2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

[weatherweenie]

Re: 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

Yeah, I thought that was uncalled for, by Valkyrie, but didn't take the bait.

One such example in this conversation is, "Your lack of knowledge..." That's an attack, and things can get quite personal after such an attack.

 

[tsptalk]

Re: 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

Moderna shares surge after FDA approves coronavirus vaccine for phase 2 trial
PUBLISHED THU, MAY 7 20207:17 AM EDT

KEY POINTS

The Food and Drug Administration has approved Moderna’s coronavirus vaccine candidate for phase 2 trial, the company announced Thursday.

The company said it will begin the next round of trials with 600 participants shortly and is finalizing plans for a phase 3 trial as early as this summer.

Shares of the company were up more than 12% in premarket trading.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/07/fda-approves-moderna-vaccine-candidate-for-phase-2-study.html

 

[k0nkuzh0n]

Here we are, a month later, and the US has 75,576 deaths. Previous projections updated on April 12th were for total to the start of August. Now projecting 134k... Which is above the April 12th update's upper limit on the range of 127k.

At this point, anyone who still thinks the flu is worse isn't going to ever change their mind.

Was updated on April 5th, and again today, April 8th.

Now its predicting a peak on April 12th. Total deaths projected at ~60k (31k to 127k). I think the Update on April 5th was to ~80k, and prior to April 5th it was ~93k but I can't remember.

COVID-19

 

[weatherweenie]

Hearing more and more people trying to pin this on Bill Gates, somehow.

Here we are, a month later, and the US has 75,576 deaths. Previous projections updated on April 12th were for total to the start of August. Now projecting 134k... Which is above the April 12th update's upper limit on the range of 127k.

At this point, anyone who still thinks the flu is worse isn't going to ever change their mind.

 

[tsptalk]

Coronavirus: Hydroxychloroquine trial begins in the UK

Chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine or a placebo will be given to more than 40,000 healthcare workers from Europe, Africa, Asia and South America.

All the participants are staff who are in contact with Covid-19 patients.

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-52737169

 

[Intrepid_Timer]

Here we are, a month later, and the US has 75,576 deaths. Previous projections updated on April 12th were for total to the start of August. Now projecting 134k... Which is above the April 12th update's upper limit on the range of 127k.

At this point, anyone who still thinks the flu is worse isn't going to ever change their mind.

At 134000 deaths, one has a 0.041% chance of dying from the virus in the US. Many more than that will die from "complications" of the virus shutdowns. In 2017, 1.4 million people in America attempted suicide. More than 47000 died. I guarantee those numbers go up this year. Of course, most don't care because it does't affect them, just like people that don't work and have no money doesn't affect those who are either happy to stay home, still working (at home maybe) or don't need wages. What they do care about is someone sneezing on them and giving them a 0.041% chance of dying from a virus that the VAST majority have no symptoms from. What's wrong with the way we have done it in the past, those showing symptoms or at high risk stay home. There have been multiple viruses in the past that had a higher mortality rate after infection than the coronavirus. If one wants to stay home, stay home. Personally, I ain't skeered. If I were afraid of those odds, I'd NEVER get out of bed, let alone leave the house.People need to stop looking down their noses at those who disagree with one's own opinion on science, the economy and various other things. Most equations in life have more than one answer.

 

[bmneveu]

At 134000 deaths, one has a 0.041% chance of dying from the virus in the US. Many more than that will die from "complications" of the virus shutdowns. In 2017, 1.4 million people in America attempted suicide. More than 47000 died. I guarantee those numbers go up this year. Of course, most don't care because it does't affect them, just like people that don't work and have no money doesn't affect those who are either happy to stay home, still working (at home maybe) or don't need wages. What they do care about is someone sneezing on them and giving them a 0.041% chance of dying from a virus that the VAST majority have no symptoms from. What's wrong with the way we have done it in the past, those showing symptoms or at high risk stay home. There have been multiple viruses in the past that had a higher mortality rate after infection than the coronavirus. If one wants to stay home, stay home. Personally, I ain't skeered. If I were afraid of those odds, I'd NEVER get out of bed, let alone leave the house.People need to stop looking down their noses at those who disagree with one's own opinion on science, the economy and various other things. Most equations in life have more than one answer.

You asked why we don't have only the people who show symptoms or are high risk to stay home. You also answered it already. The majority of people who get the virus don't show symptoms. That's how this thing spreads. You are contagious before you show symptoms.

 

[tctang75]

You asked why we don't have only the people who show symptoms or are high risk to stay home. You also answered it already. The majority of people who get the virus don't show symptoms. That's how this thing spreads. You are contagious before you show symptoms.

So who gives a rat's a$$ - all you scared to death over your 0.041% odds, just stay home...and out of our way!

 

[Intrepid_Timer]

You asked why we don't have only the people who show symptoms or are high risk to stay home. You also answered it already. The majority of people who get the virus don't show symptoms. That's how this thing spreads. You are contagious before you show symptoms.

It's the same with every other virus in history, yet here we are...........

 

[Intrepid_Timer]

Re: COVID-19; was 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_selection

It may sound "mean" to some, but it is what it is.

 

[nasa1974]

Re: 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

I'm not sure where you are coming up with the 0.041%. Granted we don't know how many have had the virus in the U.S. since only 1.5M have been tested so far. But even if we triple testing to 4.5M and with 96,000 so far that come out to just over 2% death rate.

 

[rangerray]

The overwhelming majority of deaths have occurred with persons over the age of 65, many predisposed because of underlying conditions. I’ve read somewhere that nursing home residents may account for as much as 13%.


Sent from my iPhone using TSP Talk Forums

 

[bmneveu]

So who gives a rat's a$$ - all you scared to death over your 0.041% odds, just stay home...and out of our way!

This is so irresponsible and disrespectful. I am not scared. I am considerate of those that I might infect who are higher risk and far more likely to die.

 

[Intrepid_Timer]

Re: 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)

I'm not sure where you are coming up with the 0.041%. Granted we don't know how many have had the virus in the U.S. since only 1.5M have been tested so far. But even if we triple testing to 4.5M and with 96,000 so far that come out to just over 2% death rate.

The statement I quoted said projections are for 134,000 deaths by the beginning of August. There are 328 million people living in the US as of the end of 2019. I didn't say anything about how many had, or have the virus or how many were tested. This is just the mortality number that equates to said projections. The lock downs were based on projections from the Imperial College that frankly, were dead wrong in the first place............and it wasn't the first time!

"[FONT=&quot]When it came to dealing with an unexpected surge in infections and deaths from SARS‐​CoV‐​2 (the virus causing COVID-19 symptoms), federal and state policymakers understandably sought guidance from competing epidemiological computer models. On March 16, a 20‐​page report from Neil Ferguson’s team at Imperial College London quickly gathered enormous attention by producing enormous death estimates. Dr. Ferguson had previously publicized almost equally [/FONT]sensational death estimates[FONT=&quot] from mad cow disease, bird flu and swine flu."[/FONT]

https://www.cato.org/blog/how-one-model-simulated-22-million-us-deaths-covid-19

 

[James48843]

The overwhelming majority of deaths have occurred with persons over the age of 65, many predisposed because of underlying conditions. I’ve read somewhere that nursing home residents may account for as much as 13%.


Sent from my iPhone using TSP Talk Forums

Ok- so you are saying that the fact that half those who die are over 65 so it’s ok. Got it.

I don’t necessarily agree with your point that those over 65 are going to die soon anyway, so there is no sense in trying to reduce their chance of dying- but hey, at least I understand your position.




Sent from my iPhone using TSP Talk Forums

 

[PessOptimist]

The overwhelming majority of deaths have occurred with persons over the age of 65, many predisposed because of underlying conditions. I’ve read somewhere that nursing home residents may account for as much as 13%.

Ok- so you are saying that the fact that half those who die are over 65 so it’s ok. Got it.

I don’t necessarily agree with your point that those over 65 are going to die soon anyway, so there is no sense in trying to reduce their chance of dying- but hey, at least I understand your position.

James, I am not sure where you got the point "those over 65 are going to die soon anyway".

C'mon everyone. Yes us old farts should die soon and decrease the surplus population. The taxes we no longer pay will decrease the monies available for the younger more productive members of society. Most on this MB have income that was not impacted by the pandemic. Where are you all coming from?

Happy long weekend!

PO

 

[Intrepid_Timer]

Ok- so you are saying that the fact that half those who die are over 65 so it’s ok. Got it.

I don’t necessarily agree with your point that those over 65 are going to die soon anyway, so there is no sense in trying to reduce their chance of dying- but hey, at least I understand your position.




Sent from my iPhone using TSP Talk Forums

I believe it is very rude to make assumptions like you just made. Nowhere did rangerray say in that statement that people over 65 were going to die soon anyway so it's okay. Are you a journalist, because that's the exact BS they have been putting out lately, on both sides. My take from that statement is that older folks, especially with underlying medical issues, should take extra precautions and those that are around them should to, for their benefit.

 

[James48843]

Just a quick note:

We’re now past 200,000 deaths in the US, and about to hit 7 million cases. Although there has been some progress, there are still no validated FDA approved treatments, and a vaccine solution is still some time away. This continues to look like a longer-term major impact on everything.

Pray for doctors and scientists to continue to look for treatments and preventions; an end to PPE shortages and medical staff burnout. There still is a long way to go to get past all this-

And take your vitamin D, wash your hands, and wear a mask!




Sent from my iPhone using TSP Talk Forums

 

[k0nkuzh0n]

Its pretty wild to me how little we still know about COVID-19, especially whether you can get re-infected or not. I never thought we would have a vaccine this year, but kind of surprised we still don't know if any treatment actually helps.

Not to get political, but in PA, the court ruled the governor's limits on crowds (indoors and outdoors) was unconstitutional.

 

[nasa1974]

Its pretty wild to me how little we still know about COVID-19, especially whether you can get re-infected or not. I never thought we would have a vaccine this year, but kind of surprised we still don't know if any treatment actually helps.

Not to get political, but in PA, the court ruled the governor's limits on crowds (indoors and outdoors) was unconstitutional.

Then how come we can limit the number of people in a building under local fire codes? That's not unconstitutional. Maybe because it isn't a law??????