|
Post by garbanzo on Mar 25, 2020 19:01:43 GMT -5
Everyone will have a different opinion on this. The reality is somewhere in the middle. It's not a matter of opinion - it's a matter of math. I'll explain using an analogy. You're at the post office. There's a huge line, and there are only two people working the counter. It takes you 45 minutes to get through, and it sucks. You have better things to do than wait in line at the post office! But there's a reason everyone stands in line and waits their turn: there are only two people working the counter, so only two customers can get help at the same time. If everyone were to grow impatient, ignore the line, and all rush to the counter at the same time, it wouldn't help the situation at all. They would still only be able to serve two people at the same time, and a lot of people wouldn't get served at all. That's the situation that hospitals around the world are facing with ventilators. You see, most people who catch this virus just get over it without needing treatment. But some people get very, very sick, and need to be put on a ventilator or they will die. If we wait this out - if we work diligently and do everything we can to slow the spread of this virus, then maybe there will be enough ventilators for everyone who needs them. But if we get impatient and rush back to our normal lives, then the number of people who get really, really sick at the same time will skyrocket. There won't be enough ventilators to go around, and many, many more people will die.
Yes, at the end of the day, it's inevitable that this thing will peak. Lots of people are going to get sick from this virus. Many will die. But if we don't do everything in our power to slow down the rate of infection, then a lot more people will pay the ultimate price for our impatience.
All that said, I take it back - this is a matter of opinion. What's more important -the "economy", or the lives of your coworkers, neighbors, friends, and family?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2020 20:11:33 GMT -5
Everyone will have a different opinion on this. The reality is somewhere in the middle. It's not a matter of opinion - it's a matter of math. I'll explain using an analogy. You're at the post office. There's a huge line, and there are only two people working the counter. It takes you 45 minutes to get through, and it sucks. You have better things to do than wait in line at the post office! But there's a reason everyone stands in line and waits their turn: there are only two people working the counter, so only two customers can get help at the same time. If everyone were to grow impatient, ignore the line, and all rush to the counter at the same time, it wouldn't help the situation at all. They would still only be able to serve two people at the same time, and a lot of people wouldn't get served at all. That's the situation that hospitals around the world are facing with ventilators. You see, most people who catch this virus just get over it without needing treatment. But some people get very, very sick, and need to be put on a ventilator or they will die. If we wait this out - if we work diligently and do everything we can to slow the spread of this virus, then maybe there will be enough ventilators for everyone who needs them. But if we get impatient and rush back to our normal lives, then the number of people who get really, really sick at the same time will skyrocket. There won't be enough ventilators to go around, and many, many more people will die.
Yes, at the end of the day, it's inevitable that this thing will peak. Lots of people are going to get sick from this virus. Many will die. But if we don't do everything in our power to slow down the rate of infection, then a lot more people will pay the ultimate price for our impatience.
All that said, I take it back - this is a matter of opinion. What's more important -the "economy", or the lives of your coworkers, neighbors, friends, and family?
Well said. With approximately 20% of infected people needing hospitalization, even if not ventilators, we could never hope to treat everyone.
No country could support 20% of its population in need of hospital beds. India alone would have 250 million people in need of hospitals at the same time if we just let this thing run wild.
|
|
|
Post by bonesaw on Mar 26, 2020 6:19:50 GMT -5
Well, I work in Respiratory Care Services at a major pediatric hospital and have been following this closely. This is coming from politicians mostly from what I have heard, but hooking a ventilator up to multiple patients??? How? Are they all going to be paralyzed then? Because how the hell are multiple patients going to breathe spontaneously with the same ventilator? They would be triggering breaths during the other patient's breaths, which wouldn't work. And paralyzing people isn't good either. Out of everything I have heard about this situation, from a respiratory view, this is the only thing that sticks out...the rest yeah. There are only so many ventilators. Its physics at that point and triage measure are going to need to be used.
Also, the New York thing where Cuomo saying he needs a projected 30,000 ventilators? Well, did somebody tell him that there are other parts of the country with concentrations of this virus too? They have their own projections. They shouldn't just ship the guy 40,000 until he actually needs them, staying ahead of the curve. But it almost seems like New York is the "be all, end all" and that shouldn't be the case.
|
|
|
Post by kemp on Mar 26, 2020 7:50:06 GMT -5
Everyone will have a different opinion on this. The reality is somewhere in the middle. It's not a matter of opinion - it's a matter of math. I'll explain using an analogy. You're at the post office. There's a huge line, and there are only two people working the counter. It takes you 45 minutes to get through, and it sucks. You have better things to do than wait in line at the post office! But there's a reason everyone stands in line and waits their turn: there are only two people working the counter, so only two customers can get help at the same time. If everyone were to grow impatient, ignore the line, and all rush to the counter at the same time, it wouldn't help the situation at all. They would still only be able to serve two people at the same time, and a lot of people wouldn't get served at all. That's the situation that hospitals around the world are facing with ventilators. You see, most people who catch this virus just get over it without needing treatment. But some people get very, very sick, and need to be put on a ventilator or they will die. If we wait this out - if we work diligently and do everything we can to slow the spread of this virus, then maybe there will be enough ventilators for everyone who needs them. But if we get impatient and rush back to our normal lives, then the number of people who get really, really sick at the same time will skyrocket. There won't be enough ventilators to go around, and many, many more people will die.
Yes, at the end of the day, it's inevitable that this thing will peak. Lots of people are going to get sick from this virus. Many will die. But if we don't do everything in our power to slow down the rate of infection, then a lot more people will pay the ultimate price for our impatience.
All that said, I take it back - this is a matter of opinion. What's more important -the "economy", or the lives of your coworkers, neighbors, friends, and family?
I can understand the above sentiments, but some of the issues fall into healthcare and the allocation of funding, and this is the case if we talk about a range of health services. There needs to be a balance between economic considerations, personal freedoms and the obvious need to treat people afflicted with this virus. Thousands are being wiped off every year in all sorts of different ways, but we don’t create an unworkable and temporary police state and send the economy down the gurgler, sinking the livelihoods of millions in the process of trying to prevent these disasters. I would think that the lives of your coworkers, neighbours, friends and family would be depended on a sustainable economy in the long run.
|
|
|
Post by kemp on Mar 26, 2020 8:01:49 GMT -5
What about the future generations that will need to depend on a fully functioning economy, and in any case, could you guarantee for certain that many of these current actions would have made a substantial difference in the number of the lives saved. Italy and Spain have some of the harshest lockdowns on the planet at the moment, and the number of people that have died as a result of the virus has sky rocketed in those respective states. The ventilators needed for respiratory care treatment were created in a fully functioning economy, not in this lets just get everyone out of work and squander all our savings on keeping them at home. That will eventually run out, print money ( as some are doing ), well you know where that led to in the 1920’s.
|
|
|
Post by kemp on Mar 26, 2020 8:06:15 GMT -5
Coronavirus ( and its mutations ), will eventually end, one way or another. I would rather have a working economy on the other side of this. The other option to kick start everything is to create another major war. How many would die in that case !?! www.nytimes.com/2020/03/22/opinion/coronavirus-recession-stimulus.html'This Stimulus Bill Will Not Save the Economy From Collapse' 'When the stock market crashed in 1929, the Dow plummeted from its September peak of 381.17 to a low of 41.22 in July 1932. Because so few Americans owned stocks, it took three years for the financial collapse to cycle though the rest of the economy. Unemployment only gradually increased, to a peak of about 25 percent in early 1933. Gross domestic product fell steadily, ultimately declining by about 30 percent. The economic crash caused by the coronavirus, if anything, will be sharper and steeper. If we set out to deliberately destroy an economy, requesting most people to stay home is a very effective way. The virus itself is disrupting production, but the necessary public health response to the virus is economically catastrophic — and if government doesn’t act massively to offset the damage, the collapse will worsen. As airlines, hotels, restaurants, theaters, auto production lines and much of retail shut down while people self-quarantine, there will be enormous layoffs. Households reduce their purchases to bare necessities, causing more shutdowns and more job losses. A ravaged stock market adds to the downdraft. The financial crash of 1929 turned into a decade-long depression because government was too slow and too timid to counteract the broader impact. Will we repeat that epic mistake? It was the war, and the astonishing mobilization for war, that finally cured the Great Depression. During each of the four war years, the government borrowed an average of more than 20 percent of G.D.P. for the war effort, and at its peak spent more than 35 percent of G.D.P. on the war, raising the difference from taxation. As a byproduct, America rebuilt production capacity, went on an invention spree and modernized its economy. We lived off that investment for much of the postwar boom.'
|
|
|
Post by johnnypt on Mar 26, 2020 9:32:00 GMT -5
Coronavirus: Trump wants US open for business amid pandemic www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52009108"WE CANNOT LET THE CURE BE WORSE THAN THE PROBLEM ITSELF," he tweeted, using the all-caps he reserves for matters of apparent urgency. "AT THE END OF THE 15 DAY PERIOD, WE WILL MAKE A DECISION AS TO WHICH WAY WE WANT TO GO!’ The massive lockdowns only hold back the inevitable. At the end of is, it will still peak and do massive damage in many places. I’m thinking the economic damage might be longer lasting. People need to go out and about and do their business, all these massive closures and restrictions will come back to haunt us. Everyone will have a different opinion on this. The reality is somewhere in the middle. In the words of Han Solo, that's the real trick, isn't it? We have to be careful to find a way to attack this thing and still have a functioning society on the other side. There are places that need to be locked down (I'm in one of them), there are other places that need to be running as normal as possible with people being careful. Keeping everyone cooped up and unable to function for too long is going to lead to other mental and emotional issues that might not need to happen. The NYC tri-state area needs to do what's necessary to cope with things. Some outer areas of NY, NJ, PA...they might, stress might, not need that. At some point this is going to end, everything does. We need to do what we can to get to that end and then do what we need to do to get things up and running with the least damage. I don't know if we can go back to 'normal', I kind of doubt it. But we can get to a point where we can function again, just maybe with a new set of priorities in place. Maybe the next time a report comes out that we need a whole lot more medical assets and nothing is done about it for a decade, maybe next time they'll do something about it and not...well, other things.
|
|
|
Post by garbanzo on Mar 26, 2020 18:11:12 GMT -5
As of today, the US (already) has more confirmed cases of COVID-19 than any other country in the world.
This crisis has already defined our generation, and it's only the beginning. I can't even imagine what the coming months will bring...
|
|
|
Post by Von K on Mar 26, 2020 19:28:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by kemp on Mar 27, 2020 7:56:26 GMT -5
Anti malaria drug. Thanks for posting this Von K. It would be interesting to find out the results in more cases.
|
|
|
Post by darthgall on Mar 27, 2020 9:27:51 GMT -5
Read an article that said HIV epidemic in the 80's led to large permanent increase in condom usage. In the same vein, it predicted biggest change was people much more serious/meticulous about handwashing. My 6 year old sings "happy birthday" 2X while washing (loudly, too), and I imagine that will run through her head when she washes her hands decades from now...
|
|
|
Post by Von K on Mar 27, 2020 9:42:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by johnnypt on Mar 27, 2020 10:52:33 GMT -5
This, yes. Fish tank cleaner, no! Some people need practical advice...
|
|
|
Post by Von K on Mar 27, 2020 14:09:05 GMT -5
This, yes. Fish tank cleaner, no! Some people need practical advice... I read about that. A tragic case. At least the anti-malarial medicine is already prepped for human dosage and consumption.
|
|
|
Post by darklordbob on Mar 27, 2020 17:31:27 GMT -5
And if the disease ever jumps to fish we'll have meds for them too. Win win. All jokes aside, if this stuff can be proven effective it will be a godsend until a proper vaccine can be developed and shipped out worldwide.
|
|