Recommended Posts

Posted

Field hospitals going up in many places here in the Seattle area. The events center attached to our football stadium is being turned into a non-COVID medical center to take some strain off our hospitals. For the time being, panic buying has subsided and inventory at grocery stores seems to be returning to some form of normal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The impact of coronavirus where I am?   Hmm.  Where to begin.  Last weekend, when I left the hospital on Friday night, we had 9 cases in our ICU.  When I came in on Monday, the ICU was completely

Might be irreverent after I posted the currently existing horror scenarios back on page 1 and 2 of this thread on January 30th - ages ago in this fast developing news circle. So, to end my commen

I’m ready, come what may...  

Posted
7 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

something that has nothing to do with the virus but your comment re the cars got me thinking. i still think that they are not relatable in relation to the virus, but what would the situation be if...

say we go back 100/150 years. to pre-car days. an alien being arrives and says to world leaders - 'i will grant you an invention which will transform life on your planet. it will allow even the common man the ability to travel far and wide, relatively cheaply. in comfort. it make lives infinitely easier. it will allow for goods and people to be moved quicker than ever dreamt of. 

BUT, in return, i demand you sacrifice a million people a year and they will be random - male, female, old, young, innocent, idiots, drunks, the fit and healthy. while it will make lives easier, it will contribute massively to the pollution across your planet and may even eventually contribute to climate change which will eventually destroy your way of life'.

what do you reckon the response would be? i'm honestly not sure i know the answer to that. anyway, that is just me with some idle speculation. 

Excellent thought experiment - and I agree, they are not that relatable but for other reasons.

I think the response would likely be panic, hysteria and long threads about it on cigar forum websites!  Flip the experiment around and this alien being says he will remove all automobiles but will save a million people per year, and I think most people would not respond with the opposite reaction: jubilation.  The difference?  In the first there is uncertainty which causes fear and panic.  In the latter, perspective and understanding that some lives are worth the benefits that are now visible.  

Again, I don't think this is that relatable to what is going on but still fun to think about the human condition.

  • Like 1
Posted
15 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

i would think that my posts make it blindingly obvious that i am all too aware of that. but the first priority must surely be saving lives. i'm not silly enough to suggest that if it were a choice between a blind 95-year-old cripple with terminal diptheria and the world economy, we throw out the economy, but there are potentially millions of lives at stake. millions die and the economy is down the toilet anyway. 

Economic catastrophe has led to horrific events throughout history (e.g. civil unrest, war, genocide, forced collectivisation).  To repeat the platitude, millions (and perhaps billions) of lives are indeed at stake.  With respect (does this give me a pass?), the "lives are worth more than money" or some variation of "you don't value life enough if you can't see that the economic abyss of a draconian response is worth it" is of course going to provoke a response.  It deliberately or unintentionally raises a challenge to one's morality, which is a pernicious feature of these discussions.   

19 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

the rest of what you say is ludicrous. you want to compare the benefits of automobiles to the benefits of a pandemic? 

 

I think this twists a valid point.  It's not the "benefits of a pandemic.  There obviously are none (outside of the abstract).  It's the social "costs" versus "desirability"  -- the Prosser  formula (I think) that we all learned on the first day of products liability at law school (product liability versus product safety and who bears the costs of harm). 

Maybe reduced speed limits rather than "automobiles" would be a more apropos analogy.  However, it's the same concept.      

  • Like 1
Posted

Cities that clamped down early and longer in the Spanish flu outbreak had faster growth once the danger passed.

"The cities that implemented aggressive social distancing and shutdowns to contain the virus came out looking better. Implementing these policies eight days earlier, or maintaining them for 46 days longer were associated with 4% and 6% higher post-pandemic manufacturing employment, respectively. The gains for output were similar. Likewise, faster and longer-lasting distancing measures were associated with higher post-pandemic banking activity."

"... cities that practiced stricter social distancing did better post-pandemic doesn’t mean those places didn't suffer economically — they did, but on balance, the distancing measures appear to have reduced the pandemic’s economic toll."

Alternatively phrased: If you think shutdowns hurt the economy, you should see what pandemics do.

Without faith that you aren't going to die when you interact with others, you don't have an economy.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Posted
35 minutes ago, JamesKPolkEsq said:

Cities that clamped down early and longer in the Spanish flu outbreak had faster growth once the danger passed.

"The cities that implemented aggressive social distancing and shutdowns to contain the virus came out looking better. Implementing these policies eight days earlier, or maintaining them for 46 days longer were associated with 4% and 6% higher post-pandemic manufacturing employment, respectively. The gains for output were similar. Likewise, faster and longer-lasting distancing measures were associated with higher post-pandemic banking activity."

"... cities that practiced stricter social distancing did better post-pandemic doesn’t mean those places didn't suffer economically — they did, but on balance, the distancing measures appear to have reduced the pandemic’s economic toll."

Alternatively phrased: If you think shutdowns hurt the economy, you should see what pandemics do.

Without faith that you aren't going to die when you interact with others, you don't have an economy.

Back at ya Polk -- from your Bloomberg piece:

Also, to be clear, the finding that cities that practiced stricter social distancing did better post-pandemic doesn’t mean those places didn't suffer economically — they did, but on balance, the distancing measures appear to have reduced the pandemic’s economic toll.

Unfortunately, the authors don’t have specific data to figure out why, precisely, this happened. And of course, the economy in the early 1900s was much less complicated and interconnected that it is today, so we have to be careful not to extrapolate too much from historical evidence. But this is at least consistent with the arguments my Bloomberg Opinion colleagues Noah Smith and Michael Strain have already put forward for why easing distancing measures too early would be potentially devastating for the economy.

It’s also worth remembering that the distancing measures during the flu pandemic saved lives, too; that’s already been well known for years. What we’ve learned now is that the net economic impact of those measures appears to have been positive, as well.

Don't see this as saying much of anything.  

Posted
19 hours ago, JamesKPolkEsq said:

Every day, around the world, about 40 people/million die (estimated mean lifespan of 70 years). On a typical day 13200 Americans die, today we’ve lost about 500 to COVID-19, increasing our death rate by 4% (obviously much higher in the hot-spots).

Italy’s population of 60 million means that on average 2,400 Italians die each day. Today, about 900 Italians died of COVID-19, increasing the death rate by nearly 40%. They are not out of the woods.

Methodologically invalid. (Irrespective of the argument.)

Posted

I hadn’t realized that the Australian government is forcibly quarantining returning Australian citizens in hotels. Is it everyone coming from overseas or just people coming from certain areas?

Posted
8 minutes ago, bpm32 said:

I hadn’t realized that the Australian government is forcibly quarantining returning Australian citizens in hotels. Is it everyone coming from overseas or just people coming from certain areas?

All international travelers are required to self-isolate. Previously it was only foreign travelers, or those who may have been exposed (ie cruise ship travelers, or those who flew on flights with a known infected person). The Aust Govt is providing accom in the city travelers arrive in. After they are quarantined for 14 days, they may continue to travel home or their final destination, but if it is interstate (ie you land in Sydney but live in Brisbane), you may be required to serve another self-isolation period.

Last week some Govt jerkwad let a whole bunch of cruise ship passengers off in Sydney (with known infected on board), and let them travel freely through the city and airports. The next cruise ship passengers are locked up in hotels. But the following one? People are allowed to go home. Everyone here is absolutely flabbergasted at the inconsistency.

State based travel is restricted to essential travel only. Some states have enacted a self-isolation requirement if you are coming from another state.

Further restrictions on movement may be enforced if people continue to flaunt the social distancing rules and restrictions. There was talk of suburb by suburb lock downs, but this has been thrown out in favour of citywide lock downs.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Fuzz said:

All international travelers are required to self-isolate. Previously it was only foreign travelers, or those who may have been exposed (ie cruise ship travelers, or those who flew on flights with a known infected person). The Aust Govt is providing accom in the city travelers arrive in. After they are quarantined for 14 days, they may continue to travel home or their final destination, but if it is interstate (ie you land in Sydney but live in Brisbane), you may be required to serve another self-isolation period.

Last week some Govt jerkwad let a whole bunch of cruise ship passengers off in Sydney (with known infected on board), and let them travel freely through the city and airports. The next cruise ship passengers are locked up in hotels. But the following one? People are allowed to go home. Everyone here is absolutely flabbergasted at the inconsistency.

State based travel is restricted to essential travel only. Some states have enacted a self-isolation requirement if you are coming from another state.

Further restrictions on movement may be enforced if people continue to flaunt the social distancing rules and restrictions. There was talk of suburb by suburb lock downs, but this has been thrown out in favour of citywide lock downs.

Thanks, man. Pretty interesting how “lockdown” means different things in different places. In California it generally means “stay home, I guess, if that’s okay with you”. Hopefully it’s still working though.

Posted

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/28/trump-coronavirus-politics-us-health-disaster?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR3yvanWY_G4OgCGUBSaBmJuFgOc9rFALm6r-NDo3-Tlsx_8efVSvRB_QXA#Echobox=1585386648

Very telling quote (hopefully not considered too political): 

“We are seeing the emergence of 50-state anarchy, because of a total vacuum of federal leadership. It’s absurd that thinktanks and Twitter are providing more actionable guidance in the US than the federal government, but that’s where we are.”

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Posted
16 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

moving away from blame, let's hear it for belgium!!

 

 
belgium.thumb.jpg.02ceda1c06f9363e8a5941cfb2d5efe0.jpg

Hold up... they have a problem with a 500-participant orgy but they let her be the health minister?

Posted
1 hour ago, Habana Mike said:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/28/trump-coronavirus-politics-us-health-disaster?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR3yvanWY_G4OgCGUBSaBmJuFgOc9rFALm6r-NDo3-Tlsx_8efVSvRB_QXA#Echobox=1585386648

Very telling quote (hopefully not considered too political): 

“We are seeing the emergence of 50-state anarchy, because of a total vacuum of federal leadership. It’s absurd that thinktanks and Twitter are providing more actionable guidance in the US than the federal government, but that’s where we are.”

Not telling at all.  This is an amazingly tortured, agenda-driven piece filled with unsupported factual leaps.  

 

    

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Posted
53 minutes ago, SigmundChurchill said:

The impact of coronavirus where I am?  

Hmm.  Where to begin.  Last weekend, when I left the hospital on Friday night, we had 9 cases in our ICU.  When I came in on Monday, the ICU was completely full.  By Wednesday, the ICU, CCU, Neuro ICU, and Pediatric ICU were all full, and my recovery room was being converted to another ICU.  Today, the new ICU we made was full, and we were down to the last ventilator, not including the ones in the operating rooms.  So today, in between surgeries, I started converting positive pressure operating rooms into negative pressure COVID rooms.  We have had 10 patients die over the weekend.  All the while, putting on hazmat suits and intubating people who were completely healthy just days before.  I even intubated a 27 week pregnant woman today, who may or may not make it.

For anyone who thinks this is like the flu, all I can say is that I have been through 25 flu seasons without ever having to put on a hazmat suit.  Or converting any other parts of the hospital into ICUs, for that matter.

Wow! Thanks for your service. You are on the front lines and I appreciate your perspective.

You are in one of the hardest hit areas on the planet.

Stay safe and keep up the good work. Hope you all get what you need to survive through this...

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Posted
1 hour ago, SigmundChurchill said:

The impact of coronavirus where I am?  

Hmm.  Where to begin.  Last weekend, when I left the hospital on Friday night, we had 9 cases in our ICU.  When I came in on Monday, the ICU was completely full.  By Wednesday, the ICU, CCU, Neuro ICU, and Pediatric ICU were all full, and my recovery room was being converted to another ICU.  Today, the new ICU we made was full, and we were down to the last ventilator, not including the ones in the operating rooms.  So today, in between surgeries, I started converting positive pressure operating rooms into negative pressure COVID rooms.  We have had 10 patients die over the weekend.  All the while, putting on hazmat suits and intubating people who were completely healthy just days before.  I even intubated a 27 week pregnant woman today, who may or may not make it.

For anyone who thinks this is like the flu, all I can say is that I have been through 25 flu seasons without ever having to put on a hazmat suit.  Or converting any other parts of the hospital into ICUs, for that matter.

Ah geez, not good. Thanks for what you do, I can't imagine how bad things are getting there.People really need to start taking this serious.Stay safe fella....

  • Thanks 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, BellevilleMXZ said:

Ah geez, not good. Thanks for what you do, I can't imagine how bad things are getting there.People really need to start taking this serious.Stay safe fella....

 

34 minutes ago, Habana Mike said:

Wow! Thanks for your service. You are on the front lines and I appreciate your perspective.

You are in one of the hardest hit areas on the planet.

Stay safe and keep up the good work. Hope you all get what you need to survive through this...

 

Thanks.  I will also add that my friends at all the surrounding hospitals are experiencing the same.  I am not looking forward to the first patient we have to tell that we dont have a ventilator for them.  At this rate, that might well be tomorrow.  This is bad.

Posted
1 hour ago, Habana Mike said:

Let's agree to disagree on this. From my perspective, regardless how you read the piece, if the Governor of California had not taken the actions he did when he did the Bay area would be the epicenter of the pandemic rather than New York.

I guess I’m not seeing the controversy—I would expect these decisions to be up to the states, or even the counties, where local leaders should know their area better than people thousands of miles away. What’s right for CA isn’t necessarily what’s right for WY or ND.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
7 hours ago, Habana Mike said:

Let's agree to disagree on this. From my perspective, regardless how you read the piece, if the Governor of California had not taken the actions he did when he did the Bay area would be the epicenter of the pandemic rather than New York.

Deal.  

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Community Software by Invision Power Services, Inc.