Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It sounds like neither of those cases will happen anytime soon, so when do you predict this lockdown will end then?
Now you’re asking the relevant question. The lockdowns will continue at least into June and possibly even into summer 2021. I’ve seen some models suggesting that once this initial wave passes, we could potentially ease lockdowns for one month out of every three until the crisis is over.
Point is, we’re in for the long haul. Yes, age and underlying health issues are high risk factors, but this thing still kills at random and appears to have some genetic components in who develops severe symptoms. When there are not enough ventilators to go around, this virus can be quite deadly even for healthy young people.
As to the first paragraph, there is a third possibility: treatment. With a bit of luck on our side, we should have a good one in the summer. There are several drugs in clinical trials as well as an antibody exchange that show promise. If we can get solid treatment, then yes, it can become just another everyday risk. The right treatment can be the difference between a virus being a serial killer vs. an inconvenience. Before antibiotics, cutting your hand on the wrong thing could kill you. Now nobody thinks of that as an issue. More recently, AIDS was a murderer in the worst kind of way in the 80s. Now, people get it and it doesnt even disrupt their dating life because we have treatment.
As to your second paragraph, yes actually the evidence is becoming quite clear that it will be cyclical. MIT, the University of Maryland, and the NIH among many others have all said that is what they believe. Its pretty clear from case numbers that weather plays a significant role in spread. This of course can be overcome by gathering thousands of people in one place for an event (like Mardi Gras or Spring Break) and we cannot rely on it. We still have to do the heavy lifting in the form of social distancing, but warm and humid weather can be our helping hand. Warm humid weather does slow the spread of the virus. It will not stop it completely, but it can help.
Everything I’ve read says that this virus mutates much slower than typical seasonal illness, which is why a vaccine is in the process of development. It has the strong possibility for becoming endemic since containment has failed miserably, but from what scientists know so far, it doesn’t mutate fast enough to come back every year as a new strain that most people don’t have immunity to like what the flu often does.
Last edited by Westerner92; 03-31-2020 at 12:13 PM..
Now you’re asking the relevant question. The lockdowns will continue at least into June and possibly even into summer 2021. I’ve seen some models suggesting that once this initial wave passes, we could potentially ease lockdowns for one month out of every three until the crisis is over.
Point is, we’re in for the long haul. Yes, age and underlying health issues are high risk factors, but this thing still kills at random and appears to have some genetic components in who develops severe symptoms. When there are not enough ventilators to go around, this virus can be quite deadly even for healthy young people.
If we 'ease' lockdowns, wouldn't we be risking people's lives? Wouldn't it save more lives to just stay locked down the entire time and not 'ease' it?
If we 'ease' lockdowns, wouldn't we be risking people's lives? Wouldn't it save more lives to just stay locked down the entire time and not 'ease' it?
Not really. The disease itself is pretty much unavoidable now. The majority of us reading this have it or will get it at some point. As long as we slow the rate of transmission down enough so that everyone who needs a ventilator gets one, the public has done what it can to mitigate avoidable death. Without ventilators, this disease kills a majority of people who seek hospitalization, and it’s not just the elderly and those with underlying conditions that need hospitalization.
That said, I am dubious of the models that suggest any reprieves from economic lockdown are even possible. I read about those back in early March, and we have a lot more data now about how fast this disease spreads.
“Avoidable” is the key word. Because of the covert nature of this disease, early missteps by both Chinese and Western politicians, and the countless entitled edgelords who play dumb with hypotheticals trying to downplay the threat, containment isn’t possible. Just because you can’t prevent all deaths doesn’t mean you can’t prevent most.
Not really. The disease itself is pretty much unavoidable now. The majority of us reading this have it or will get it at some point. As long as we slow the rate of transmission down enough so that everyone who needs a ventilator gets one, the public has done what it can to mitigate avoidable death. Without ventilators, this disease kills a majority of people who seek hospitalization, and it’s not just the elderly and those with underlying conditions that need hospitalization.
That said, I am dubious of the models that suggest any reprieves from economic lockdown are even possible. I read about those back in early March, and we have a lot more data now about how fast this disease spreads.
“Avoidable” is the key word. Because of the covert nature of this disease, early missteps by both Chinese and Western politicians, and the countless entitled edgelords who play dumb with hypotheticals trying to downplay the threat, containment isn’t possible. Just because you can’t prevent all deaths doesn’t mean you can’t prevent most.
So you're suggesting that these two scenarios will result in the same number of deaths:
1) Remain on lockdown
2) Ease in and out of lockdown every one out of three months
I find that a little hard to believe, honestly. I would think that scenario 1 would result is less deaths.
Everything I’ve read is that this virus mutates much slower than typical seasonal illness, which is why a vaccine is in the process of development.
Yes, but mutation rate isnt what makes a virus seasonal. Its the structure of the virus. This virus is surrounded by a lipid (layer of fat) which breaks down much easier in warm and humid air and surfaces. If we compare to Ebola (which has no seasonality), the later is a Filoviride virus which is string like and doesnt break down in humidity. The other thing to consider is that this virus (like all other respiratory viruses) transmits primarily through respiratory droplets. If you cough or sneeze, the droplets can travel much further in colder and drier air because its less dense. Those droplets travel a much smaller distance in warm humid air.
For examples in the real world I would compare the Guayaquil cluster in Ecuador vs. the Lombardy cluster in Italy.
The Lombardy cluster predates the Guayaquil cluster by 10 days from first recorded case. In the first two weeks of the virus being present, Guayaquil recorded 1,282 cases. That is nothing to sneeze it and it is something to take very seriously. However, Lombardy recorded 39,782 cases in that same amount of time. I compare these regions to one another as opposed to Asia because the reaction from the governments were the same and preventative measures like social distancing and masks were not really a thing in either place at the time. The biggest thing we can point to is the weather. This is why our leading experts on this virus are starting to publicly acknowledge the sasonality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westerner92
Not really. The disease itself is pretty much unavoidable now. The majority of us reading this have it or will get it at some point. As long as we slow the rate of transmission down enough so that everyone who needs a ventilator gets one, the public has done what it can to mitigate avoidable death. Without ventilators, this disease kills a majority of people who seek hospitalization, and it’s not just the elderly and those with underlying conditions that need hospitalization.
That said, I am dubious of the models that suggest any reprieves from economic lockdown are even possible. I read about those back in early March, and we have a lot more data now about how fast this disease spreads.
“Avoidable” is the key word. Because of the covert nature of this disease, early missteps by both Chinese and Western politicians, and the countless entitled edgelords who play dumb with hypotheticals, containment isn’t possible. Just because you can’t prevent all deaths doesn’t mean you can’t prevent most.
I watched George Stephanopoulous interview Dr. Anthony Fauci this morning. I thought it was one of the most informative interviews Ive seen recently. Fox, MSNBC, and CNN are a virus to journalism itself. All equally pathetic!
Anyway this is what his thoughts are at the current time:
-If we keep up the social distancing and preventative measures, he doesnt think we will have to extend restrictions past April 30
-He believes were two weeks away from peak death rate and one month away from peak new case rate
-Believes virus will go into seasons
-Says that this will be a dramatically different fight in the next season because we will have much more to fight the virus with
-New Orleans and Detroit a current biggest areas of worry outside NYC
So you're suggesting that these two scenarios will result in the same number of deaths:
1) Remain on lockdown
2) Ease in and out of lockdown every one out of three months
I find that a little hard to believe, honestly. I would think that scenario 1 would result is less deaths.
As do I. It’s pretty evident you don’t even read the posts you’re trying to reply to. Good luck, and may you be one of the people that doesn’t need a ventilator.
Yes, but mutation rate isnt what makes a virus seasonal. Its the structure of the virus. This virus is surrounded by a lipid (layer of fat) which breaks down much easier in warm and humid air and surfaces. If we compare to Ebola (which has no seasonality), the later is a Filoviride virus which is string like and doesnt break down in humidity. The other thing to consider is that this virus (like all other respiratory viruses) transmits primarily through respiratory droplets. If you cough or sneeze, the droplets can travel much further in colder and drier air because its less dense. Those droplets travel a much smaller distance in warm humid air.
For examples in the real world I would compare the Guayaquil cluster in Ecuador vs. the Lombardy cluster in Italy.
The Lombardy cluster predates the Guayaquil cluster by 10 days from first recorded case. In the first two weeks of the virus being present, Guayaquil recorded 1,282 cases. That is nothing to sneeze it and it is something to take very seriously. However, Lombardy recorded 39,782 cases in that same amount of time. I compare these regions to one another as opposed to Asia because the reaction from the governments were the same and preventative measures like social distancing and masks were not really a thing in either place at the time. The biggest thing we can point to is the weather. This is why our leading experts on this virus are starting to publicly acknowledge the sasonality.
I watched George Stephanopoulous interview Dr. Anthony Fauci this morning. I thought it was one of the most informative interviews Ive seen recently. Fox, MSNBC, and CNN are a virus to journalism itself. All equally pathetic!
Anyway this is what his thoughts are at the current time:
-If we keep up the social distancing and preventative measures, he doesnt think we will have to extend restrictions past April 30
-He believes were two weeks away from peak death rate and one month away from peak new case rate
-Believes virus will go into seasons
-Says that this will be a dramatically different fight in the next season because we will have much more to fight the virus with
-New Orleans and Detroit a current biggest areas of worry outside NYC
The humidity actually helps the virus stay airborne longer since the droplets don’t evaporate as easily. The heat is indeed a factor in how resilient most capsids of viruses are.
I was likely misusing “seasonality”. I took it to mean that the disease will come back in a strain that’s mutated beyond the general populations’ immunity every year. It’ll probably become endemic in human populations and join the ranks of coronaviruses that cause common colds, but currently it doesn’t appear that it’ll be like the flu in that it evolves into a new strain of severe illness that the general population has little immunity to.
If we 'ease' lockdowns, wouldn't we be risking people's lives? Wouldn't it save more lives to just stay locked down the entire time and not 'ease' it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westerner92
Not really.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DPatel304
So you're suggesting that these two scenarios will result in the same number of deaths:
1) Remain on lockdown
2) Ease in and out of lockdown every one out of three months
I find that a little hard to believe, honestly. I would think that scenario 1 would result is less deaths.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westerner92
As do I.
I am reading your posts, but they seem to be a tad contradictory. I think we are finally in agreement that a lockdown (scenario 1) will save more lives than easing in and out of lockdown. If that's the case, which strategy do you support?
The humidity actually helps the virus stay airborne longer since the droplets don’t evaporate as easily. The heat is indeed a factor in how resilient most capsids of viruses are.
.
Perhaps Im misunderstanding, but it seems so be common scientific consensus that respiratory virus transmissions drop sharply with rise in humidity.
Here is an article from Yale in 2019 when discussing flu. The Coronavirus does seem to be following the same pattern as of now:
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not really. The disease itself is pretty much unavoidable now. The majority of us reading this have it or will get it at some point. As long as we slow the rate of transmission down enough so that everyone who needs a ventilator gets one, the public has done what it can to mitigate avoidable death. Without ventilators, this disease kills a majority of people who seek hospitalization, and it’s not just the elderly and those with underlying conditions that need hospitalization.
