General / Off-Topic Interesting Times.

[Morbad]

you touch on something I mentioned to some colleagues last week...... Rather than going full lockdown I wonder if it would have been better, to have simply gone lockdown for anyone over 60, or living with over 60 or with medical complications such as heart issues/diabetes etc.

the cost to the nation would have been less so this likley could have been brought in sooner. I am sure some would have said it was age discrimination etc and to those i would simply tell to shut up!.

hindsite 20:20 and all that

The goal of any mitigation plan is to limit the rate of transmission to something health care systems can manage. Pretty much everyone is going to be exposed sooner or later, but if everyone is exposed in a short period of time, many of those most in need of supportive treatment will never get it and death rates, as well as potential disruption to the rest of society and the economy, will be much more severe than it otherwise would be.

Anyway, if you want to limit the rate of infection, you have to target efforts at one group, those likely to be infected. It would be very hard to limit seniors' exposure by only targeting seniors. Even if you could justify limiting the movements of people based on age, targeting a small subset of the total population wouldn't do much to overall infection rates. Seniors would still get infected and would still die at nearly the same rates.

 

[hairychris]

Not pharma related but my lot are running a working remotely test with 2 largest (I think) offices tomorrow, Friday 13.

As European point-person for devops & etc I'm really hoping that nothing goes too badly wrong.

Fun and, indeed, games.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

well its moot anyway because we are in lockdown at all - as shown in last nights champions league game.
Perhaps you are right but limiting exposure of those most at risk seems better than nothing... and surely it is the older folk more likely to require hospital admission where as the younger folk are more likley to see it off at home arent they?

 

[ZeroAi]

I think that's going to be an optimistic assessment.

Could be, but I'm an optimist.

I truly don't see the USA death rate from Covid-19 rising to the 30K or higher level this year, which is our average annual death rate from the flu.

 

[ZeroAi]

I am well past sixty.

My immune system got whacked badly last January. I am an "at risk" for respiratory ailments patient. I've had a kidney stone, and a minor MI. Scarlet fever as a child. Osteoarthritis. The list goes on.

Also, as a contract worker, my time out is unpaid.

Stay well.

In all seriousness let me wish you good health!

On an aside, in the USA you can retire as early as 62, so no one over that age has to work - but many choose to, and while I'm only in my 50's I plan to as well (I'm also self employeed so I get 0 paid time off)

 

[ZeroAi]

you touch on something I mentioned to some colleagues last week...... Rather than going full lockdown I wonder if it would have been better, to have simply gone lockdown for anyone over 60, or living with over 60 or with medical complications such as heart issues/diabetes etc.

the cost to the nation would have been less so this likley could have been brought in sooner. I am sure some would have said it was age discrimination etc and to those i would simply tell to shut up!.

The only good thing i can possibly see for this is it makes people realise the importance of funding the NHS so it may force the governments hand in actually supporting it more.

hindsite 20:20 and all that

+1 very good points!

 

[hairychris]

Could be, but I'm an optimist.

I truly don't see the USA death rate from Covid-19 rising to the 30K or higher level this year.

The confirmed infection vs fatality figures currently seem to imply 3% as opposed to flu's 0.1%. Italy's health service is at breaking point.

Am hoping that optimism wins the day, but a 30k US fatality count means only 1m infected going by the above figures. CDC think that there were 35.5 million flu cases 2018-2019. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2018-2019.html

That means ~1m fatalities with similar infection & fatality rates, but COVID spreads faster too...

 

[Morbad]

well its moot anyway because we are in lockdown at all - as shown in last nights champions league game.
Perhaps you are right but limiting exposure of those most at risk seems better than nothing... and surely it is the older folk more likely to require hospital admission where as the younger folk are more likley to see it off at home arent they?

I'm pointing out that you can't really limit exposure of the most vulnerable by targeting them with lockdowns. It's not remotely practical, legal, or humane, to keep large numbers of non-infected people in long term medical isolation and anything less than that would be minimally effective because all of those younger folk will still be capable of spreading the virus to them. Even if everyone over 60 confines themselves to their homes, ignoring other demographics would almost certainly mean dramatically higher rates of infection, even within that over 60 group, than if minimizing transmission in general were the goal.

 

[Raino]

The confirmed infection vs fatality figures currently seem to imply 3% as opposed to flu's 0.1%. Italy's health service is at breaking point.

Am hoping that optimism wins the day, but a 30k US fatality count means only 1m infected going by the above figures. CDC think that there were 35.5 million flu cases 2018-2019. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2018-2019.html

That means ~1m fatalities with similar infection & fatality rates, but COVID spreads faster too...

Your mixing up CFR with IFR (Confirmed Case Fatality Rate and Infection Fatality Rate), you are not alone most news(papers) do it all time which leads to many more the less wrong numbers. For Covid CFR is above 3% in average ATM while Covid IFR is below 1% !

 

[Chris Simon]

I'm pointing out that you can't really limit exposure of the most vulnerable by targeting them with lockdowns. It's not remotely practical, legal, or humane, to keep large numbers of non-infected people in long term medical isolation and anything less than that would be minimally effective because all of those younger folk will still be capable of spreading the virus to them. Even if everyone over 60 confines themselves to their homes, ignoring other demographics would almost certainly mean dramatically higher rates of infection, even within that over 60 group, than if minimizing transmission in general were the goal.

Not sure I understand what you are saying, there.
Are you really suggesting that if everybody isolates themselves, the danger of being infected gets higher?

 

[hairychris]

Not sure I understand what you are saying, there.
Are you really suggesting that if everybody isolates themselves, the danger of being infected gets higher?

No, just that if >60s only were isolated it doesn't help much.

 

[hairychris]

Your mixing up CFR with IFR (Confirmed Case Fatality Rate and Infection Fatality Rate), you are not alone most news(papers) do it all time which leads to many more the less wrong numbers. For Covid CFR is above 3% in average ATM while Covid IFR is below 1% !

Will keep that in mind, thanks.

 

[Ralph Vargr]

Anyone with cruise ship stocks or Bitcoin exposure?

Note: The aftereffects of this will be physical and real, regardless of mortality. You just stopped transport and the supply chains in their tracks, to say the least. I will leave it as an exercise for the student regarding the other economic impacts.

Computer-enhanced 1929? Nobody knows.

 

[Becks]

As long as it doesn't become idiot-enhanced 1918 ...

 

[ZeroAi]

I'm keeping an eye on Tom Hanks and his Wife.

They are both 63 and so far are just experiencing "mild flu systems" from the Covid-19 virus...

The confirmed infection vs fatality figures currently seem to imply 3% as opposed to flu's 0.1%. Italy's health service is at breaking point.

Am hoping that optimism wins the day, but a 30k US fatality count means only 1m infected going by the above figures. CDC think that there were 35.5 million flu cases 2018-2019. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2018-2019.html

That means ~1m fatalities with similar infection & fatality rates, but COVID spreads faster too...

I hear you, but what we learned from the H1N1 virus was the "actual" mortality rate was much much lower than what was initially thought.

One reason for this is the lack of testing that is available at the beginning of any outbreak.

And while H1N1 infected 60 million Americans in the first year, only 12 thousand died from it that year.

While this is high, it's only a fraction of deaths when compared to the common flu, which takes anywhere from 24K to 45K lives in the USA each year (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/past-seasons.html)

And now H1N1 is just another flu strain that people get each year.

Also, H1N1 targeted the old and young alike, while Covid-19 seems not to target the young.

 

[ZeroAi]

you can't really limit exposure of the most vulnerable by targeting them with lockdowns...that would be minimally effective because all of those younger folk will still be capable of spreading the virus to them....almost certainly mean dramatically higher rates of infection,

I won't argue about what would happen if everyone over 60 was quarantined simply because it'll never happen.

That said, I do believe it's a good idea that the VA is limiting visitation for vulnerable patients.

And even though I feel fine, I'm not going to visit my elderly parents on the off chance that I could have Covid-19 and be a-symptomatic (I coach Lego League for a local school where my wife works, so who knows?)

 

[hems303]

I am always delighted when the real life comes to sanction the people who are in denial concerning the degradation of the environment, and erect as universal truth, the overconsumption, the overproduction, and the overpollution.

... and overpopulation... but that may get 'fixed' shortly. (and I say that as one of the older with underlying health problems; at risk group.... it could impact somewhat on ED commander numbers bearing in mind the much quoted average player age)

 

[hems303]

''There are now conspiracy theories about just how this 'unnatural' CV-19 came about..... the Chinese having a looming problem with an ailing/aging population and 'dark forces' could have come up with the answer.''

China’s Aging Population Is a Major Threat to Its Future

By 2029, China's population will age into 'unstoppable' decline

time.com

China's Aging Population Becoming More Of A Problem

Put "demographics" in your list of things to worry about regarding China, says Standard Life Investments economist.

www.forbes.com

...etc. etc.
I say that such a conspiracy is unlikely seeing how the Chinese authorities locked down the source so quickly and efficiently and now claim to have a slowing spread at this time.

Edit: But it seems a bit extremely 'sus' that the movers & shakers had this..ahh..'exercise' into a major corona virus pandemic.. just two months before outbreak..

Event 201 | Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security

The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation hosted Event 201, a high-level pandemic exercise on October 18, 2019, in New York, NY.

www.centerforhealthsecurity.org

 

[Synkreto]

I'm keeping an eye on Tom Hanks and his Wife.

They are both 63 and so far are just experiencing "mild flu systems" from the Covid-19 virus...



I hear you, but what we learned from the H1N1 virus was the "actual" mortality rate was much much lower than what was initially thought.

One reason for this is the lack of testing that is available at the beginning of any outbreak.

And while H1N1 infected 60 million Americans in the first year, only 12 thousand died from it that year.

While this is high, it's only a fraction of deaths when compared to the common flu, which takes anywhere from 24K to 45K lives in the USA each year (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/past-seasons.html)

And now H1N1 is just another flu strain that people get each year.

Also, H1N1 targeted the old and young alike, while Covid-19 seems not to target the young.

Are you referring to the 2017/2018 influenza season ?

 

[Patrick_68000]

... and overpopulation... but that may get 'fixed' shortly. (and I say that as one of the older with underlying health problems; at risk group.... it could impact somewhat on ED commander numbers bearing in mind the much quoted average age)

Do you think there could be millions of deaths ? Tens of millions of deaths ?