore secured an agreement that this is long term building effort prior to taking the position so his status seems safe even while the team flounders week to week. Difficult to grade this now as the entire scenario seems to be a long term strategy. TBD.
    • Tr3ach
      How long do you feel it takes for a head coach to turn a team around?

      By Tr3ach · Posted

      I think he has started to build a culture here.  I think if we had a qb with no limitations we would be seeing a lot more with the offense.  I think most of the coaches that come in and instantly win went to teams that were underachieving previously based on roster talent level.  Based on our roster talent,  we werent underachieving,  we were just bad.
×
×
  • Create New...