The new Coronovirus, Covid-19 and its spread globally

  • Thread starter Thread starter OurLadyofSorrows
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
blackforest said:
This morning, a story on NPR was speculating that regions with less trust in government and establishment medicine have fewer people getting tested. Looking at your map, however, I’m not seeing any obvious correlation.
Click to expand...
I suspect the most significant correlation would be population density since more people and more people in/out of an area would spread the virus faster. So large cities would have higher rates.

The three real anomalies are Arizona, Maryland and Missouri. The numbers tested there are very small — in the hundreds— so my guess is testing was limited to those most obviously showing severe symptoms.
 
Agreed. Health care, in any sort of economy, seems to be a rationed commodity. The article seems to encourage readers to attend to the trends and debates underlying different rationing decisions. Ageism, is pointed to as one of these trends.
 
Theo520 said:
Here’s a news story we can all be angry about together, we can agree on something.
Click to expand...
The woman, known to police, already a problem in the community, possible evidence of ongoing challenges of meeting mental health needs.

Sources (who will remain anonymous) say “We (meaning previous societies) used to drown them.”

Wait, do I see a pattern here? First the unborn, then the aged, then the mentally unfit. What next, the incarcerated.
 
Last edited:
Crocus said:
The woman, known to police, already a problem in the community, possible evidence of ongoing challenges of meeting mental health needs.

Sources (who will remain anonymous) say “We (meaning previous societies) used to drown them.”

Wait, do I see a pattern here? First the unborn, then the aged, then the mentally unfit. What next, the incarcerated.
Click to expand...
I’m not following you. Your quote must be from a personal friend since I didn’t see it in the article. It also seems to prove the opposite, that we used to kill the ‘undesirable’ but no longer (abortion being the exception)
 
Last edited:
jeannetherese said:
Agreed. Health care, in any sort of economy, seems to be a rationed commodity. The article seems to encourage readers to attend to the trends and debates underlying different rationing decisions. Ageism, is pointed to as one of these trends.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, in a globalized economy, where some exert inordinate control the opportunity is rife for very unjust actions.

www.smh.com.au

Chinese-backed company's mission to source Australian medical supplies

Staff from Chinese-backed property giant Greenland Group were instructed to source bulk supplies of medical items, including from Sydney, to ship back to China.
www.smh.com.au www.smh.com.au

So the question to be further investigated is how much of this “sourcing” was done legitimately because of the crisis in China, and how much of it was done to undermine the potential of other countries to respond when the virus was spread outward?

No need to hastily point fingers, but also no need to put on blinkers. What conclusion can be properly evidenced from the available data?

Clearly, China is looking to consolidate its economic dominance in the world, so we ought not rule anything out prematurely.
 
Last edited:
Theo520 said:
I’m not following you. Your quote must be from a personal friend since I didn’t see it in the article. It also seems to prove the opposite, the we used to kill the ‘undesirable’ but no longer (abortion being the exception)
Click to expand...
Sorry I thought you might have read the article a few posts up about sacrificing the aged. My thoughts went to the mental condition of the woman in your story, and the challenge of looking after people like her.

My response was less about anger, more curiosity about how she arrived at that situation.

Hoping that we do not revert to killing the ‘undesirables’ but instead develop better ways to support the vulnerable (unborn, aged, ill) and improve the lives of all those living on the margins.

This pandemic certainly seems to make bad things worse. Yet maybe some good will come from it.
 
HarryStotle said:
So the question to be further investigated is how much of this “sourcing” was done legitimately because of the crisis in China, and how much of it was done to undermine the potential of other countries to respond when the virus was spread outward?

No need to hastily point fingers, but also no need to put on blinkers. What conclusion can be properly evidenced from the available data?

Clearly, China is looking to consolidate its economic dominance in the world, so we ought not rule anything out prematurely.
Click to expand...
From the article you posted:
According to a company newsletter, the Greenland Group sourced 3 million protective masks, 700,000 hazmat suits and 500,000 pairs of protective gloves from “Australia, Canada, Turkey and other countries.”
Click to expand...
Sometimes, it’s just business. Sometimes, it’s what neighbors do. We live on this planet together. I cannot fault China for trying to stop a virus, which potentially threatens all of us. Now that they have slowed the virus in that country, to almost nothing, thanks to the help they received, they are now returning the favour by sending medical supplies to Canada, Spain, France, Pakistan, etc. at the time we need it most! and we know they have the capability to produce more.
👏
 
Last edited:
Crocus said:
Now that they have slowed the virus in that country, to almost nothing, thanks to the help they received, they are now returning the favour by sending medical supplies to Canada, Spain, France, Pakistan, etc. at the time we need it most! and we know they have the capability to produce more.
Click to expand...
some of those supplies more useful than others.
You do want your test kits to have better than 80% wrong results.
Czech newspaper Irozhlas reports that China sent 150,000 testing kits to Prague which have returned false results up to 80% of the time. In other words, they simply don’t work. PJ Media provided a translation to the article
Click to expand...
 
Theo520 said:
some of those supplies more useful than others.
You do want your test kits to have better than 80% wrong results.
Click to expand...
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Do let us know how this is working out for you.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Crocus said:
Do let us know how this is working out for you.
Click to expand...
Better to just diagnose and treat using the symptoms than to rely on a test with 80% wrong answers.

USA is now testing over 70,000 a day (with reliable tests). We’ll be OK
 
If you are sick, stay home. If you are well and able, stay home.

Be well, practice social distancing.
Wash your hands.
 
80 countries are at risk of economic collapse due to the virus.

I agree wih the supermarket having to dump that food, It is a huge risk and going forward better biosecurity measures might be implemented. It really exemplifies how vulnerable the food supply is.

China is doing the right thing preventing travellers. They have the virus pretty much contained now. It is well known the virus spreads initially through travellers entering countries. Why be disingenuous about that. If China closes down again, there go medical supplies the world is relying on
 
I know this is a dumb question but here goes: If a person has only one face mask, how long can they use it?
 
Here’s a great article that expresses what I wish I had time to type up.


… Is putting America back to work sooner rather than later a Sisyphean task, the equivalent of rolling a rock perpetually uphill while up to 2 million people, in a worst-case scenario, die of COVID-19? Or does the Sisyphean task involve waiting, while millions more people lose their livelihoods, only to find themselves among the long-term unemployed or underemployed, eventually succumbing to substance abuse and chronic depression, and even perhaps, as the president forecasts, suicide?..

This isn’t just an issue of medicine. It is so much more complicated than that and if the bigger picture isn’t looked at, there could be many more deaths (that would never be attributed to COVID, but ultimately a result of). This is about balancing the lives of millions, if not hundreds of millions of people’s livelihoods. As 3% of all restaurants in the US have already shut for good. 3 million in unemployment. Starving people not able to get food. We need to balance the good of many for the needs of a few. This is not to say we should do as much as possible to save as many lives as possible, but this is nature, and some will die, but what is the best solution to save the most?
 
JoeFreedom said:
Here’s a great article that expresses what I wish I had time to type up.

‘Will some people be affected badly? Yes.’ As Trump says U.S. must reopen soon, question hangs in the air: Can the economy be saved without sacrificing lives? - MarketWatch

… Is putting America back to work sooner rather than later a Sisyphean task, the equivalent of rolling a rock perpetually uphill while up to 2 million people, in a worst-case scenario, die of COVID-19? Or does the Sisyphean task involve waiting, while millions more people lose their livelihoods, only to find themselves among the long-term unemployed or underemployed, eventually succumbing to substance abuse and chronic depression, and even perhaps, as the president forecasts, suicide?..

This isn’t just an issue of medicine. It is so much more complicated than that and if the bigger picture isn’t looked at, there could be many more deaths (that would never be attributed to COVID, but ultimately a result of). This is about balancing the lives of millions, if not hundreds of millions of people’s livelihoods. As 3% of all restaurants in the US have already shut for good. 3 million in unemployment. Starving people not able to get food. We need to balance the good of many for the needs of a few. This is not to say we should do as much as possible to save as many lives as possible, but this is nature, and some will die, but what is the best solution to save the most?
Click to expand...
It’s a fair point to try and wrestle with the idea of balancing the economy and healthcare which is the well being of the nation. Europe had the same problem, they first did nothing and then the infection rate grew too fast for them to handle, many of them did partial shutdowns to keep the economy going such as Italy, the cases only increased aswell as the death toll, now they have shut everything non essential down knowing the economic damage will be irreversible but will save more lives.

Italy is choosing poverty over death, Americans will be forever judged how they act here. Even China, a totalitarian state did what needed to be done to save lives
 
If you watched today’s press conference, the blond-haired doctor (sorry I forget her name) is trying to express to people this isn’t as bad as it seems. Go read the article above about “A Swiss Doctor” and why Italy is so bad.

I was leaving the mechanic today and watching the news (ABC I think it was) where the reporter was discussing with a person who had COVID and is recovering and at the end made a point by saying that most people who get this recover and that the data is showing most will get mild symptoms but those who do get it bad, most will ultimately recover.

This is NOT the kind of hope these stations generally give. They are typically going to send out the doom and gloom because THAT brings in more viewers, so when you get this kind of reporting from typically anti-good-news stations, you know it isn’t as bad as it seems.

And it isn’t a choice between poverty and death, it is a choice between death and more death, and where does that balance lie.

I’m just so tired of hearing, “another 3 cases here”, “another 6 cases here” and “2 more deaths here”, it makes it seem like this is going to ravage billions of people. But when seriously taken as a whole, it is NOT that bad. The doctor at the press conference made this point very clear. The models we have showing 20-22 million will get infected are just models.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top