Coronavirus General Discussion (no politics, no flamewars!)

gjl711 wrote in post #19050715
All you arguing gene pool stuff. You do realize that once you reproduce, there is no longer any affect to the gene pool. So, once you have offspring and happen to catch the virus and perish, it has no effect to the gene pool. For Covid specifically, as it impacts the older population fatally, it does not strengthen the gene pool an they have most likely already reproduced.

Bear in mind you cant aply the gene pool theory to humans since most of the people dying from covid19 had more severe illneses before and only lived because of medication, treatments and surgery. The true effect og the "weeping out the weak genes" is seen in the young generations. Furthermore with 100 years since the last big one ewe have had time to build a few generations of vulnerable individuals and our immune system weakenes as we get older so offcource we will see a Lot of elderly victims from this kind of illneses.

Tronhard wrote in post #19050815
Another way of looking at it is this:
Nearly 1600 people have died in Sweden, making it the 14th worst affected country globally.

Sweden's death rate is 156.4 per million compared to 62.84 in Denmark, 28.41 in Norway and 17.69 in Finland, which all have much more severe lock-downs. Its death toll is roughly 2.6 times the combined total of its Scandinavian neighbours.
NZ death rate per million is 2.65 or, to put it another way, Sweden, practising an open society is 59 times the NZ death rate.

Denmark .. 364
Norway..... 154
Finland .......98

I don't dispute that the path Sveden has chosen is better or worse - what I don't agree is, that the numbers really show that (yet). Here's my example that I have data from: Switzerland has currently 1479 counted deaths and a population of 8.6 Million. This is 172 cases per Million with very sever lock-downs. The health system never ever got even close to peak capacity. Looking at the data from an other view: From the begin of March to April 12th (that's the data I have) we would expect in normal years between 8699 to 10413 deaths (https://www.bfs.admin.​ch …chkeit-todesursachen.html). So far we counted a total of 10633 for this period. There is clearly an excess death rate, predominantly with the 65+ - but by no means anywhere close to the COVID attributed death numbers. Assigning death rates to COVID19 alone is hard and the number we see right now are neither comparable nor do they paint a realistic picture - as many country count differently.
Again: This is not to justify one or the other policy - but more to the point that the numbers don't show one or the other better.

The numbers in Sweden will be of extremes interest mid may since they believe 30% of the population has been infected around may first.

this website gives predictions on when peaks will happen...it looks like swedens peak won't happen for a month or so
http://covid19.healthd​ata.org/sweden

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19050579
Is it really so unthinkable to just let the virus run its course, the way viruses and other plagues did for over 99% of mankind's history?

yes.

DreDaze wrote in post #19050936
this website gives predictions on when peaks will happen...it looks like swedens peak won't happen for a month or so
http://covid19.healthd​ata.org/sweden

Yep

drmaxx wrote in post #19050934
I don't dispute that the path Sveden has chosen is better or worse - what I don't agree is, that the numbers really show that (yet). Here's my example that I have data from: Switzerland has currently 1479 counted deaths and a population of 8.6 Million. This is 172 cases per Million with very sever lock-downs. The health system never ever got even close to peak capacity. Looking at the data from an other view: From the begin of March to April 12th (that's the data I have) we would expect in normal years between 8699 to 10413 deaths (https://www.bfs.admin.​ch …chkeit-todesursachen.html). So far we counted a total of 10633 for this period. There is clearly an excess death rate, predominantly with the 65+ - but by no means anywhere close to the COVID attributed death numbers. Assigning death rates to COVID19 alone is hard and the number we see right now are neither comparable nor do they paint a realistic picture - as many country count differently.
Again: This is not to justify one or the other policy - but more to the point that the numbers don't show one or the other better.

Forgive me for being less than scientific, but I bet the high numbers of deaths are of interest to their friends and families. Right now it continues to haunt Sweden that its testing and contract tracing rates are not giving them data to understand how the virus is behaving.

The problem with seeking "herd Imminity" is that along with the main population, the medical and other essential workers will get sick too, undermining and eroding the health system's ability to respond. Yes, it IS in interesting experiment, but i am personally glad I am not in the Petri dish.

An article on Sweden's situation FYI:
https://www.stuff.co.n​z …ld-evidencebased-response

Tronhard wrote in post #19050941
Forgive me for being less than scientific, but I bet the high numbers of deaths are of interest to their friends and families. Right now it continues to haunt Sweden that its testing and contract tracing rates are not giving them data to understand how the virus is behaving.

The problem with seeking "herd Imminity" is that along with the main population, the medical and other essential workers will get sick too, undermining and eroding the health system's ability to respond. Yes, it IS in interesting experiment, but i am personally glad I am not in the Petri dish.

An article on Sweden's situation FYI:
https://www.stuff.co.n​z …ld-evidencebased-response

Well here in DK we are "doing very well" low infection and death rate per capita but is this really a success? How long can we keep going and what are the costs for everybody else? Other groups with special needs? Social vulnerable kids? People with cancer etc?
We agree in controlling the spreads in order to keep the health care system from breaking down but we must realize that at some point we have to choose in the interest of the majority and not a minority.

Tronhard wrote in post #19050941
The problem with seeking "herd Imminity" is that along with the main population, the medical and other essential workers will get sick too, undermining and eroding the health system's ability to respond.

And this is precisely what the anti-vaxxers and public protesters have failed to understand
and accept. By putting themselves in the public needlessly, they may be either carrying the virus
to others around them, or carrying it back home to their families and friends. They could, potentially,
be spreading the virus to their own families and beloved friends, many of whom may perish
due to their brazen disregard. Even themselves.

The people who so strongly attest their rights of choice are disregarding others' rights of choice
by simply mingling with others. It's no longer about freedom of individual liberties,
it's now about how your choices may ultimately mean the demise of your own family
and friends and the people they interact with.

Tronhard wrote in post #19050941
The problem with seeking "herd Imminity" is that along with the main population, the medical and other essential workers will get sick too, undermining and eroding the health system's ability to respond. Yes, it IS in interesting experiment, but i am personally glad I am not in the Petri dish.

An article on Sweden's situation FYI:
https://www.stuff.co.n​z …ld-evidencebased-response

I personally agree with you and considering the large uncertainties, I am more in favor of being on the cautious side. Nevertheless, the jury is still out and only hindsight will show which path really was better. Slowing down the infection rate does not make the disease disappear and all the countries with lock-downs still have this problem to solve. Let's hope that a vaccine or effective treatment will be found in fast.

SkedAddled wrote in post #19050952
And this is precisely what the anti-vaxxers and public protesters have failed to understand
and accept. By putting themselves in the public needlessly, they may be either carrying the virus
to others around them, or carrying it back home to their families and friends. They could, potentially,
be spreading the virus to their own families and beloved friends, many of whom may perish
due to their brazen disregard. Even themselves.

The people who so strongly attest their rights of choice are disregarding others' rights of choice
by simply mingling with others. It's no longer about freedom of individual liberties,
it's now about how your choices may ultimately mean the demise of your own family
and friends and the people they interact with.

For the time being there is no vaccine against Covid19 and it can take any time up to 18 month or maybe even more to get there. Take in to consideration that for the majority the symptoms are not that bad but for some they are severe and for some they are fatal. Combine this with the high infectiousness of the Corona virus and you get the meltdown of the Healthcare system. This virus is not wiping out humanity though its also not totally harmless for all and I understand the feeling of the individuals who fear for their lives of mourn over lost loved ones. At some point though choices have to be made and we have to realise we can't save everybody.
What antivaxxers really fail to understand is that the risks of the decreases for which we have vaccines in general are much higher with much worce consequences than the risks and concequences of the vaccines

DreDaze wrote in post #19050931
but all of your state parks, and national parks are closed as well...so what are people really able to access?...ok, south dakota said it was ok, but what if you tried to call up yellowstone, or glacier...both those are closed

It's quite obvious that if those were open they might be swarming with people (since it would be the only/one of the very few place(s) outside they could go), then you'd be back to square one with it being impossible to go safely go there because there would be too many people. Add that to the fact that the park(s) would likely also fill up quickly at capacity and/or lots of people would get turned away, causing an outcry. So no one wins really.

Same idea with your secluded cove. If it was somehow a safe space to go, then it would have to be listed like all other 'safe'/allowable spots, and tons of people would start flocking there, making it unsafe in the process, the moreso since I'm sure there aren't the slightest bit of process to at least try to keep people at least two meters apart.

The thing is, if everyone were to come to the conclusion to do what they wanted to do and to interpret the rules/instructions in the way most convenient to them according to whatever flawed judgement they have, then those instructions would be rendered meaningless. In game theory terms, what you are doing by going to the secluded cove would be called 'defection' (or at least to the best of my recollection that's the technical term).

DreDaze wrote in post #19050931
.
..... but all of your state parks, and national parks are closed as well...so what are people really able to access?
.

Both locally (to me) and nationally, we can access millions upon millions of acres of National Forest lands, which include all of the National Grasslands.

And here in my neck of the woods, we have all of the tribal lands open to individual recreation - about a million and a half acres worth.

Then locally for me there are the PUD river access and recreation areas, including the extensive wetlands where I photograph birds. And of course the big nature area about a half mile downriver from me.

And all of the state DNR lands, which are a lot more extensive than the State Park system. . Also the state Fish & Wildlife lands, which are also much more extensive than the State Park system.

Honestly, I hardly ever go to Washington state parks anyway ....... have only bought the pass once in the past 11 years. . State parks just ain't where its at, for my kind of wildlife photography and recreation. . They're okay if you like to camp in established campgrounds, but for do-it-yourself recreation, all of the other lands that I just mentioned are far better.

The state parks that I do go to, in Colorado and Montana, that are incredible for wildlife photography, are open now:

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19051063
The county you live in may have screwed things up for outdoor recreation, but almost nowhere else are there such stringent restrictions. . If you want to get out into nature, and do it legally, then you just need to travel a bit further to get out of your county and into the vast, unpopulated areas of extreme northern California where overcrowding is not a problem.

My county has forbidden travel out of the county for nonessential reasons. In fact, we're discouraged from going outside our neighborhoods. I don't know the rules in other counties.

Speaking only for the U.S., immediately lifting the lock down so that every business can re-open right away will not solve the financial problems for small companies or even large ones that depend upon walk-in trade. People will only return to restaurants, bars, coffee shops, gyms etc. when they feel it is reasonably safe to do so.

At this moment, more Americans feel it would be premature to lift the lock-down than those who want to re-open. I don't know what the demonstrations hope to accomplish in these few state capital locations. Right now people are either too cautious or too scared to go running out and resuming their prior lives of old habits. Obviously the best decision will be a measured and layered response plan, over time, that also takes into consideration the area and other factors. More testing will be required for this.

I am sympathetic to those people out of work and know that many businesses may fail. I help manage a shuttered non-profit whose employees may have to go on unemployment if this goes on too long. We don't want to see that happen. But if people don't feel safe enough to the streets and come through our doors, all the legislation in the world won't force the return of our clients and visitors.