Jump to content

Coronavirus


Steve

Recommended Posts

Meanwhile in Texas we're up to about 2,000 cases per day. 

Our Rt is at 1.02 which means it will continue to spread for an extended period of time - though it may be slow enough to avoid flooding the hospitals.

The county we're in is still under 4 deaths per 100,000 so that's pretty good.

 

The slow, but higher than 1.0 Rt makes me think this thing is going to linger around for months and months.

 

Total deaths for Texas is an Orwellian 1,984.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Arkansas we're currently at 12,917 confirmed cases, 8,110 recovered, and 179 deaths. Somewhere between 400 and 450 new cases daily.

 

I do feel a bit reassured that my city has two large hospitals, and that this county has only has 1 death out of 305 confirmed cases so far, so we're getting survival figures much better than the averages I've seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh hey, some time over the weekend the U.S. coronavirus death toll exceeded the number of U.S. servicemen killed in World War I. 

 

Next milestone on my list is the toll from World War II at 405k.  Which seems like a lofty goal, but if it takes a total of eight months to reach 200k, and vaccine efforts fail...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Old Man said:

Oh hey, some time over the weekend the U.S. coronavirus death toll exceeded the number of U.S. servicemen killed in World War I. 

 

Next milestone on my list is the toll from World War II at 405k.  Which seems like a lofty goal, but if it takes a total of eight months to reach 200k, and vaccine efforts fail...

Curious, is there a record on the national Spanish flu death toll

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Badger said:

Curious, is there a record on the national Spanish flu death toll

 

 

All we have are estimates, because the situation was so chaotic and statistical methodology was questionable. According to the Centers for Disease Control, the estimate of fatalities in the United States is 675,000: https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/1918-pandemic-h1n1.html

 

That's out of a population of a little over 103 million: http://demographia.com/db-uspop1900.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, death tribble said:

Brazil's death toll has now outstripped Britain's. Britain nearly at 300,000 cases.

The shops have started reopening and it is almost normal. More traffic and pedestrians out and about. However no cinemas and restaurants and pubs yet.

Is the US going to have to work harder for the top spot?  We got to be Number One!  (Okay, bad joke but some of the things we do...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Newport, Oregon has reported a fresh outbreak. The coastal resort town (known for its world-class aquarium) had been one of the Oregon cities that reopened recently. That reopening has led to outbreaks is no longer a surprise.

 

In unrelated news, my gym has become one of the many businesses to shutter for good. We are in a situation where regardless of what we do, a lot of people will get hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

All we have are estimates, because the situation was so chaotic and statistical methodology was questionable. According to the Centers for Disease Control, the estimate of fatalities in the United States is 675,000: https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/1918-pandemic-h1n1.html

 

That's out of a population of a little over 103 million: http://demographia.com/db-uspop1900.htm

 

Yup.  That's why I was saying that a '1% overall population fatality rate', or deaths of 'a few million', would be an unprecedented disaster in the history of the US.  Even the Spanish Flu only hit 0.65% of the population at the time, which was roughly as much as our major civil/wars (though I somehow opted out of including WWII... oops).

 

I am curious if that's 675k is over a single year, or a couple years.

 

They are predicting roughly 60-70% of the population to get coronavirus.  If the fatality rate is less than a percent, that makes it near (but not at) Spanish Flu level for overall impact.  But since this disease is now too widespread to control, it will likely be here for years.

 

The amount of people that will have breathing problems, diabetes, other ongoing health conditions will be a huge burden on our healthcare/financial system...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tom Cowan said:

Is the US going to have to work harder for the top spot?  We got to be Number One!  (Okay, bad joke but some of the things we do...)

The US has the top spot for cases and deaths despite the fact that India and China both have larger populations.

The US has nearly three times the number of deaths that anyone else has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, death tribble said:

The US has the top spot for cases and deaths despite the fact that India and China both have larger populations.

 

 

Both India and China have had incredibly strict restrictions in affected areas.  The government delivers food, everyone stays at home, etc.  It's the only reason there aren't millions more dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TrickstaPriest said:

I am curious if that's 675k is over a single year, or a couple years.

 

 

https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-i/1918-flu-pandemic

 

Basically about a year, total, spring/summer 1918 to spring 1919.

 

On the India and China infection and death rates...there's concern neither is accurate.  WIth China, it's whether they're hiding their cases.  With India, it's more likely they're not finding them.  But also remember that Brazil had relatively few cases for some time, and now....???  Same with Chile and Peru;  they have among the highest infection rates of any sizable area/country on the planet, and they had next to nothing in early April, and still low numbers at the end of April.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cancer said:

 

This offers more support for the vascular nature, I think, which is even more encouraging in narrowing the field down.  Cuz, on its own...these results are a LOT better than nothing, but....if you gotta wait til you're on a ventilator, you're already really, really messed up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If given a choice I'd rather it be most effective for the people in the direst condition than the opposite. And it appears to be helpful, though not to the same degree, to those merely on oxygen. It's people not requiring hospitalization that it does little if any good for, which gives me hope that it won't become the new toilet tissue with every idiot trying to stockpile it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...