Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Everything Coronavirus

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • S.R. wrote: View Post
    Open the playgrounds! https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/coron...unds-1.5645602

    Half of what we've done we're going to realize was ineffective in hindsight. I'm fine with that when decisions had to be made on minimal data. As new info like this comes out, it better inform upcoming decisions - e.g. how to operate schools.
    Everything's been open for a while here in Vancouver. The big thing with schools are good practices to protect the adults and slow down potential spreads overall. It's a lot of people meeting indoors for extended periods, necessitated by the Canadian winter, so it's a tough nut.

    I'd guess they'd want to start the school year with an emphasis on outdoor learning (until it gets too cold), balance face-to-face with remote to provide teachers with the safety of half-full classrooms, give kids/parents the option to study from home (many will), and be prepared to go fully remote as need be through to next summer. Give teachers better in-class support to go digital - largely by them teaching the class and the kids helping with the production. Split up the younger grades for more small-group work off site or in expanded space (rent community centres, etc.).

    Thank goodness we're not quite so dependent as the US on public schools for child nutrition. It can all work, as long as the virus is kept well under control.
    Last edited by SkywalkerAC; Sat Jul 11th, 2020, 08:54 PM.

    Comment


    • inthepaint

      “All the hospitals are full”.
      In Houston, overwhelmed ICUs leave COVID-19 patient’s waiting in ER.

      https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...id-19-n1233430

      Comment


      • golden wrote: View Post
        inthepaint

        “All the hospitals are full”.
        In Houston, overwhelmed ICUs leave COVID-19 patient’s waiting in ER.

        https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...id-19-n1233430
        The situation in Houston, as well as NY in April and currently in Brazil, are/were terrible. Those are places where the virus legitimalnly got out of hand, with bigger outbreaks than we've seen in the rest of the world.

        The virus has the same biological virulence everywhere in the world, but we can see population/cultural/governance factors seem to have a huge role in how it will manifest itself. What jumps at me about these 3 places having in common is
        -- hugely populated areas with typically crowded/very busy hospitals routinely (and even worse during public health crises)
        -- Governments (and people) that were too cavalier/cowboy on this and ignored too many basic common sense things early on that could have helped prevent the major outbreaks they had.

        There's a balance to be found in approaching covid, and that balance will be different on different parts of the world. The big outbreaks won't happen in remote hiking trails in Idaho, middle schools in Manitoba or Phil's tire shop in South Dakota. It'll happen in big Houston malls, crowded NY subways/cafes, Brazil's beaches and markets crawling with people, and senior homes. They needed more control and commitment from the people than the mom-and-pop bakery in Saskatchewan that had to shut down for 3 months, but for a variety of societal/political reasons, didn't get it.

        Ultimately, I think the places in the world that will have faired the best healthwise and economically are those that had a balanced, common sense approach to it. Wearing masks early on (like many Asian countries in February), limiting of huge crowds, common sense hand hygiene etc...along with a sensible and targeted plan to gradually re-open things and maintain people's livelihoods, while also protecting the most vulnerable. A healthy dose of respect for a thing we don't have a vaccine for yet, but without undue alarmism.

        Easier said than done, but 9 months in since it was discovered, that seems to be the formula that works out the best. Hopefully Houston and the other places in trouble can turn it around soon.
        2019 NBA Champions. Glad to have doubted the doubters.

        Comment


        • inthepaint wrote: View Post

          The situation in Houston, as well as NY in April and currently in Brazil, are/were terrible. Those are places where the virus legitimalnly got out of hand, with bigger outbreaks than we've seen in the rest of the world.

          The virus has the same biological virulence everywhere in the world, but we can see population/cultural/governance factors seem to have a huge role in how it will manifest itself. What jumps at me about these 3 places having in common is
          -- hugely populated areas with typically crowded/very busy hospitals routinely (and even worse during public health crises)
          -- Governments (and people) that were too cavalier/cowboy on this and ignored too many basic common sense things early on that could have helped prevent the major outbreaks they had.

          There's a balance to be found in approaching covid, and that balance will be different on different parts of the world. The big outbreaks won't happen in remote hiking trails in Idaho, middle schools in Manitoba or Phil's tire shop in South Dakota. It'll happen in big Houston malls, crowded NY subways/cafes, Brazil's beaches and markets crawling with people, and senior homes. They needed more control and commitment from the people than the mom-and-pop bakery in Saskatchewan that had to shut down for 3 months, but for a variety of societal/political reasons, didn't get it.

          Ultimately, I think the places in the world that will have faired the best healthwise and economically are those that had a balanced, common sense approach to it. Wearing masks early on (like many Asian countries in February), limiting of huge crowds, common sense hand hygiene etc...along with a sensible and targeted plan to gradually re-open things and maintain people's livelihoods, while also protecting the most vulnerable. A healthy dose of respect for a thing we don't have a vaccine for yet, but without undue alarmism.

          Easier said than done, but 9 months in since it was discovered, that seems to be the formula that works out the best. Hopefully Houston and the other places in trouble can turn it around soon.
          But isn't this the argument in favor of "alarmism", i.e early & swift, harsh measures like lockdowns and contact tracing. Many North Americans just don't like being told what to do, unlike Asian countries who just accept it. Even now, telling Americans to do what Asians do is still being looked at as anti-American, un-democratic, anti-religious and Orwellian. Canada fared well, probably because we still have a large population of 1st and 2nd generation immigrants who have retained the habits of discipline, obedience and respect for others from the old countries, if for no other reason than their survival over there depended on it.

          And the ICUs over capacity also refutes the notion that our hospitals would have never become overloaded if corona was just treated like just another flu. That's what you were saying, right? It's clearly a more harmful and insidious virus.
          Last edited by golden; Mon Jul 13th, 2020, 12:56 PM.

          Comment


          • FL had 15,000 new covid cases just YESTERDAY.
            Canada has just 17,000 active cases TOTAL.

            Watch what stage 3 does to these Canadian numbers or even just ON....
            Last edited by G__Deane; Mon Jul 13th, 2020, 10:50 AM.

            Comment


            • NZ and Aus have been quite successful, they cracked down hard and early compare to us and especially compared to the States. Got things under control in just a few short weeks and got things opening up again. Public sports events are running with crowds now.

              That said, both countries have had the virus show up again. NZ hasn't had to do broad shutdowns again but Melbourne did.
              "We're playing in a building." -- Kawhi Leonard

              Comment


              • S.R. wrote: View Post
                NZ and Aus have been quite successful, they cracked down hard and early compare to us and especially compared to the States. Got things under control in just a few short weeks and got things opening up again. Public sports events are running with crowds now.

                That said, both countries have had the virus show up again. NZ hasn't had to do broad shutdowns again but Melbourne did.
                I'm quite happy with the success of NZ & Aus. However, isn't it a bit difficult to compare their success with other places in world such as USA & Canada? Wasn't there more people movement from affected areas to North America compared to Australia & New Zealand? I.e more people traveled from Europe & China to North America compared to Aus & NZ, especially during the early stages.

                Comment


                • S.R. wrote: View Post
                  NZ and Aus have been quite successful, they cracked down hard and early compare to us and especially compared to the States. Got things under control in just a few short weeks and got things opening up again. Public sports events are running with crowds now.

                  That said, both countries have had the virus show up again. NZ hasn't had to do broad shutdowns again but Melbourne did.
                  New Zealand is a tiny island about half the size of Newfoundland with a population about the size of Alberta. They better be able to get it under control.

                  Comment


                  • Incidentally Newfoundland also significantly locked down its borders and only has one case in isolation. New Zealand's population is 10x NL.

                    Comment


                    • A study on heart scans of COVID-19 patients has revealed more than half had some form of damage.
                      https://www.newsweek.com/scans-revea...-study-1517293

                      Comment


                      • golden wrote: View Post

                        But isn't this the argument in favor of "alarmism", i.e early & swift, harsh measures like lockdowns and contact tracing. Many North Americans just don't like being told what to do, like Asian countries who just accept it. Even now, telling Americans to do what Asians do is still being looked at as anti-American, un-democratic, anti-religious and Orwellian. Canada fared well, probably because we still have a large population of 1st and 2nd generation immigrants who have retained the habits of discipline, obedience and respect for others from the old countries, if for no other reason than their survival there depended on it.

                        And the ICUs over capacity also refutes the notion that our hospitals would have never become overloaded if corona was just treated like just another flu. That's what you were saying, right? It's clearly a more harmful and insidious virus.
                        What I call "alarmism are things like the nightly reporting of raw number of cases without accompanying context (like% of tests or demographics of deaths/co-conditions etc), giving tickets to families rollerblading on empty parking lots, saying we'll have to isolate and hole up without work until there's a vaccine, that it works just like HIV without real evidence etc...

                        Things like asking people to wear a mask (without waffling back and forth on the usefulness of it), contact tracing, limiting big crowds etc... are all very common-sense and very useful things. It's certainly not like the regular flu, it's especially tough on the elderly and people with other respiratory problems, but it's not the second coming of the bubonic plague that was gonna kill 2M people in North America in 3 months either.

                        There will be crowded hospitals in big urban centres with localized outbreaks, but there will also be empty ones in rural Wyoming or in the Canadian prairie (where my wife is a part-time Nurse, but it's often being sent home because there are not enough patients to justify her being there). That's why the one-size-fits-all approach is tough. The virus is the same biological entity everywhere, but the physical and social environment it behaves on is different from place to place. It's up to each jurisdiction to fine-tune their approach, based on things like like overall age, people's attitude, population density etc...

                        There's a middle to be found, and that middle will be a bit different from place to place. Problem is, there's no middle in the states anymore. The middle is boring. It's not good at generating clicks or twitter echo chambers. Couple that with, like you say, a population that doesn't like being told what to do, and certain messages actually have the opposite of the intended effect, and people throw covid parties or refuse to wear a mask when asked, just out of spite or to boast their political stripe. Then on the other extreme, there's people refusing to go back to work until there's a vaccine, despite all safety measures in the workplace. The whole thing got really political and unnecessarily divisive in the states, and apparently in parts of Brazil too, and now both places are unfortunately struggling to deal with it (both healthwise and economically)
                        2019 NBA Champions. Glad to have doubted the doubters.

                        Comment


                        • I haven't read the study/link you're quoting, but I assume you did, so I'll just ask you: Did it show causality? In other words did the study conclude that covid directly caused heart damage on this patients? Or maybe, did it conclude that patients with a pre-existing heart damage were more susceptible to covid? Or did it show just a correlation with no causality either way?

                          I legit don't know and I'm open to any possibility if it's scientifically shown, but these questions are crucial. If we have a respiratory virus directly causing heart damage, that's the first since humans discovered germs of any kind centuries ago. It would be the discovery of the century, and should be all over the news shortly with multiple studies independently finding it causes that.
                          2019 NBA Champions. Glad to have doubted the doubters.

                          Comment


                          • inthepaint wrote: View Post

                            What I call "alarmism are things like the nightly reporting of raw number of cases without accompanying context (like% of tests or demographics of deaths/co-conditions etc), giving tickets to families rollerblading on empty parking lots, saying we'll have to isolate and hole up without work until there's a vaccine, that it works just like HIV without real evidence etc...

                            Things like asking people to wear a mask (without waffling back and forth on the usefulness of it), contact tracing, limiting big crowds etc... are all very common-sense and very useful things. It's certainly not like the regular flu, it's especially tough on the elderly and people with other respiratory problems, but it's not the second coming of the bubonic plague that was gonna kill 2M people in North America in 3 months either.

                            There will be crowded hospitals in big urban centres with localized outbreaks, but there will also be empty ones in rural Wyoming or in the Canadian prairie (where my wife is a part-time Nurse, but it's often being sent home because there are not enough patients to justify her being there). That's why the one-size-fits-all approach is tough. The virus is the same biological entity everywhere, but the physical and social environment it behaves on is different from place to place. It's up to each jurisdiction to fine-tune their approach, based on things like like overall age, people's attitude, population density etc...

                            There's a middle to be found, and that middle will be a bit different from place to place. Problem is, there's no middle in the states anymore. The middle is boring. It's not good at generating clicks or twitter echo chambers. Couple that with, like you say, a population that doesn't like being told what to do, and certain messages actually have the opposite of the intended effect, and people throw covid parties or refuse to wear a mask when asked, just out of spite or to boast their political stripe. Then on the other extreme, there's people refusing to go back to work until there's a vaccine, despite all safety measures in the workplace. The whole thing got really political and unnecessarily divisive in the states, and apparently in parts of Brazil too, and now both places are unfortunately struggling to deal with it (both healthwise and economically)
                            Is there really a middle ground? To get the entire herd moving you might have to resort to alarmism to get the defiant stragglers off their ass, because the problem with highly contagious diseases are that it only takes one straggler to seed another wave of outbreaks and un-ravel any good that was done.

                            Comment


                            • inthepaint wrote: View Post

                              I haven't read the study/link you're quoting, but I assume you did, so I'll just ask you: Did it show causality? In other words did the study conclude that covid directly caused heart damage on this patients? Or maybe, did it conclude that patients with a pre-existing heart damage were more susceptible to covid? Or did it show just a correlation with no causality either way?

                              I legit don't know and I'm open to any possibility if it's scientifically shown, but these questions are crucial. If we have a respiratory virus directly causing heart damage, that's the first since humans discovered germs of any kind centuries ago. It would be the discovery of the century, and should be all over the news shortly with multiple studies independently finding it causes that.
                              "Those with abnormal scans were more likely to be older and have certain underlying heart problems. But after the team excluded patients with existing heart conditions from their analysis, the proportion of abnormal scan results and those with severe cardiac disease was similar. This suggests that the issues were related to COVID-19, they said."

                              Comment


                              • inthepaint wrote: View Post

                                I haven't read the study/link you're quoting, but I assume you did, so I'll just ask you: Did it show causality? In other words did the study conclude that covid directly caused heart damage on this patients? Or maybe, did it conclude that patients with a pre-existing heart damage were more susceptible to covid? Or did it show just a correlation with no causality either way?

                                I legit don't know and I'm open to any possibility if it's scientifically shown, but these questions are crucial. If we have a respiratory virus directly causing heart damage, that's the first since humans discovered germs of any kind centuries ago. It would be the discovery of the century, and should be all over the news shortly with multiple studies independently finding it causes that.
                                I think this is the quote you are looking for. "Compared with patients with a normal echocardiogram (n = 549, 45%), patients with an abnormal scan (n = 667, 55%) were older and had a higher prevalence of pre-existing ischaemic heart disease, heart failure, or valvular heart disease, but a similar prevalence of hypertension or diabetes mellitus."

                                So it doesn't look like they just picked COVID-19 patients at random and did heart scans. Many of them were in the ER, many of them had comorbidities associated with coronary problems, and "60% of scans were performed in a critical care setting (54% intensive care, 2% high dependency unit and coronary care unit, 5% emergency room, and 1% cardiac catheter laboratory), with the remainder performed in general medicine, cardiology, respiratory, and dedicated COVID-19 wards."

                                Oddly enough, patients with pre-xisting cardiac problems, and patients in cardiology wards and cardiac catheter labs and cardiology wards had cardiac problems.

                                I'm not saying it's a nothing burger, but random cardio scans on COVID-19 patients who didn't have pre-existing conditions, and who then developed cardio problems over the span of time during or after they contracted COVID-19 would be a lot more significant. Of course i may have misinterpreted the paper. But given the tendency to want to get in print at any cost these days, I have to lift an eyebrow at this one.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X