I have been reading up on the "flatenning the curve" approach and

[OldFatDog]

think that it is reasonable to cancel events three months out. The horse is out of the barn concerning the virus spreading throughout a huge number of people in the USA. By limiting social interactions the hope is to limit the numbers of people being infected at any given time. Instead, have less people infected at a time over a longer period of time. The upside is that the impact is manageable at any given time. The obvious downside is that the impact covers a much longer period of time which means canceling events three months out. The consequences of a huge spike at once would be devastating on not only the health care system but all systems. Help me out if I am misunderstanding. And yes, I am going to post this on the other board as well.

https://www.bing.com/images/search?...ECAEEF00F78EF520282F0AD5A759BD51B&FORM=IQFRBA

https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/11/flattening-curve-coronavirus/

 

[She Mate Me]

think that it is reasonable to cancel events three months out. The horse is out of the barn concerning the virus spreading throughout a huge number of people in the USA. By limiting social interactions the hope is to limit the numbers of people being infected at any given time. Instead, have less people infected at a time over a longer period of time. The upside is that the impact is manageable at any given time. The obvious downside is that the impact covers a much longer period of time which means canceling events three months out. The consequences of a huge spike at once would be devastating on not only the health care system but all systems. Help me out if I am misunderstanding. And yes, I am going to post this on the other board as well.

https://www.bing.com/images/search?...ECAEEF00F78EF520282F0AD5A759BD51B&FORM=IQFRBA

https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/11/flattening-curve-coronavirus/

That's my understanding as well. Not overwhelming the system so better care can be provided seems to be the focus.

 

[paindonthurt_]

I think it’s a little over kill but I guess it’s better to be cautious than not.

In 6 months, the issues won’t be Coronavirus. It will be the fallout from mass hysteria and overreacting.

 

[8dog]

I thought they could have held off on the cws but its not 3 months away. Memorial day is less than 2.5 months away and thats when you have to be ready to start.

 

[Seinfeld]

I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head. I’m not knowledgeable enough to know how far we need to go out, but what we’re seeing is most definitely a case of inflicting some short term pain in order to avoid an absolute catastrophe.

I was looking at a chart just a few minutes ago that showed confirmed cases in the U.S. going from 10 to 1,000 in just a few weeks. Imagine that exponential growth occurring for another 2-3 months... Hard to think about, but we’ve reached a genuine case where a scenario simply CAN’T happen, and that’s why we’re seeing sudden drastic measures

 

[dorndawg]

I think it’s a little over kill but I guess it’s better to be cautious than not.

In 6 months, the issues won’t be Coronavirus. It will be the fallout from mass hysteria and overreacting.

What will that fallout be, when compared to the very possible fallout of a mass viral outbreak killing hundreds of thousands of Americans?

 

[mount lefroy]

think that it is reasonable to cancel events three months out. The horse is out of the barn concerning the virus spreading throughout a huge number of people in the USA. By limiting social interactions the hope is to limit the numbers of people being infected at any given time. Instead, have less people infected at a time over a longer period of time. The upside is that the impact is manageable at any given time. The obvious downside is that the impact covers a much longer period of time which means canceling events three months out. The consequences of a huge spike at once would be devastating on not only the health care system but all systems. Help me out if I am misunderstanding. And yes, I am going to post this on the other board as well.

https://www.bing.com/images/search?...ECAEEF00F78EF520282F0AD5A759BD51B&FORM=IQFRBA

https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/11/flattening-curve-coronavirus/

Well, it's inconvenient for me and I'm not fearful for my own life, so any information that indicates this is dangerous I will ignore or belittle.

 

[engie]

You are exactly correct in your assessment of flattening the curve. Sucks because I'm 3 weeks away from being scheduled in Louisville for a little horse race that's 7 weeks out and likely isn't going to happen. With the work being done at Churchill Downs, it was a good chance this was going to be my last involvement there. I'll be without a real job for the foreseeable future unless I can find a way to parlay the services we provide into a healthcare-related sector, which isn't going to be necessary unless there was widespread failure to flatten the curve, resulting in temporary accommodations being necessary. Anyway, I know that's neither here nor there in the big scheme of things to anyone.

Staying below the healthcare accommodation threshold is basically a tenfold difference in the likelihood of it actually killing loved ones vs them getting it and recovering. So I'm all for that. I'm resigned to the fact that we're all going to be exposed to it until we reach herd immunity. It's just a matter of when. Hopefully at a time when healthcare is available if needed.

 

[paindonthurt_]

It will likely end up being similar to H1N1.

IN 1 YEAR
USA
61M cases 20% of the population
12,000 deaths

Worldwide
363,000 deaths

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/2009-h1n1-pandemic.html

To date with WUHAN VIRUS (3 months)
5100 deaths

https://www.verywellhealth.com/what-is-h1n1-swine-flu-770496

 

[engie]

I was looking at a chart just a few minutes ago that showed confirmed cases in the U.S. going from 10 to 1,000 in just a few weeks. Imagine that exponential growth occurring for another 2-3 months... Hard to think about, but we’ve reached a genuine case where a scenario simply CAN’T happen, and that’s why we’re seeing sudden drastic measures

The US charts are worthless at this point due to lack of testing and availability of tests. The real rate at which it's doubling, determined elsewhere, is about 6.5 days. Which is still staggering. Especially when you can easily assume 100x as many cases as diagnoses here in America. Officially 1663 x 100 = 166,300 as of yesterday. About 1.2 million by the end of the month if we don't flatten the curve.

 

[SirBarksalot]

I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head. I’m not knowledgeable enough to know how far we need to go out, but what we’re seeing is most definitely a case of inflicting some short term pain in order to avoid an absolute catastrophe.

I was looking at a chart just a few minutes ago that showed confirmed cases in the U.S. going from 10 to 1,000 in just a few weeks. Imagine that exponential growth occurring for another 2-3 months... Hard to think about, but we’ve reached a genuine case where a scenario simply CAN’T happen, and that’s why we’re seeing sudden drastic measures

I calculated it out, using the 1,000 or so cases we knew about a few days ago. By April 12, there would be 250,000+ cases. Of course that 1,000 starting number is low.

 

[dorndawg]

You could very well be right. Are you willing to bet the lives of our at-risk population on it? I'm not.

 

[paindonthurt_]

I’m simply asking why we didn’t all freak the 17 out with swine flu?

Were we more willing to bet against the at-risk population back in 2009?

How abt some balance? Let’s be cautious but not destroy economy and lives by freaking out to save lives.

 

[dorndawg]

Yeah, no, Ima go ahead and "freak out to save lives". And I'm glad most of the country is too. If some folks need to throw their sucker in the sand, that's on them.

 

[My Bru]

I’m simply asking why we didn’t all freak the 17 out with swine flu?

Were we more willing to bet against the at-risk population back in 2009?

How abt some balance? Let’s be cautious but not destroy economy and lives by freaking out to save lives.

For the little bit of good social media provides, it provides way more bad. One of the worst things to ever happen to us. That said, you could say it's just revealing our true colors, that were always there but with no vehicle to show them to the world.

So to answer your question, my answer is, less social media in 2009.

I do not believe in a boogeyman. Right now, it's easy to blame the liberals for stirring this up to get the people to turn on Trump, and back then it was Obama so they didn't freak out as much. So, with that said, I'm not going to blame them/media/etc. for this either, although it certainly seems that way. People just want to panic, and they have a reason to now that social media gets the information out there faster. And obviously, more outragers seems to be the left side than right, so they control social media even more.

 

[paindonthurt_]

Yeah, again, I’m asking what’s different abt this vs swine flu?

Panic and freak out is NEVER GOOD.

If this ends up the same or similar as swine flu regarding numbers, will the cost be worth it? I guess you can say yes if the precautions worked and the numbers would have been higher.

But what if the numbers are way lower? Do the lower numbers justify the other fallout that will surely happen?

We saved lives from Coronavirus but we lost lives due to economic conditions possibly?

WHATS THE DIFFERENCE NOW AND IN 2009?

 

[dorndawg]

Do what you gotta do, my man. The rest of us doing what we gotta do too.

 

[paindonthurt_]

Social media is losing its poop right now including many on this site.

You provide legit info and they change the subject.

Another good article here on H1N1 compared to WUHAN VIRUS.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa...-similar-epidemics-played-out/?outputType=amp

 

[deadheaddawg]

my god

 

[kired]

WHATS THE DIFFERENCE NOW AND IN 2009?

Do the math. 61M cases and 12,000 deaths in the US. That's like 0.02%

The mortality rate for this one has been estimated as high as 3%. Just assume it's really only 1%. If 61M Americans get infected, that's 610,000 deaths. 50 times H1N1. Or if the mortality rate really is 3%, that's almost 2,000,000 people.

12,000 vs 2,000,000 is a kind of a big difference.

 

[paindonthurt_]

Sure bro.

 

[1msucub]

Staying below the healthcare accommodation threshold

This is the ultimate reason for all of the cancellations. The problem with mass gatherings is that they usually involve large, DIVERSE, groups. Think about how many parts of the country are represented at the first-weekend sites of the NCAA tournament, and how close the proximity of the participants is. It's potato-salad-in-the-sunshine level of bad as far as disease opportunity. Compare that to a small, rural, church service of 50-75 people. There is still risk, but that is a mostly local, uniform, population that is exposed to essentially the same things in the same areas.

It's why we discourage our producers from buying a calf at the sale barn and putting it right in their herd off the trailer. The effects of a novel disease in a susceptible population are always unknown until it happens. That calf goes into another lot for a couple of weeks to prevent that very thing. This panic-buying of goods is sad, comical, and utterly ridiculous.....but the hopefully overabundance of caution demonstrated by these shutdowns and cancellations is absolutely the right thing to do given the unknowns of this particular virus.

Just my two cents based on experience and background.
Pass the Charmin.

 

[msstate7]

Do the math. 61M cases and 12,000 deaths in the US. That's like 0.02%

The mortality rate for this one has been estimated as high as 3%. Just assume it's really only 1%. If 61M Americans get infected, that's 610,000 deaths. 50 times H1N1. Or if the mortality rate really is 3%, that's almost 2,000,000 people.

12,000 vs 2,000,000 is a kind of a big difference.

61 million Americans would be 61 million/330 million, 0.185. It's been in China for 2 months, and they have 80,815 cases, which is 80,815 / 1.4 billion, .000058.

I've saw these projections for 60-90 million Americans to get, and I just don't see how data supports this

 

[Seinfeld]

He’s referring to the mortality rate. H1N1 was basically 1 in 5,000. Covid-19 is 1 in 35

 

[kired]

I'm just pointing out that the mortality rate is apparently a lot higher than the H1N1 that paindonthurt was referencing from 2009. H1N1 mortality rate was only 0.02%

 

[turkish]

I think there is plenty of panic buying from people that aren’t concerned in the least with the actual sickness — they’re concerned with complete economic collapse brought on by the panic (legitimate or not). While I’m not in their group, I do feel anxious and a little unprepared for that doomsday scenario as a parent.

This is just to build on your post, not argue against it in any way.

 

[msstate7]

I'm just pointing out that the mortality rate is apparently a lot higher than the H1N1 that paindonthurt was referencing from 2009. H1N1 mortality rate was only 0.02%

Yeah, I get that. I'm talking strictly cases though, and I've saw the 60-90 million predicted American cases in other places too. I don't get what it's based on though

 

[engie]

If this ends up the same or similar as swine flu regarding numbers, will the cost be worth it? I guess you can say yes if the precautions worked and the numbers would have been higher.

But what if the numbers are way lower? Do the lower numbers justify the other fallout that will surely happen?

If the measures we have taken actually defeat this thing without a tremendous body toll and without reaching herd immunity, it's going to self-fulfill what you said here in calling what has been done a drastic overreaction. That's the absolutely ideal scenario for all involved IMO.

 

[engie]

Yeah, I get that. I'm talking strictly cases though, and I've saw the 60-90 million predicted American cases in other places too. I don't get what it's based on though

The number is what they are considering necessary to reach herd immunity and end the threat of the virus that way. Likely using the data from H1N1 since current data suggests a similar Ro(contagiousness) for coronavirus. Basically it's the worst case scenario.

China's extreme measures have slowed the spread of the virus tremendously, but they have not yet defeated it, and it is not yet business as usual there. We'll see what happens when they go back to business as usual.

 

[My Bru]

Do the math. 61M cases and 12,000 deaths in the US. That's like 0.02%

The mortality rate for this one has been estimated as high as 3%. Just assume it's really only 1%. If 61M Americans get infected, that's 610,000 deaths. 50 times H1N1. Or if the mortality rate really is 3%, that's almost 2,000,000 people.

12,000 vs 2,000,000 is a kind of a big difference.

Why is the mortality rate being estimated? That's dumb. We know who has died. What we don't know, is who actually has it (so that means the numbers go up but the mortality rate goes down).

 

[My Bru]

He’s referring to the mortality rate. H1N1 was basically 1 in 5,000. Covid-19 is 1 in 35

Except that it's not....we don't know what it is yet, but definitely going to be a lot lower than estimated now.

 

[PBRME]

There’s not an accurate number of who’s died from it because of a lack of testing.

 

[NWADawg]

I think it’s a little over kill but I guess it’s better to be cautious than not.

In 6 months, the issues won’t be Coronavirus. It will be the fallout from mass hysteria and overreacting.

When some people realize that they way over purchased food stock and could never eat it all before the expiration, please donate to food banks.

 

[My Bru]

There’s not an accurate number of who’s died from it because of a lack of testing.

Deaths are a LOT easier to pinpoint than who actually has it. Come on, man.

 

[FISHDAWG]

The Masters has just been postponed ...nothing outside of WW2 has made them ever postpone to my knowledge

 

[Maroon Eagle]

If there is a fallout from people overreacting, then that could be interpreted as a good thing because that means flattening the curve worked.

 

[dawglawz]

Apples and oranges. China is a dictatorship, a feature of which is the ability to control freedom of movement. We (thankfully) don't have that option here.

The most dramatic—and controversial—measure was the lockdown of Wuhan and nearby cities in Hubei province, which has put at least 50 million people under a mandatory quarantine since 23 January. That has “effectively prevented further exportation of infected individuals to the rest of the country,” the report concludes. In other regions of mainland China, people voluntarily quarantined and were monitored by appointed leaders in neighborhoods.
Chinese authorities also built two dedicated hospitals in Wuhan in just over 1 week. Health care workers from all over China were sent to the outbreak’s center. The government launched an unprecedented effort to trace contacts of confirmed cases. In Wuhan alone, more than 1800 teams of five or more people traced tens of thousands of contacts

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/202...coronavirus-they-may-not-work-other-countries

 

[paindonthurt_]

The death rate on h1n was a lot higher early on the in process until they confirmed more cases.

As the denominator grows and the numerator remains relatively the same the death rate will drop significantly.

 

[msstate7]

If we hit the estimated case number above, that would mean we would get hit 318865.5 times worse than China (ground zero) has so far

 

[My Bru]

The death rate on h1n was a lot higher early on the in process until they confirmed more cases.

As the denominator grows and the numerator remains relatively the same the death rate will drop significantly.

I don't understand how they aren't getting that.